Active Users:461 Time:02/05/2025 07:10:59 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 1446 Views
Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 20/10/2016 01:30:05 PM 807 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 20/10/2016 04:46:54 PM 789 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 21/10/2016 11:28:14 AM 893 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 21/10/2016 12:44:08 PM 733 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 23/10/2016 12:32:14 AM 831 Views
Re: Egwene the Sun God, Rand the Mother (and the nature of OP) - 23/10/2016 08:43:57 PM 713 Views
Sanderson's fan service gay characters were a mistake - 20/10/2016 02:56:34 PM 919 Views
This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 03:50:37 PM 825 Views
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 04:05:20 PM 793 Views
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 06:24:43 PM 870 Views
Re: This honestly never bothered me that much - 21/10/2016 07:28:34 PM 752 Views
Since you don't seem to know what your opinion actually is - 21/10/2016 08:08:26 PM 722 Views
Re: Since you don't seem to know what your opinion actually is - 21/10/2016 08:30:31 PM 761 Views
That's an unfair assessment - 24/10/2016 04:13:45 AM 1008 Views
Re: That's an unfair assessment - 25/10/2016 12:41:51 AM 980 Views
Should have been more clear - 25/10/2016 02:34:41 AM 816 Views
Oh, yes, that's a good point then. - 01/11/2016 10:18:07 AM 769 Views
I agree - 01/11/2016 03:49:45 PM 886 Views
On f**king - 20/10/2016 04:28:31 PM 961 Views
Double post *NM* - 20/10/2016 04:33:11 PM 371 Views

Reply to Message