Active Users:484 Time:18/09/2025 07:40:42 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 1512 Views
Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 20/10/2016 01:30:05 PM 876 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 20/10/2016 04:46:54 PM 870 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 21/10/2016 11:28:14 AM 979 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 21/10/2016 12:44:08 PM 804 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 23/10/2016 12:32:14 AM 904 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 23/10/2016 08:43:57 PM 783 Views
Sanderson's fan service gay characters were a mistake - 20/10/2016 02:56:34 PM 1042 Views
This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 03:50:37 PM 910 Views
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 04:05:20 PM 869 Views
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 06:24:43 PM 938 Views
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 07:28:34 PM 826 Views
Since you don't seem to know what your opinion actually is - 21/10/2016 08:08:26 PM 801 Views
Re: Since you don't seem to know what your opinion actually is - 21/10/2016 08:30:31 PM 836 Views
That's an unfair assessment - 24/10/2016 04:13:45 AM 1146 Views
Re: That's an unfair assessment - 25/10/2016 12:41:51 AM 1053 Views
Should have been more clear - 25/10/2016 02:34:41 AM 962 Views
Oh, yes, that's a good point then. - 01/11/2016 10:18:07 AM 834 Views
I agree - 01/11/2016 03:49:45 PM 1032 Views
On f**king - 20/10/2016 04:28:31 PM 1023 Views
Double post *NM* - 20/10/2016 04:33:11 PM 401 Views

Reply to Message