Active Users:644 Time:21/03/2026 10:33:35 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 1632 Views
Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 20/10/2016 01:30:05 PM 995 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 20/10/2016 04:46:54 PM 1001 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 21/10/2016 11:28:14 AM 1102 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 21/10/2016 12:44:08 PM 891 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 23/10/2016 12:32:14 AM 1039 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 23/10/2016 08:43:57 PM 907 Views
Sanderson's fan service gay characters were a mistake - 20/10/2016 02:56:34 PM 1182 Views
This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 03:50:37 PM 1019 Views
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 04:05:20 PM 993 Views
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 06:24:43 PM 1057 Views
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 07:28:34 PM 945 Views
Since you don't seem to know what your opinion actually is - 21/10/2016 08:08:26 PM 898 Views
Re: Since you don't seem to know what your opinion actually is - 21/10/2016 08:30:31 PM 935 Views
That's an unfair assessment - 24/10/2016 04:13:45 AM 1283 Views
Re: That's an unfair assessment - 25/10/2016 12:41:51 AM 1153 Views
Should have been more clear - 25/10/2016 02:34:41 AM 1102 Views
Oh, yes, that's a good point then. - 01/11/2016 10:18:07 AM 940 Views
I agree - 01/11/2016 03:49:45 PM 1159 Views
On f**king - 20/10/2016 04:28:31 PM 1115 Views
Double post *NM* - 20/10/2016 04:33:11 PM 441 Views

Reply to Message