Add the third gender into the game

[Maydown]

I am probably not the first one to bring this into consideration on this forum, but now that the gay marriage situation has been resolved think it's high time the paradox added the third gender into the game.

Unlike the gay marriage, which, altough an important step in the right direction, generally did not occur in real life in the time period of CK III (at least to best of my knowledge, the closest irl things would be akin to concubinage within the logic of the game, which I think they absolutely should add to the game btw), the third gender was widespread and played an important role in the world history.

I probably don't need to tell the educated public here how widespread (and important to the religious practices) the third gender was in India and the neighbouring countries, I am sure all of you are well aware of that (but if not I can highly recommend en.wikipedia(dot)org/wiki/Transgender_history and en.wikipedia(dot)org/wiki/Third_gender#History articles from the English wikipedia).
Devs themselves can brush up their knowledge about third gender and transgender people in any region and historical period of the world with google scholar
(e.g. scholar.google(dot)com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=medieval+england+third+gender and scholar.google(dot)com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=third+gender+middle+ages+india), and if not you can read some of the more popular science articles that have come out recently such as this one thetimes.co(dot)uk/article/viking-hordes-may-have-been-trans-kzn7kbzqs

Gameplay-wise I imagine the third gender being a relatively rare occurence, maybe 1-2-3%, just to make it rare but still appearing in your games fairly frequently, and if you're playing the parent you'd be able to either accept it or "fight" it. I'd also suggest culture-specific flavour traits that would depend on your character's culture (e.g. you'd be able to become Hijara if playing in India), etc.

So, what does everyone think of it?

EDIT: Had to rework the entire post because the forum wouldn't let me post links even to the English Wikipedia lmao

 

[RynGM]

You're right - similar (but not identical) topics have come up before.

As stated in that thread, I think something representing non-binary thinking should be put in based on a spirit of inclusiveness for players.

I personally don't think it should be a zero-sum debate about either being historic or representative - the default game rule should err on the historic, while optional settings allow for a more inclusive and modern representation.

It makes sense to me from both a compassionate and a pragmatic stance. For the latter, it brings in more people to your game by allowing them to feel represented.

Also, it's good publicity for the company - most of the gaming news coverage I saw about RC towards the end touted the gay marriage option. Not only is it the right thing to do, but it's also a good look for Paradox.

 

[Matihood1]

*sigh* Something something finger something something hand... I honestly don't see any gameplay value in such an addition.

 

[DukeLeto42]

Unlike the gay marriage, which, altough an important step in the right direction, generally did not occur in real life in the time period of CK III (at least to best of my knowledge, the closest irl things would be akin to concubinage within the logic of the game, which I think they absolutely should add to the game btw), the third gender was widespread and played an important role in the world history.

Yes, I think it's reasonable for rulers that have concubinage permitted (via faith or culture) and a religion that does not view homosexuality as sinful should have that as an option.

Moving into questions about trans identities in the game, it's definitely a complicated issue and one that's hard not to impose our modern perceptions onto. Many of the cultures within this game's scope had no real construction for gender identities outside a binary, which makes reflecting such identities complicated to say the least.

Societies that recognized some form of Third Gender are a very different story, because they have a way to be classified within the period's own terminology and social constructs. It's certainly something worth exploring, even if only via options opened by a cultural tradition.

you can read some of the more popular science articles that have come out recently such as this one thetimes.co(dot)uk/article/viking-hordes-may-have-been-trans-kzn7kbzqs

This, though, is a lot harder to parse. Norse myth certainly has many cases of transgressive gender and sexual identities (Loki and the horse incident being probably the most famous), but then again so did many other mythic traditions. We don't really have explicit evidence for such identities, but then again virtually everything we hear about Norse society is filtered through a thoroughly Christianized lens.

Most of the burials that make the news, though, come from the overturning of a rather underwhelming archaeological tradition. Lots of burial excavations didn't have someone on-site that knew their bones well enough to identify male from female skeletons (that is, the skeletal evidence of sexual dimorphism). So, they used clear proxies that would Never Be Wrong Ever: does the skeleton have a sword in the grave goods? Clearly male. A brooch? Unquestionably female.

Shockingly, these identifications were in fact sometimes wrong.

 

[RynGM]

I honestly don't see any gameplay value in such an addition.

For the people it affects, it's about feeling represented, which in turn makes the game appeal more to them. This adds gameplay value.

Arguably, there are a lot of pieces in CK3 that add great value for some people and nothing for others. That doesn't mean they're not worthy inclusions.

 

[Matihood1]

For the people it affects, it's about feeling represented, which in turn makes the game appeal more to them. This adds gameplay value.

I'm left-handed and yet I don't need a left-handed trait in the game to feel immersed or represented. I'm also allergic and yet there are no allergies in this game and I'm honestly perfectly fine with that. I don't get this whole drive for representation everywhere.

 

[DukeLeto42]

I'm left-handed and yet I don't need a left-handed trait in the game to feel immersed or represented. I'm also allergic and yet there are no allergies in this game and I'm honestly perfectly fine with that. I don't get this whole drive for representation everywhere.

Been a while since anyone was killed for being left-handed (my uncle being forced to write with his right hand as a kid isn't really on the same level). Plus, nobody denies that us left-handed folk existed in the past.

 

[RynGM]

Been a while since anyone was killed for being left-handed (my uncle being forced to write with his right hand as a kid isn't really on the same level). Plus, nobody denies that us left-handed folk existed in the past.

This 1000%. It's false equivalence to compare being left handed with being trans, since the order of magnitude is way out.

It's like saying an oil tanker spill isn't a big deal because you spill oil on your driveway all the time.

A better thought experiment is if you imagine a world where your gender identity was as minimally represented in video games as being trans or nb (on top of the world already being a pretty unfriendly place).

Personally, putting the shoe on the other foot, I think it'd suck if the only games in the world I could play a cis male were what I could find on itch.io, with maybe an outlier here and there. Certainly not 99.9% of AAA titles.

That's what I imagine, and because of that I think inclusion isn't just a matter of gameplay, it's a matter of compassion and ethics.

 

[MateuszS]

Only if they enable legal capital punishment for everything.

 

[RynGM]

Only if they enable legal capital punishment for everything.

I don't get it.

 

[Matihood1]

Been a while since anyone was killed for being left-handed (my uncle being forced to write with his right hand as a kid isn't really on the same level). Plus, nobody denies that us left-handed folk existed in the past.

So you want trans people in the game to watch them get killed? Mkay.

 

[Olaf Trygvasson]

So you want trans people in the game to watch them get killed? Mkay.

I do not think trans people should be included in the game, because, if they existed, they were an insignificantly tiny number, and certainly did not exist amongst the nobility- at least not openly. But if we are trying to keep CK3 at least mildly historically accurate, adding trans people would result in said characters either being closeted their entire life or being executed. Is that what you want?

 

[DukeLeto42]

I do not think trans people should be included in the game, because, if they existed, they were an insignificantly tiny number, and certainly did not exist amongst the nobility- at least not openly. But if we are trying to keep CK3 at least mildly historically accurate, adding trans people would result in said characters either being closeted their entire life or being executed. Is that what you want?

Again, this suggestion specifically pertains to societies that had Third Gender identities during this period. Here's a summary of the Hijra community in India, which points out that, at least under Mughal rule, there were prominent trans individuals that were neither closeted nor executed. Importantly, while it doesn't discuss the community during the Middle Ages (but this was a quick search, not detailed research), the piece notes that the Hijra community was only stigmatized under British rule.

What you've said may be true about all of the game's "Crusader Kings," but the game's scope has long since moved into areas where it is not at all true.

 

[Olaf Trygvasson]

Again, this suggestion specifically pertains to societies that had Third Gender identities during this period. Here's a summary of the Hijra community in India, which points out that, at least under Mughal rule, there were prominent trans individuals that were neither closeted nor executed. Importantly, while it doesn't discuss the community during the Middle Ages (but this was a quick search, not detailed research), the piece notes that the Hijra community was only stigmatized under British rule.

What you've said may be true about all of the game's "Crusader Kings," but the game's scope has long since moved into areas where it is not at all true.

I would counter this by saying that PDX shouldn't even touch Africa, India, etc. until the focus area of the game (Europe, MENA) is at least somewhat functional

 

[Blk82]

The game already has a third-gender of sorts in the form of eunuchs, who are subject to different inheritance rules. The concept of transgenderism varies with cultures. For example, in Western society, women who secretly lived as men were historically tolerated more than one might suppose. Additionally, Elizabeth I of England is often portrayed as an 'honorary man' of sorts. There is also the case of St. Marina the Monk, who would classified as transgendered by modern standards.

The problem with transgendered characters comes with marriages and succession rules. Typically, marriages in game are expected to produce children and a character changing gender would alter the succession rules. Also, people do not always transition at a young age. For example, Caitlyn Jenner lived as a man until her mid 60's. (In fact, late transitioning is so common that it formerly thought that some of types of transgenderism did not manifest until middle age.) So, what happens if your eldest son comes out as transgendered in his 40's, and therefore, removes your grandson and great-grandson from succession? Or, if the first-born daughter transitions in her 40's, and hijacks the line of succession.

In the case of the Hijra, they have been historically associated with eunuchs, although that may not be the case currently. I think the best solution would be add do religion and cultural doctrines about eunuch inheritance, holding theocratic offices, and the like as well as creating a separate "eunuch" character model. That would allow for third gender characters without mucking up the player's succession plans.

 

[Draky]

I cant believe I used to read Wikipedia all the time

As for the suggestion above, I think it's too much trouble for a mechanic that wasn't that historically important or that would add any real fun to the game. I'd rather them reimplement nomads and let subsaharan africans revert from feudal/clan back to tribalism like they used to in real life

 

[Matihood1]

and let subsaharan africans revert from feudal/clan back to tribalism like they used to in real life

But... why would anyone want to do this in the game? There are almost no benefits to being tribal over being feudal/clan (the only benefit I can think of is that you have the ability to raid when you normally wouldn't due to your religion). But I guess this discussion is off topic here.

 

[Trinculo]

Heavens, no. Paradox should absolutely not be pushing this ideology in their games.

Now, content featuring women and girls trying to disguise their gender in male-dominated societies, that's a different story, but I don't think that's what you have in mind.

 

[Matihood1]

This 1000%. It's false equivalence to compare being left handed with being trans, since the order of magnitude is way out.

It's like saying an oil tanker spill isn't a big deal because you spill oil on your driveway all the time.

A better thought experiment is if you imagine a world where your gender identity was as minimally represented in video games as being trans or nb (on top of the world already being a pretty unfriendly place).

Personally, putting the shoe on the other foot, I think it'd suck if the only games in the world I could play a cis male were what I could find on itch.io, with maybe an outlier here and there. Certainly not 99.9% of AAA titles.

That's what I imagine, and because of that I think inclusion isn't just a matter of gameplay, it's a matter of compassion and ethics.

No, it's a 100% valid equivalence, considering the point I was making - that this whole drive for representation and inclusivity is dumb. Your argument is that you want trans people to be added because they were persecuted and not because it would contribute anything to the gameplay. And the argument that it would add an additional layer of "compassion and ethics" - you and I know full well that that wouldn't be true. I can already see an event where a trans person is brought before you and you get 4 options:
-let them free - lose piety and clergy opinion
-recruit them to court - same thing
-put them in prison - probably neutral, gain stress when compassionate
-execute them - gain piety, gain stress when compassionate

And since compassionate trait already sucks and is avoided by most players that aren't going full roleplay (and with piety being rather useful), I can totally see the fouth option being the most popular. I don't think that's the effect you really want to achieve.

 

[Blk82]

Been a while since anyone was killed for being left-handed (my uncle being forced to write with his right hand as a kid isn't really on the same level). Plus, nobody denies that us left-handed folk existed in the past.

Actually, that is a limitation on identity expression. That would be akin to someone saying to a black person in the 1950's, "Shut up about segregation, because look at the crimes committed against the Jews in Germany recently." In fact, that is pretty much the argument used by the segregationists, many of whom thought that they were actually defenders of personal freedom because they thought that all (white) people were entitled to self-determination. That line of reasoning, in which oppression turns into a competition, and easily turn into neo-reactionaryism, such as terf-ery.