No gays in the land?

[Mega Fauna Blitzkrieg]

Gay or straight is really unimportant and is generally exploited one way or another as a cheap attention grab. Mass Effect 3 had that famously gay (and terribly written) character, man on man gay, not the acceptable girl on girl porn kind, I mean.

It really is just irrelevant, and since most of the sexuality in this series is either rape or incest, i'm kinda glad they don't throw gay in there too. Guilt by association?

Anyways, all that being said...men by nature are violent and sexual beings, without society to reign them in. In the absence of any women, or chance of women, men will turn to other men regardless of their original preferences. Don't think so? Spend some time in prison.

In conclusion, you would be foolish to think that such epitomes of masculinity as the aptly described fiery loined haruchai, didn't turn to one another in their 2000 years of femaleless service.

What the hell do you think they do with their sleepless nights?!

[peter]

Sorry, but that's nonsense Mega Fauna Blitzkrieg (assuming it wasn't just written in jest to highlight the sillyness of the idea that 'gayness' or 'straightness' needs to be brought into the Chrons at all). To suppose that the Haruchai would not be able to restrain their sexual drives with the same ability that they do their need for sleep, their response to pain, their feelings of grief and just about every other (human) need you can think of is to fail to understand the people from start to finish. To abandon their wives and familys just to succumb to the temptations of the flesh in their collegues would be a pointless exercise in the extreme. The Haruchai channel their drives. Sex and agression are closely linked as you note and to see where the sex drive takes it's form you only have to see the way they fight at the drop of a hat. When a Haruchai needs sex - he fights.

[Cozarkian]

Let's start with TC, he could have been gay (Joan = Jason and Roger is adopted) but that really doesn't add anything to the story other than a call out for more money. Further, SRD needed TC to be straight so he would rape and impregnate Lena.

Elena could have been a lesbian, but SRD got more mileage out of the story by giving her daddy issues and coming on to TC (besides, it would have been a very divisive method to suggest her daddy issues turned her gay).

At least some of the Haruchai need to be straight, unless you plan on giving them a unique form of procreation. Also, since part of their character would be to give up their sexual desires to improve their service, SRD would have to go out of his way to add "gay Haruchai" solely for the sake of saying "See, there are gay people." There is just no story purpose.

Hile Troy or any of the Forestalls could be gay, but again, there is no reason to show it.

Sunder and Hollian could have been lesbians, and the breaking of the Law of Life could have been to make an impossible pregnancy, but then we would wonder if the child was Sunder's or Hile Troy's.

The best opportunity would probably be with the Giants. The First and Pitchwife could have lesbians, and since their relationship was important for their character development it wouldn't look like an "I just threw this in to appease gays." Alternatively, there could be a lesbian couple among the swordmannir included for the purpose of character development through the cammora when one of them is killed.

Finally, there could have been a gay couple among the Ramen, assuming it could be woven in without making it a "see, I like gays statement."

With all of that said, one of the better reasons for never using gay characters is a practical one. Readers like nostalgia, so it is best to leave open the possibility that any of your beloved characters had offspring. Otherwise, if you decide to write a second trilogy in that same world, you can't make badass character in book #4 be the descendant of badass character in book #2. Fans might still like the character in book #4, but they would like him/her even more if they could trace their bloodline to an earlier beloved character.

[Shaun das Schaf]

Let's start with TC, he could have been gay (Joan = Jason and Roger is adopted) but that really doesn't add anything to the story other than a call out for more money. Further, SRD needed TC to be straight so he would rape and impregnate Lena.

Elena could have been a lesbian, but SRD got more mileage out of the story by giving her daddy issues and coming on to TC (besides, it would have been a very divisive method to suggest her daddy issues turned her gay).

At least some of the Haruchai need to be straight, unless you plan on giving them a unique form of procreation. Also, since part of their character would be to give up their sexual desires to improve their service, SRD would have to go out of his way to add "gay Haruchai" solely for the sake of saying "See, there are gay people." There is just no story purpose.

Hile Troy or any of the Forestalls could be gay, but again, there is no reason to show it.

Sunder and Hollian could have been lesbians, and the breaking of the Law of Life could have been to make an impossible pregnancy, but then we would wonder if the child was Sunder's or Hile Troy's.

The best opportunity would probably be with the Giants. The First and Pitchwife could have lesbians, and since their relationship was important for their character development it wouldn't look like an "I just threw this in to appease gays." Alternatively, there could be a lesbian couple among the swordmannir included for the purpose of character development through the cammora when one of them is killed.

Finally, there could have been a gay couple among the Ramen, assuming it could be woven in without making it a "see, I like gays statement."

With all of that said, one of the better reasons for never using gay characters is a practical one. Readers like nostalgia, so it is best to leave open the possibility that any of your beloved characters had offspring. Otherwise, if you decide to write a second trilogy in that same world, you can't make badass character in book #4 be the descendant of badass character in book #2. Fans might still like the character in book #4, but they would like him/her even more if they could trace their bloodline to an earlier beloved character.

Gay people can have children. Lesbians don't lose their wombs because they're gay, and in the absence of artificial insemination options, are quite capable of having procreative sex with a man. And gay men can and have had their children carried /delivered by a woman. You could argue such options would detract (or add, depending on your viewpoint) from a story, but there's also plenty of writers - Steve Erikson and John Scalzi come to mind - who seamlessly include gay characters, so seamlessly in fact that readers, in Erikson's case in particular, have said, "Oh they were gay, I didn't notice until the re-read." I believe Cambo had this very experience.

My point is, different sexualities can very naturally be included without any real disruption to story and character for both of these things are much bigger than sexuality.

But then the Chronicles were written in an era when there was, generally speaking, less diversity of sexual orientation in mainstream fiction.

[Mega Fauna Blitzkrieg]

Well I meant the Blood Guard specifically, not all Haruchai. During their 2000 years of lonely sleepless nights. But also yes, I was kidding.

I don't think the books ancientness is what prevented seemingly having any gay characters, more just the irrelevance of it. I mean it's a book series about pain and despair and isolation, and some other stuff too maybe, I was skimming, basically the entire first chronicles is internal anyways, inside TC's mind (maybe literally, but at least figuratively). Spoken dialogue vs inner monologue is on like a 30/70 split. And Covenant himself isn't gay, so there is no need to really explore that issue.

Now, being gay in OUR Earth, can lead to a lot of heavy and dark themes like the series loves, but being gay in the Land? The people who respond to you raping their daughter by taking you to see their version of Aurora Borealis? (Ok that was incredibly unfair to Atiaran, and I shall stick my finger into an electric socket as penance).

I doubt very much that being gay in the Land would cause someone any more grief than being a stonedowner or a ramen or what have you. As there are no red-necks in the land.

Has anyone ever asked SRD about the lack of gays? I would be willing to bet it had nothing to do with being written in the 70s. Although, the 80s...? People were out of their minds on Reaganomics, so maybe...

[shadowbinding shoe]

I doubt very much that being gay in the Land would cause someone any more grief than being a stonedowner or a ramen or what have you. As there are no red-necks in the land.

I'm not sure if that's true. The Healthsense and Laws would include sexual tendencies fitting to the beings' biological composition. The unnaturalness of the demondim spawn is a huge issue in the Chronicles. Wouldn't procreative action and sexual desire be possible only with appropriately compatible beings? Maybe in a different world Mhoram would desire Covenant but in the Land their love is platonic.

[Vraith]

I doubt very much that being gay in the Land would cause someone any more grief than being a stonedowner or a ramen or what have you. As there are no red-necks in the land.

I'm not sure if that's true. The Healthsense and Laws would include sexual tendencies fitting to the beings' biological composition. The unnaturalness of the demondim spawn is a huge issue in the Chronicles. Wouldn't procreative action and sexual desire be possible only with appropriately compatible beings? Maybe in a different world Mhoram would desire Covenant but in the Land their love is platonic.

Hmmm....that would be a problem only if homosexuality is "unhealthy," or "unnatural," or "wrong" [in the particular sense SRD uses "wrong"].
And the demondim are "unnatural..." but that isn't why they are an issue...they are an issue cuz they're evil. The Wayn. are "unnatural," too...but they aren't a problem.

[shadowbinding shoe]

I doubt very much that being gay in the Land would cause someone any more grief than being a stonedowner or a ramen or what have you. As there are no red-necks in the land.

I'm not sure if that's true. The Healthsense and Laws would include sexual tendencies fitting to the beings' biological composition. The unnaturalness of the demondim spawn is a huge issue in the Chronicles. Wouldn't procreative action and sexual desire be possible only with appropriately compatible beings? Maybe in a different world Mhoram would desire Covenant but in the Land their love is platonic.

Hmmm....that would be a problem only if homosexuality is "unhealthy," or "unnatural," or "wrong" [in the particular sense SRD uses "wrong"].
And the demondim are "unnatural..." but that isn't why they are an issue...they are an issue cuz they're evil. The Wayn. are "unnatural," too...but they aren't a problem.

Spoiler

Last Chronicles explicitly say otherwise. They get ill in ROTE from being near to the Staff in the past and in AATE they and the Ur-viles claim their goal in life is to become part of Creation instead of outsiders.

[Cozarkian]

Gay people can have children. Lesbians don't lose their wombs because they're gay, and in the absence of artificial insemination options, are quite capable of having procreative sex with a man. And gay men can and have had their children carried /delivered by a woman. You could argue such options would detract (or add, depending on your viewpoint) from a story, but there's also plenty of writers - Steve Erikson and John Scalzi come to mind - who seamlessly include gay characters, so seamlessly in fact that readers, in Erikson's case in particular, have said, "Oh they were gay, I didn't notice until the re-read." I believe Cambo had this very experience.

My point is, different sexualities can very naturally be included without any real disruption to story and character for both of these things are much bigger than sexuality.

But then the Chronicles were written in an era when there was, generally speaking, less diversity of sexual orientation in mainstream fiction.

When you start writing stories about lesbians having voluntary sex with men in order to produce offspring, you've passed the point where they are seamlessly integrated into the story.

[Vraith]

When you start writing stories about lesbians having voluntary sex with men in order to produce offspring, you've passed the point where they are seamlessly integrated into the story.

Depends completely on the story and character and author's abilities.
Hell, it's happened seamlessly [and seamed, and with hidden seams] in the real world...in fact, other options haven't existed for very long...so why not in a fictional one?

[Mega Fauna Blitzkrieg]

Can we just all agree that Mhoram would be a perfect bottom?

[Shaun das Schaf]

Gay people can have children. Lesbians don't lose their wombs because they're gay, and in the absence of artificial insemination options, are quite capable of having procreative sex with a man. And gay men can and have had their children carried /delivered by a woman. You could argue such options would detract (or add, depending on your viewpoint) from a story, but there's also plenty of writers - Steve Erikson and John Scalzi come to mind - who seamlessly include gay characters, so seamlessly in fact that readers, in Erikson's case in particular, have said, "Oh they were gay, I didn't notice until the re-read." I believe Cambo had this very experience.

My point is, different sexualities can very naturally be included without any real disruption to story and character for both of these things are much bigger than sexuality.

But then the Chronicles were written in an era when there was, generally speaking, less diversity of sexual orientation in mainstream fiction.

When you start writing stories about lesbians having voluntary sex with men in order to produce offspring, you've passed the point where they are seamlessly integrated into the story.

How about kids from a previous marriage? Seamless enough for you? Many women (and men) come out later in life after heterosexual relationships. And strange as it sounds, they don't throw away their kids when they come out! My workplace alone includes a gay Dad and a gay Mum.

And you know, writers have imaginations, that's why they're writers. They can make things as seamless or as prominent as they wish. And most adult readers are capable of taking the journey with them, assuming the writing and the story is engaging enough, because really, that's the important thing.

[Cozarkian]

Depends completely on the story and character and author's abilities.
Hell, it's happened seamlessly [and seamed, and with hidden seams] in the real world...in fact, other options haven't existed for very long...so why not in a fictional one?

The shortest distance between two points is a straight line. If you A&B are heterosexual couple and you want to write about their offspring, C, that's a straight line. If A&B are a homosexual couple, now you have to take an extra step to explain the existence of C. Unless you have an in-story reason for making A&B homosexual, you are adding unnecessary complexity to the story without adding depth. This might not be true for every story (futuristic stories or fantasy creatures with different methods of procreation) but it is true for the Land.

You can run into the same problem in reverse. Maybe your character, A, is passing on an important piece of wisdom shared by his parents. If he uses neutral language (my parents) or heterosexual language (my mom and dad) we can focus directly on the importance of the message. But if he says "my moms" or "my dads," now we jump to the question of "is he adopted, do they artificial insemination, etc..." and the author has to waste time answering that question before the author can get to the point.

Personally, if an author needs a relationship for character development I think it is perfectly valid for the author, as a practical matter, to use a heterosexual relationship unless they have specific need of a homosexual relationship.

Basically, I reject the notion that authors should actively seek or avoid the use of gay couples. There are practical reasons why heterosexual relationships are the default and it is perfectly acceptable for authors not to deviate from the default if they don't need to.

[Cozarkian]

How about kids from a previous marriage? Seamless enough for you? Many women (and men) come out later in life after heterosexual relationships.

That probably isn't seamless, since the author has to go through the extra step of explaining there was a previous marriage. Unless the point the author is trying to make depends on the existence of that previous marriage (like the character has trauma from a divorce), then it merely detracts from whatever point the author is trying to make.

And strange as it sounds, they don't throw away their kids when they come out! My workplace alone includes a gay Dad and a gay Mum.

Um, that doesn't sound strange at all. Keep in mind I'm not saying anything bad about gays or arguing they shouldn't be included for moral reasons. I'm just saying there are practical reasons why heterosexual couples are used by default.

... the writing and the story is ... the important thing.

My point exactly. If you need a heterosexual couple, use one. If you need a gay couple, use one. If you need a couple and it doesn't matter which, for practical reasons, authors tend to go with heterosexual couples.

[Leperheart Landfollower]

Amok's sparkling gayness has nothing to do with sexuality, it's def a problem in our world that males who sparkle with gayness are pigeonholed as homosexual. Def SRD liberates these words and many more, wins back their proper meaning in his writing. It just adds more purity to the land, that a screw is a screw, etc. I wanna be able to sparkle with gayness and sprinkles, without people getting any false ideas that my bubbly, flambuoyant attitude has anything even remotely to do with my sexual preference; it really doesn't. And it's 1000% refreshing that the people of the land don't have urges to repress themselves, and so tend in most cases to shine with their full light, unfettered and free

[darthbuzz]

I think it is simple as back in the 70's 80's there were just gay and straight people ans some in-between and we got on with it.
These days there must be representation everywhere of every sexual orientation and race regardless of the actual ratios.
This way of thinking causes more homophobia, racism, etc., than anything that has come before imo.

It is crazy here in the UK, if you didn't know better, watching UK adverts would make you think that 90% of couples are mixed race when that is obviously no where near correct. Food for racists.


_______
"The reason I dedicate my life to helping animals so much is because there are already so many dedicated to hurting them."