Active Users:1195 Time:22/11/2024 04:40:21 PM
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much kHz1000 Send a noteboard - 21/10/2016 04:05:20 PM

View original postBecause of this, putting in a gay man as a minor character seemed less like it was caving to PC pressure to "PUT A GAY MAN IN THE SERIES BECAUSE THEY SHOULD BE REPRESENTED" and more like a (rather late) attempt at more consistent world-building.

But it was, BS consciously decided he should place a gay guy in WoT to rectify RJ's perceived mishap. He expressely stated it was so. To me it came off as an unnecessary appendage in an otherwise organic story. Thank you, Mr Sanderson, but your alms are not necessary. And if some straight person found the lack of gay men problematic (God how I loath the word), well really, who cares what straight people think?
Reply to message
Gender in WoT - 19/10/2016 05:25:44 PM 1374 Views
Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 20/10/2016 01:30:05 PM 723 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 20/10/2016 04:46:54 PM 699 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 21/10/2016 11:28:14 AM 806 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 21/10/2016 12:44:08 PM 654 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 23/10/2016 12:32:14 AM 745 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 23/10/2016 08:43:57 PM 637 Views
Sanderson's fan service gay characters were a mistake - 20/10/2016 02:56:34 PM 827 Views
This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 03:50:37 PM 763 Views
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 04:05:20 PM 711 Views
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 06:24:43 PM 795 Views
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 07:28:34 PM 681 Views
Since you don't seem to know what your opinion actually is - 21/10/2016 08:08:26 PM 654 Views
Re: Since you don't seem to know what your opinion actually is - 21/10/2016 08:30:31 PM 674 Views
That's an unfair assessment - 24/10/2016 04:13:45 AM 924 Views
Re: That's an unfair assessment - 25/10/2016 12:41:51 AM 894 Views
Should have been more clear - 25/10/2016 02:34:41 AM 737 Views
Oh, yes, that's a good point then. - 01/11/2016 10:18:07 AM 695 Views
I agree - 01/11/2016 03:49:45 PM 800 Views
On f**king - 20/10/2016 04:28:31 PM 885 Views
Double post *NM* - 20/10/2016 04:33:11 PM 341 Views

Reply to Message