I answered the poll as male who plays males and females equally. Used to be heavily skewed toward male characters long ago, but in recent years I've been more interested in playing female characters so I usually have a roughly equal amount of male and female characters at any given time.
Do you believe that your political or philosophical beliefs influence your characters and your perception of genders in a fictional setting?
Absolutely. How could they not? I'd like to think that they don't influence things very strongly, because I very intentionally work to examine things from a more neutral stance and I often purposely make parts of my characters go against my beliefs, but I'm sure some stuff slips through without me noticing. One example of how my beliefs can influence gender things is that even in realistic roleplay set in fairly realistic pseudo-medieval times I've made a female character that's an independent warrior type, despite that flying in the face of the time period. I'm used to thinking about things a certain way, looking at things through my modern lens of "people should be equal," so sometimes I have to consciously constrain or shift said thoughts for the sake of going along with the circumstances presented by the roleplay. Sometimes I fail to do that, and that's when my beliefs overtly influence things.
Do you believe there are more than two genders (male, female), and do you express this in writing?
More than two genders? Eh, not really. It's complicated though. Holmishire already explained some of what I think, though in rather different terms than I would (and momentarily will) use.
Basically, I see gender as a two variable construct with an optional extra thing to examine for the sake of categorization. Those variables are masculinity and femininity, and the extra bit is looking at how well those things match up with your physical sex. Masculinity and femininity as far as I conceive of them are not the spectrum that a lot of people like to talk about either, where they are opposite ends of a line and everyone fits on some point of it, rather they are two axes on a graph (
like this, not the kind with quadrants because those would require negative figures and I don't think there's such a thing as negative quantities of masculinity or femininity). To figure out gender you just have to figure out where someone would be placed on that graph by estimating their relative quantity of masculinity and femininity, which is an inexact science at best because all you can do is separately compare them to what total and complete lack of femininity/masculinity would be like and guessing where your level is, and making a little dot on the graph where those levels meet up. If they end up noticeably above the line, they're probably female; if they end up noticeably below the line, they're probably male; if they end up right by the line, they're probably a roughly even mix that might be called androgynous or bigender; if they end up right at the bottom left corner, meaning zero for both things, they're probably neither and that could be called agender. However, I still call this two genders, and to explain my reasoning I'm going to make a probably shitty analogy. Let's pretend masculinity is a banana (because phallic symbol) and femininity is a peach (because vaginal symbol... although I feel like that's not the proper opposite term to 'phallic' but whatever), and gender is a fruit smoothie. When you have more of one fruit than the other, it would make sense to say it's something like a peach smoothie with banana instead of a peach and banana smoothie; however, if they're roughly equal in proportion, it would be inaccurate to not call it a peach and banana smoothie. If the smoothie has neither of them, well, that's an interesting thing to call a fruit smoothie, but you do you. What it comes down to for me is that "peach and banana" is not a new and separate fruit, so I don't see why "equally masculine and feminine" would be a new and separate gender. Having neither fruit in the smoothie is also not a new and separate kind of fruit, so I don't see why "not masculine or feminine" would be a new and separate gender. The entire system is built upon the relation to and between male and female, because those are the only two genders. By the way, it's important to note that while these traits are related to physical sex, gender is a separate thing; sex is what parts you have, gender is about masculinity and femininity, and one does not absolutely determine the other.
That other thing I mentioned, comparing your graphed findings with your physical sex, is how we get labels like transgender. Transgender is not a gender, it is a term referencing how your gender relates to your sex. Calling transgender a gender in and of itself would be like declaring t-shirt to be a shirt color. I can't recall if there are any categorizing terms for how intersex (which is a physical sex, not a gender, which I'm bothering to state because I've seen a few people try to claim it as a gender) people match up with genders, but they probably exist.
To summarize, while there's a lot of nuance in what exactly it means to be male or female by gender, those are really the only terms that you really need when doing something like filling out the gender line of a character sheet. The nuance ought to be displayed in the character's behavior and personality, because that's where it really matters. Making up new terms for every different possible configuration of masculinity and femininity is just annoying and makes no sense. I know people want to be special little snowflakes and have fancy words to describe their totally unique gender identity, but it's really pointless clutter when you're trying to discuss the reality of gender. I could rant about that nonsense for a while, but this answer is already way longer than it needed to be so I'll spare everyone and move on.
I do express all this in my writing, but not explicitly. It's not something that ever needs to be explained. You'll never see me list a character's gender as something other than male or female (because even if they're equally mixed or neither I'll just label them with the term that correlates to their physical sex for ease of reference), but you might see me playing an androgynous character or a male that has a lot of feminine traits, or so on. I don't ever focus on gender identity for my characters so it's never something I feel the need to explicitly explain.
Have you ever played an LGBT character? Do you currently play any LGBT characters? Can you estimate, roughly, what percentage of characters you play that are LGBT?
I have indeed. Currently I have 4 active characters across 3 roleplays (all your roleplays in fact, Brovo, because all my other ventures are sitting in limbo or died off, haha), and 2 of them are not heterosexual. Overall I'd guess that something like 15% of my characters fit somewhere into LGBT territory. This is in large part because I consider the default to be heterosexual (simply because the vast majority of humans and animals from dimorphic species are heterosexual with zero or only incidental forays into other categories) and most of my characters never get put in a position where their sexuality matters, so I never bother to even consider whether or not they might have some other sexuality. Honestly, I could just as easily count them as asexual since they never express any kind of sexuality, but that would be kind of misleading so I won't bother doing so.
How much emphasis do you place on your character's gender in the following areas: Physically/Biologically, gender identity, sexuality.
Physical – Eh, not much? If the character's gender matches up with their biological sex then there's really no need to place special emphasis on this, and I haven't ever played a transgender character so it hasn't ever been an issue for me.
Gender Identity – Depends on the character and setting, but typically also not much. I generally don't put any special emphasis on a character's gender identity, I just have them act in ways that fit their own conception of their gender and their place in the world and so forth. I've never made a character that had any real struggle with their gender identity because I don't find it to be a very interesting topic to explore, so I've never felt the need to put special attention on it.
Sexuality – Well, discounting the characters that effectively never have a sexuality, I do place a lot of emphasis on gender when sexuality does actually get involved. Sexuality is all about what people are attracted to, and gender is a huge factor there. Physical sex is also a big thing, probably more important than gender because the main consideration of sexuality is what kind of genitals you want your partner to have, but I digress. Gender and how it's expressed have a lot to do with attraction, so it's kind of important to emphasize that if sexuality is in play.
Do you feel uncomfortable playing/writing as the opposite biological sex? (IE: If you are a male, do you feel uncomfortable playing females, and vice versa.) Is this restricted solely to carnal activities (ex: sex), or is it simply general discomfort altogether?
I'm totally fine with playing females in most circumstances. I don't think I'd be entirely comfortable writing out a sex scene for a female character, but that's mainly because I've never done it before so it would be a new experience. I also felt really awkward and uncomfortable the first time I wrote a sex scene with a male character, but I got past that. If I ever got interested in doing sex scenes in roleplays again (haven't done it in years because on the actual writing side of things it gets repetitive and boring rather easily, and the only reason to bother with them other than enjoying the writing would be for masturbatory purposes and that's just way too much effort when porn is so readily accessible) I figure I could get used to doing it from the female perspective as well.
Do you feel you still need to improve the way you write genders in your characters? Why, or why not?
Nope. There are very few ways in which I think it's possible to write gender poorly, most of those are just plain old bad writing in other ways, and I just don't really care much about how well or poorly I write genders. I care about making a good story and having interesting characters; sometimes that means gender is totally irrelevant, and sometimes that means using blatant stereotypes because they fit for whatever is going on. I've got a character who is a total manwhore, hits all sorts of tropes about how men are arrogant and think only with their penis, but I don't see that as a problem because he's fun to play and he adds neat things to the roleplay because he is more than just his gender. In that same game I have a female who is afraid of violence and tries to solve everything with words rather than force, but she's also just fine because she isn't just a woman, she has more going on than just gender. Gender is never really at the forefront of my characters because their abilities and personalities are what actually matter, and that's exactly the way it should be, so I feel no need to change my writing as it pertains to gender.
Do you believe that other people fairly portray genders in their characters on average? Why, or why not? If not: Is it out of a sense of ignorance, malevolence, naivety, or something else?
This is a kind of odd one to answer, because as I said above I don't consider things like using negative or stereotypical tropes to necessarily be unfair or poor writing of a gender. I'd say people almost always fairly portray character gender, because most things that others maight label as failings could just as easily be the character expressing their actual gender. Something a lot of people seem to be unwilling to admit is that negative gender stereotypes actually do fit some real life people, so using them can in fact be true to reality rather than horribly sexist or whatever. If you acknowledge that gender is not just a binary switch in which the only options are generic male or generic female, if you accept that it's actually a complex thing with a huge range of potential outcomes, then you have to accept that even the most painfully stereotypical and overblown interpretation of masculinity or femininity are real and valid possible expressions of someone's gender. What if someone makes a super macho guy who only thinks about fighting things, banging chicks, and getting drunk? I say that's a fair portrayal of gender because there are men who are actually like that. What if someone makes a super feminine girl who is obsessed with finding her Prince Charming and having a fairy tale wedding and settling down to have a nuclear family wherein she's the stay at home mom? Also fair, there are real women like that. The thing to keep in mind is that characters are usually not intended to be representative of the whole of a gender. That female character example above is not really sexist or unfair or whatnot because it's not trying to say all women are or should be like this, it's just a character that happens to fit perfectly into the traditional gender roles for females. There's nothing wrong with that at all, so it's not an unfair portrayal.
I don't I've ever seen anyone portray gender in an unfair manner in roleplay, because of my above thoughts. If someone were to describe a character as very masculine and then play them as very feminine, then I suppose that could be an unfair portrayal, but that's one of those things that I'd classify under bad roleplaying rather than gender issues. The only way I could see something actually counting as unfair portrayal without being explained away by poor roleplaying would have to be if someone were to explicitly and earnestly say that their character is exactly how all males/females are or should be. I don't know what exactly might motivate someone to do something that dumb, but I suppose it could be any of those traits listed in the question.
I don't think people make characters they plan on hating or having something despicable they want to depict for the most part (there are exceptions; I distinctly recall one of Jorick's Game of Thrones characters being a murderous pedophile which fit nicely into the setting, and I know him well enough to know that he doesn't write characters to be malicious, it's all about telling a story), people tend to play characters they like or think reflects them in some way.
Yup, no malicious intent, just intent to make things interesting. It was very much intended to be a depiction of something despicable, to add another dimension of awful shit into the already fairly dark world of Game of Thrones. It's all about making a good story and getting people interested and engaged with it, and sometimes a heinous monster of a character is a good way to get that done. :D