Games

20309 readers

580 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
No humor/memes etc..
No affiliate links
No advertising.
No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
No self promotion.
No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
No politics.

Comments.

No personal attacks.
Obey instance rules.
No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works

259

EA’s latest The Sims 4 patch is making everyone pregnant, including the men and the chaste (www.videogamer.com)

submitted 21 hours ago by brot@feddit.org to c/games@sh.itjust.works

42 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 55 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (19 children)

While not every player is not privy to the nightmare of every person in their game becoming with child, those who have the bug are finding a large number of Sims randomly marked as pregnant.

Who the fuck wrote this?

Once a character is pregnant, they can’t Woo-Hoo anymore,

Never pegged The Sims for being so Puritain.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 5 points 21 hours ago (5 children)

I don't think the Puritans had any issue with pregnant people having sex.

[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 8 points 21 hours ago (4 children)

I assumed they were generally against the concept of sex not strictly for the purpose of reproduction.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 16 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

https://www.bostonmagazine.com/arts-entertainment/2016/10/18/puritans-and-sex-myth/

Debunking the Myth Surrounding Puritans and Sex

The Puritans weren't prudish. In fact, they were passionate.

From the beginning, Puritans maintained sexual intercourse was necessary for procreation, but also asserted sex was an important way for couples to bond in a loving relationship.

“They talk about the duty to desire, that you’re supposed to engage in intercourse with your married partner and that this is good,” says Bremer. “There will actually be some people in early New England who are censured by the church because they have deprived their married partner of sex for three months or more and this is seen as bad.”

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

“There will actually be some people in early New England who are censured by the church because they have deprived their married partner of sex for three months or more and this is seen as bad.”

Bet I can guess the gender of the people who were censured...

[–] tal@lemmy.today 4 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

I'm assuming that you're guessing "female"?

https://sexualityandthecity.com/2016/11/26/when-women-wanted-sex-much-more-than-men/

In the 1600s, a man named James Mattock was expelled from the First Church of Boston. His crime? It wasn’t using lewd language or smiling on the Sabbath or anything else that we might think the Puritans had disapproved of. Rather, James Mattock had refused to have sex with his wife for two years.

Looking at other sources, the expulsion was in 1640.

[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 6 points 20 hours ago

TIL thanks

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (14 replies)