Active Users:386 Time:02/05/2025 07:51:16 AM
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 1444 Views
Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 20/10/2016 01:30:05 PM 806 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 20/10/2016 04:46:54 PM 788 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 21/10/2016 11:28:14 AM 892 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 21/10/2016 12:44:08 PM 731 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 23/10/2016 12:32:14 AM 830 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 23/10/2016 08:43:57 PM 711 Views
Sanderson's fan service gay characters were a mistake - 20/10/2016 02:56:34 PM 917 Views
This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 03:50:37 PM 823 Views
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 04:05:20 PM 792 Views
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 06:24:43 PM 868 Views
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 07:28:34 PM 751 Views
Since you don't seem to know what your opinion actually is - 21/10/2016 08:08:26 PM 720 Views
Re: Since you don't seem to know what your opinion actually is - 21/10/2016 08:30:31 PM 760 Views
That's an unfair assessment - 24/10/2016 04:13:45 AM 1007 Views
Re: That's an unfair assessment - 25/10/2016 12:41:51 AM 979 Views
Should have been more clear - 25/10/2016 02:34:41 AM 815 Views
Oh, yes, that's a good point then. - 01/11/2016 10:18:07 AM 768 Views
I agree - 01/11/2016 03:49:45 PM 884 Views
On f**king - 20/10/2016 04:28:31 PM 959 Views
Double post *NM* - 20/10/2016 04:33:11 PM 371 Views

Reply to Message