[R&F] Inevitable thread on "Flirtatious" and "Curmudgeon" straights-only traits

[Abaxial]

The plot thickens when you look at the chances to roll this particular aspect. The Percentage Chance column is new I believe, it used to be a "preferred agenda" meant the AI always picked it, which is why Tedy used to always be an Environmentalist.

I assume a higher Percentage Chance means a higher chance of rolling this agenda. While the exact mechanics aren't known, I also assume based on the nature of the table that a roll is made against this table first, if the agenda isn't selected from the table a random roll from all available agendas is made.

Hilariously(?) Alexander has a specifically higher than normal chance to roll "Flirtatious." LOL. So his sexuality is explicitly codified, at least to a degree higher than normal chance.

View attachment 487586

Forgive my ignorance, but what file is that? And can you make flirtatiousness go away by just editing it?

 

[shyPiano]

Hilariously(?) Alexander has a specifically higher than normal chance to roll "Flirtatious." LOL. So his sexuality is explicitly codified, at least to a degree higher than normal chance.

Given what has been said about Alexander in this thread, knowing this is really saddening to me.

I don't really have anything against the agenda itself, making leaders like or dislike others due to gender is alright by me - my problem with it is that they tied it specifically with sexuality by calling it "Flirtatious" (and giving all those lines). Had the agenda worked exactly the same way, but with different flavor, and there wouldn't be half the controversy present here.
As for gay agendas, refer to my statement above.

It's a shame that the presence of LGBT is such a political issue, in an ideal world there really wouldn't be any problems one way or the other. But as long as such is the case, I find it really imprudent of Firaxis to explicitly include sexuality at all in the game. If adding an explicitly gay agenda is that bad of an issue, they really shouldn't even have touched the idea of an explicitly straight agenda either.

 

[FractalAdvocate]

Forgive my ignorance, but what file is that? And can you make flirtatiousness go away by just editing it?

https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/removing-flirtatious-curmudgeon.628191/

Wrote this down, realized it gets moddy for a discussion thread, and also I'd kinda like to make/have someone else make this an actual mod, so I went and made it it's own post. Caveat emptor and all that, it's worked for me fine so far, but I can't guarantee anything about it.

 

[Zaarin]

I don't recall any foreign leader objecting to Elizabeth of England or Victoria because she was a woman.

Uh...Elizabeth I spent pretty much her entire reign endeavoring to prove that she was the equal to any man so foreign leaders didn't take advantage of her status as "the weaker sex." It's also why she kept herself in essentially a state of constant marriage negotiations so that the male leaders of Europe could dream they could conquer England by marrying their son off to her. Elizabeth's status as a woman was definitely a big deal, both domestically and abroad. And rather than go Cleopatra, she held herself up as an aloof prize that could never be won (it's not a coincidence she styled herself the Virgin Queen--she was definitely invoking Marian images, as well as the idea of courtly love [which is hypothetically supposed to be unconsummated]).

It was less significant for Victoria because she was little more than a face on a postage stamp; the leaders of the UK at that time were male prime ministers.

 

[Stringer1313]

The whole "gay identity" is modern Western concept that has little historical meaning. Just like historically marriage has practically nothing to do with romantical love. Modern western ideas of love/sexuality/marriage are alien to people who lived in the past and actually they are still alien to 90% of people living in the world today.

"Gay" is a new construct but having romantic or sexual feelings for someone of the same gender is not.

 

[Stringer1313]

The problem isn't the agenda. There are always people who prefer dealing with a certain gender.

The issue is the name

I think you hit it on the head. Regardless of sexual orientation, people of all genders sometimes prefer to deal with one particular gender. Just take sexual desire out of it. A reasonable compromise would be to rename the traits and descriptions.

 

[Disgustipated]

Upon further reflection I have no problem with Firaxis wanting to "shake things up" with diplomacy. I bet many of the people complaining about this also complain because the games are too peaceful and they are never attacked. Which do you want? I have no problem with these 2 agendas in theory. They just seem a little childish, and I fear they are trying to turn the Civilization games in the Sims. It seems like something you'd see out of the Sims. Civilization 6: Rise and Fall of the Sims. I would go with something similar, but drop the flirtatious name.

 

[Stringer1313]

Upon further reflection I have no problem with Firaxis wanting to "shake things up" with diplomacy. I bet many of the people complaining about this also complain because the games are too peaceful and they are never attacked. Which do you want? I have no problem with these 2 agendas in theory. They just seem a little childish, and I fear they are trying to turn the Civilization games in the Sims. It seems like something you'd see out of the Sims. Civilization 6: Rise and Fall of the Sims. I would go with something similar, but drop the flirtatious name.

Again as the OP I have absolutely zero problem with Firaxis wanting to shake things up with diplomacy, and for creating new agenda traits, even those based on immutable characteristics. It presents a challenge and also reflects historical reality, there being all sorts of dumb reasons leaders hated each other. For example I have no problem with Victoria's agenda which you can never satisfy if you didn't start on her home continent.

It's just that these traits are stupidly heteronormative and demeaning and can easily be replaced with other things.

 

[outlaw22]

A flirtatious Alexander certainly doesn't sound realistic. But it's just a game, and these things don't really bother me on face value. The only thing that bothers me is there will be situations where I can't improve my relations, it's not like I can get a sex change operation in the game.



I like in Fallout: New Vegas they call it Confirmed Bachelor. Which was actually a frequently used terms back in the old days.

Next expansion will add a medical district that allows sex changes in the modern era.

 

[Scaramanga]

Uh...Elizabeth I spent pretty much her entire reign endeavoring to prove that she was the equal to any man so foreign leaders didn't take advantage of her status as "the weaker sex." It's also why she kept herself in essentially a state of constant marriage negotiations so that the male leaders of Europe could dream they could conquer England by marrying their son off to her. Elizabeth's status as a woman was definitely a big deal, both domestically and abroad. And rather than go Cleopatra, she held herself up as an aloof prize that could never be won (it's not a coincidence she styled herself the Virgin Queen--she was definitely invoking Marian images, as well as the idea of courtly love [which is hypothetically supposed to be unconsummated]).

It was less significant for Victoria because she was little more than a face on a postage stamp; the leaders of the UK at that time were male prime ministers.

Elizabeth is a bit of a curmudgeon then

 

[JacquesBquick]

i think something as simple as changing "Flirtatious" to "Socialite" or "Progressive" would be a simple enough of a fix. Its open-ended enough to mean whatever you want. Curmudgeon doesn't really have specific heteronormative context. Its perfectly reasonable to have leaders only respecting leaders of their same sex (not like, in life, but as a game mechanic that is also representative of history and 'leader agendas').

flirtatious is explicitly heterosexual in this application, and thus excludes via its addition. Change the name of the agenda to something more benign and its fine to me. I sent a private message on reddit to a community manager indicating this opinion as well earlier today, but thank you for als omaking a thread here about it.

 

[Stringer1313]

i think something as simple as changing "Flirtatious" to "Socialite" or "Progressive" would be a simple enough of a fix. Its open-ended enough to mean whatever you want. Curmudgeon doesn't really have specific heteronormative context. Its perfectly reasonable to have leaders only respecting leaders of their same sex (not like, in life, but as a game mechanic that is also representative of history and 'leader agendas').

flirtatious is explicitly heterosexual in this application, and thus excludes via its addition. Change the name of the agenda to something more benign and its fine to me. I sent a private message on reddit to a community manager indicating this opinion as well earlier today, but thank you for als omaking a thread here about it.

I like the "Socialite" suggestion to replace Flirtatious. I could easily buy into the notion that since we are in a heteronormative world, playing to heteronormativity by flirting with the opposite sex can be a thing. And then they can say "Fraternal/Sororal" to mean only likes dealing with men, only likes dealing with women (and just make it so that only male leaders can get fraternal and only female leaders can get sororal).

 

[Scaramanga]

With the enhancements to alliances I can't help but think this is supposed to simulate marriage alliances, which were between a man and a woman. Some rulers were enthusiastic about this option and some, like Elizabeth, we're not.

 

[Kwami]

i think something as simple as changing "Flirtatious" to "Socialite" or "Progressive" would be a simple enough of a fix. Its open-ended enough to mean whatever you want. Curmudgeon doesn't really have specific heteronormative context. Its perfectly reasonable to have leaders only respecting leaders of their same sex (not like, in life, but as a game mechanic that is also representative of history and 'leader agendas').

flirtatious is explicitly heterosexual in this application, and thus excludes via its addition. Change the name of the agenda to something more benign and its fine to me. I sent a private message on reddit to a community manager indicating this opinion as well earlier today, but thank you for als omaking a thread here about it.

You'll have to change more than just the names. The descriptions and dialogues also need to change.

In fact, let's just stop basing agendas on gender. It's a poor concept with no real value.

EDIT: And actually, curmudgeon isn't OK, either. Since when are all curmudgeons anti-female or anti-male or whatever? That's total nonsense. That agenda should change, too.

 

[JacquesBquick]

yeah i hear you, i don't think any of us asked for these agendas and be very happy to see a total mea culpa with their deletion altogether. let people mod that stuff in if they want it.

 

[Gedemon]

I'm not going to give my opinion about that feature itself, as for me the whole agenda system needs to be reworked (ie "a nation has no friends, only interests"), but in that special topic, and after reading some complaints, note that this is from the game's code:

<Where LeaderType="LEADER_ALEXANDER"/>
<Set>
<SameSexPercentage>50</SameSexPercentage>
</Set>

 

[miaasma]

help help philip II is flirting with me

 

[Photi]

Haven't had a chance to play R&F yet, but i like the sound of these new agendas. I actually think they act (to an extent) as equalizers with the player. There's probably more than few players around here who alter their behavior against the AI based on AI attractiveness, so it is only fair the AI can potentially reciprocate or otherwise bias their own gameplay.

 

[Kwami]

I'm not going to give my opinion about that feature itself, as for me the whole agenda system needs to be reworked (ie "a nation has no friends, only interests"), but in that special topic, and after reading some complaints, note that this is from the game's code:

<Where LeaderType="LEADER_ALEXANDER"/>
<Set>
<SameSexPercentage>50</SameSexPercentage>
</Set>

Is that code used for anything, though? Has anyone seen a gay leader with the flirtatious or curmudgeon agenda?

 

[JacquesBquick]

I'm not going to give my opinion about that feature itself, as for me the whole agenda system needs to be reworked (ie "a nation has no friends, only interests"), but in that special topic, and after reading some complaints, note that this is from the game's code:

<Where LeaderType="LEADER_ALEXANDER"/>
<Set>
<SameSexPercentage>50</SameSexPercentage>
</Set>

oh wow, so if that's the case, does that mean alexander has a even chance at getting a flirtatious agenda for male leaders? that would solve my complaint, i just really didn't think they'd include something like that!