Active Users:344 Time:17/06/2025 10:15:54 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 1462 Views
Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 20/10/2016 01:30:05 PM 823 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 20/10/2016 04:46:54 PM 814 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 21/10/2016 11:28:14 AM 918 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 21/10/2016 12:44:08 PM 749 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 23/10/2016 12:32:14 AM 849 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 23/10/2016 08:43:57 PM 728 Views
Sanderson's fan service gay characters were a mistake - 20/10/2016 02:56:34 PM 939 Views
This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 03:50:37 PM 846 Views
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 04:05:20 PM 813 Views
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 06:24:43 PM 888 Views
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 07:28:34 PM 770 Views
Since you don't seem to know what your opinion actually is - 21/10/2016 08:08:26 PM 740 Views
Re: Since you don't seem to know what your opinion actually is - 21/10/2016 08:30:31 PM 778 Views
That's an unfair assessment - 24/10/2016 04:13:45 AM 1091 Views
Re: That's an unfair assessment - 25/10/2016 12:41:51 AM 996 Views
Should have been more clear - 25/10/2016 02:34:41 AM 900 Views
Oh, yes, that's a good point then. - 01/11/2016 10:18:07 AM 783 Views
I agree - 01/11/2016 03:49:45 PM 966 Views
On f**king - 20/10/2016 04:28:31 PM 977 Views
Double post *NM* - 20/10/2016 04:33:11 PM 378 Views

Reply to Message