XD I actually made this thread to plumb public opinion on the subject. It all seemed so... surrealistic. - I think I get the general idea now. To be fair, sexuality is an immensely important building block to any story we tell each other, in RP or through any other medium. The 'lore' governing these aspects of a concept-race determines quite a few reactions and interactions in play, quite apart from the ferocious textfucking 'you just know' people get up to. In any case, it was but curiosity. I shan't be rubbing my buns on anything. Maybe make love to a chair or a bench...
Florans are unisex tribal walking-flytraps with a culture that revolves around finding new and better ways to ssstab. Doubt sex means anything to them, on the contrary to how they're potrayed by players on the server en-masse. Unless you've already read this one, take a gander at this article: http://community.playstarboundrp.co...professor-oak-ic-ooc-khaltor.5172/#post-60315
John, it would help a lot if you actually read the things you quote. : P If you did, you would notice that I was talking about the important role of sexuality in any human communication. (RP and telling stories falls into that category.) Most players subconsciously fall into communicative patterns representative of some aspect of their own psycho-sexual makeup when roleplaying a character - knowing stuff like this is a tiny but important detail that may help people to identify themselves within their characters and seek deeper immersion, avoiding that trap. I certainly don't think sex needs to be a fundamental building block to any story in and of itself. That would be a silly. : P PS: The link was very helpful, thank you! It's exaclty what I asked for.
While sexuality may be an important part of some stories, though I would certainly argue not all, I do not feel that sexuality is the same thing as the actual biological processes through which that sexuality is resolved, and it's far more important to understand the cultural settings and romantic motivations than it is to understand how the actual act of reproduction is done. A Victorian-era love story and one from 1974 would be entirely different in feel and content. While sexuality and its expression necessitate that we know the reasons behind people coming together romantically, it's not particularly important how the actual sex act is carried out, and that's far easier to simply perform off-screen, in sense. It's the difference between a romance film and a pornographic film. In essence, I don't feel that it's actually important to show people having sexual intercourse, within romance; it seems a very tertiary thing, in regards to the storyline, that adds very little by its inclusion.
