Suggestions

I really like Scribbles and Fiona because its not played as "LOOK AT US WERE TRANS!!" they're just who they are.

But yeah if a future shop-running duo were wlw or mlm mates just casually it would be really awesome! But since this site and its lore is already very open minded and accepting I see no reason to push for it.

Tbh if I saw the staff suddenly ramming a bunch of LBGT+ rep in I would get really untrusting because it would be obvious its just for #allypoints y'know?

Also I didn't know scribbles was trans too hell yeah!

@Absofacto Scribbles is canonically nonbinary.

https://www1.flightrising.com/forums/frd/1112431#post_4651218

[quote name="nekosysteme" date="2020-02-23 14:02:26" ] I just don't like how making a gay couple at the trading post kinda implies that all other dragons are straight :( However I'd love to see lore snippets for all the NPC. Maybe that way they can introduce gay/straight relationships without it sounding like gay = anormal. [/quote] Nah! Does Fiona imply that all the other trading post npcs are cis? (I'm sure some people would say yeah but most would say nah). And tbh I'd be happy enough even if they picked an already existing npc and said 'they gay' but from some responses on this thread people would not like that. There's a really fine balance between 'don't have it be lazily forced in' and 'don't make new characters so they can be gay' You can't win sometimes. ¯\_(?)_/¯ I think people would be happy with a gay npc but suggesting one is taboo.

[quote name="MurkyDepths" date="2020-02-24 04:09:02" ] [quote name="nekosysteme" date="2020-02-23 14:02:26" ] I just don't like how making a gay couple at the trading post kinda implies that all other dragons are straight :( However I'd love to see lore snippets for all the NPC. Maybe that way they can introduce gay/straight relationships without it sounding like gay = anormal. [/quote] Nah! Does Fiona imply that all the other trading post npcs are cis? (I'm sure some people would say yeah but most would say nah). And tbh I'd be happy enough even if they picked an already existing npc and said 'they gay' but from some responses on this thread people would not like that. There's a really fine balance between 'don't have it be lazily forced in' and 'don't make new characters so they can be gay' You can't win sometimes. ¯\_(?)_/¯ I think people would be happy with a gay npc but suggesting one is taboo. [/quote] Because taking an already existing character and being like "hey they're LGBT now" " despite there being no indication prior just seems like it's more done for the sake of brownie points Likewise creating a new character JUST so they can be LGBT is also pretty bad, since it really gives more of an air that LGBT folk are nothing more than a novelty and again just done for the sake of brownie points. The problem with the NPC's is we aren't really given much info on them, they don't have a story of any sort, no development, no nothing. Unless the staff decides to change that down the line and give us lore on the NPCs, there just isn't a good way the staff can go about it if they truly wish to include a gay couple or gay/bi/ace npc without it coming off as adding diversity for the sake of diversity

[quote name="Apocalyptichorse" date="2020-02-24 08:23:43" ] Because taking an already existing character and being like "hey they're LGBT now" " despite there being no indication prior just seems like it's more done for the sake of brownie points Likewise creating a new character JUST so they can be LGBT is also pretty bad, since it really gives more of an air that LGBT folk are nothing more than a novelty and again just done for the sake of brownie points. The problem with the NPC's is we aren't really given much info on them, they don't have a story of any sort, no development, no nothing. Unless the staff decides to change that down the line and give us lore on the NPCs, there just isn't a good way the staff can go about it if they truly wish to include a gay couple or gay/bi/ace npc without it coming off as adding diversity for the sake of diversity [/quote] I'm happy with lore for the npcs. And despite so many people disagreeing, I think if they introduced a gay npc couple the majority of the website would be happy about it. There was a similar thread suggesting for trans npcs filled with a lot of no supports, but when Fiona comes out almost everyone adores her. (Not just cause she's trans ofc, but there are a lot of people highlighting that she is and how much that means to them). If this thread never existed and staff released a gay npc couple, do you think people would start getting all 'I dunno, feels fake/forced'? And honestly what is 'diversity for the sake of diversity'?? That kinda implies that cis/straight is the 'base' and anything else is an 'addition' and should be met with suspicion. That's tiring. It's tiring to have every LGBT character scrutinised. It's not like staff would do that thing seen in old cartoons where they try and shove as many minority aspects onto one characters so the rest can be 'normal', seeing as we already have two other LGBT characters. When staff release a not-obviously-lgbt character nobody goes 'Aren't they kinda pandering to the straights/cis?'. I get not wanting tokenism, but FR isn't a cooperation that markets the hell out of 'INCLUDES GAY CHARACTER! DIVERSITY!' and then has them appear in the background for 2 seconds (keff keff disney). Pretty much all the npcs have the same amount of lore, and FR doesn't make a huge deal out of their characteristics. I think we can trust them to make a good gay couple that has a function and isn't in-your-face.

There had been toooooooooo many real life situations where companies, societies, movies, what-not, trying to be 'diverse' for the sake of diversity, and not 'who's best for the job'. We just don't want fr to become like them, trying to fill a diversity quota without thinking 'is it appropriate or even necessary to mention their relationships at all'. That's all. If they can manage that, go for it. We're not opposing more LGBT+ npcs, we're opposing adding them for no better reason than diversity or rep.