I now pronounce you Dwarf & Hobbit...oops!

[Rikae]

Originally Posted by davem

Anything he hasn't put in there doesn't actually exist – whether its logically possible or not.

Ah. In this case, I suppose the silly thread in Mirth a while back about no one in M-E going to the bathroom (or should I say toilet?) is actually true; despite the fact that we're dealing with human beings and it would seem obvious they would be, biologically, the same as real humans; because Tolkien didn't mention it? Or are we to assume M-E people, like us, kept such things private?
Of course nothing Tolkien left out exists. Technically, neither does anything he included...

Originally Posted by Davem

Now, one assumes that in a world created by a conservative Catholic born in the Edwardian period certain things wouldn't exist – not simply wouldn't be mentioned, but would not be put into the world at all. And this is not a question of morality or organised religion, but simply of what a man like Tolkien would choose to include, to give existence to.

Why? Because he would have considered it immoral and/or unnatural? Because I seem to recall that he did include evil in his world; I didn't get the impression he was constructing a utopia...rather, he brought a great deal of insight into the flawed nature of humanity (if you want to call it that), to his writing; so I doubt he would have us assume that his humans were somehow (from a christian point of view) "more perfect" than modern ones.
Certainly actual gay marriage wouldn't fit into M-E; nor would it fit the style and plot for Tolkien to have paid undue attention to the sex lives of his characters for him to dwell on, say, a sadomasochistic interlude between Saruman and Grima . He doesn't give us graphic descriptions of the bedroom antics of Sam and Rosie, either; Occam's razor would suggest this is because he didn't consider it fitting or relevant to include this, not because he wishes us to believe that hobbits reproduce asexually.

Originally Posted by Davem

Homosexuality in M-e is not an option because in M-e (as opposed to the Primary World) sexuality does not operate in that way.

You might be able to make this argument for other races...but there are humans in M-E, and it's illogical to assume they differ from real humans unless the professor actually specified as much.

[davem]

No, the question is, when Tolkien concieved of his characters, human or otherwise, did he concieve of any of them being gay - ie, did he actually concieve of that aspect of human sexuality applying? Was it in his mind? Perhaps, if pushed, he would have acknowledged the possibility, but this is different from looking at what he actually concieved of existing in that world. I don't see that Tolkien would have even thought about Homosexuality being present in his creation (& if one looks at the detail into which he went in 'exploring' that world, it seems to me that such a significant aspect of the primary world human condition would have merited some comment.

In other words, you can't argue, on the one hand, that homosexuality is an essential aspect of the human race & therefore must exist in M-e, & then on the other argue that its no more significant than going to the lavatory, & that that's why Tolkien failed to mention it. Its logically possible, but its too significant an aspect for it to exist without comment.

[Lalwendë]

I think rather that Tolkien did not include any outwardly gay characters simply because he didn't. Even in the 50s he was operating in a different world - if a writer did include a gay character then he or she would invariably be included to serve a purpose, e.g. to make a point about sexuality (like DH Lawrence) or to point the work up as a 'gay' novel (like Radclyffe Hall). Tolkien's work though was not really 'about' sex or relationships so he had no reason to make sure he included such characters. In contrast today you may find a critic clamouring for such characters just in the interests (irrelevant or otherwise) of 'balance' - in much the way that you find modern critics bemoaning the supposed lack of women in Tolkien's work. Plenty of fiction exists without mentioning any gay characters, any women, any black people, any children etc - it does not mean that they did not exist.

He was not trying to make any kind of point by not including any outwardly gay characters, they simply were not relevant to the story he wrote in the period he was writing. The possibility remains for some characters to have been in the closet (or not in the closet, rather that the issue did not come up as it was not part of the narrative) or for unseen folk in Middle-earth to have been gay.

[Rikae]

Originally Posted by Lal

Tolkien's work though was not really 'about' sex or relationships so he had no reason to make sure he included such characters.

Precisely.

[Durelin]

Originally Posted by Lal

but the same dislike did not prevent Tolkien and Auden being great friends - and Auden was not only gay but also a Marxist.

'Tis a good point, but I know a number of people who feel that "gay marriage" or same-sex civil unions should not be permitted, while they are great friends with and have no problems with homosexual people. The issue really isn't about homosexuality and whether or not it's right - well, that becomes part of it, though not if you look at it somewhat objectively? - but whether or not the "marriage" of these partners should be allowed. That makes it sound all real-worldy, but...well, really that's the case in the real world legal debate, too, because most people in the "western world," I guess, feel like the government shouldn't legislate on morality, so to speak...well, a lot of people do....

But...people can RP anything they want! I mean, they can use the flirt emote (which is hilarious, I might add) on anyone. All an in-game marriage system does is...well, it's kinda like a real world legal marriage, in that is just gives them some benefits as a pair. At least, typically that's how it works in games. Like, they get experience points from each others kills and such.

And I'm guess there will be RP elements to it that make people feel more like their characters are married, but, that's pretty basic...I mean, you could call it a "blood-brother/sisterhood-ness" or something....

Really, I guess I'm coming to the same conclusion as CoD...there doesn't seem to be anywhere near enough of a point to the marriage system to spark any sort of debate!