Active Users:602 Time:21/12/2025 02:29:47 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 1571 Views
Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 20/10/2016 01:30:05 PM 942 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 20/10/2016 04:46:54 PM 935 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 21/10/2016 11:28:14 AM 1050 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 21/10/2016 12:44:08 PM 848 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 23/10/2016 12:32:14 AM 981 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 23/10/2016 08:43:57 PM 859 Views
Sanderson's fan service gay characters were a mistake - 20/10/2016 02:56:34 PM 1099 Views
This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 03:50:37 PM 970 Views
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 04:05:20 PM 936 Views
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 06:24:43 PM 1005 Views
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 07:28:34 PM 892 Views
Since you don't seem to know what your opinion actually is - 21/10/2016 08:08:26 PM 844 Views
Re: Since you don't seem to know what your opinion actually is - 21/10/2016 08:30:31 PM 886 Views
That's an unfair assessment - 24/10/2016 04:13:45 AM 1224 Views
Re: That's an unfair assessment - 25/10/2016 12:41:51 AM 1102 Views
Should have been more clear - 25/10/2016 02:34:41 AM 1035 Views
Oh, yes, that's a good point then. - 01/11/2016 10:18:07 AM 888 Views
I agree - 01/11/2016 03:49:45 PM 1104 Views
On f**king - 20/10/2016 04:28:31 PM 1066 Views
Double post *NM* - 20/10/2016 04:33:11 PM 418 Views

Reply to Message