inu-kun said:
You do realize you try to defend the honor of a fictional character?
Pointing out that someone with a medical background is trying to define things as such has nothing to do with defending his [the character's] honour. Surely, you can tell the difference.
Edit: And really? dissing Witcher 3 for not being inclusive?
Oh maybe not. I mean, seriously, who here has "dissed" Witcher 3?
God forsake having games that are actually good, DA:I is better since it's inclusive in how mediocre it is!
By the same measure, god forbid someone have different criteria for what constitutes a good game. Not that anyone has even said it's a bad game, but apparently Witcher 3's honour must be defended.
Honestly, one of the biggest reasons video games and video gamers aren't treated seriously by the rest of culture is the incessant urge to balk at even the tiniest of criticisms.
LifeCharacter said:
I'd prefer the Japanese reaction during the early 1600s, when they started to really crack down on them. But your idea's good too.
Well, I generally don't have that level of malice in me. Sometimes, but rarely.
Don't forget all those bits of American pop culture that we wound up stealing from them. The Witcher 3 has really put a spotlight and just how much influence Polish history and culture has had on our own.
Don't forget basically everything in Dungeons & Dragons. They totally got that from Polish mythology. I would never have known this without Witcher 3.
Let's see if you're saying that when Saint She Who Must Not Be Named graces us with another new gif.
Oh, trust me, our glorious feminazi overlady cannot shake my conviction.
I don't think the demographic most likely to have the name Marv knows what a tag is, or what twitter is.
I didn't know you were such a Marvist.
I honestly hate this idea that because they can come up with a story about trans people or gay people being oppressed and discriminated against everywhere that doing anything differently is just a missed opportunity that the writers need to beat themselves up over. Not every story involving a gay character or a trans character needs to make a big deal of it and have them overcome some sort of prejudice. And, considering how many people love whining about Dorian's totally gay sidequest adventure of shoving the gay agenda down people's throat, I highly doubt they'd be avoiding any criticism by having a story centered around Krem's gender.
I don't know if you know who Steve Shives is. He's a YouTuber, an atheist, and a feminist. I bring him up because he did a video where he and his wife disagreed over Joss Wheedon. I'm on the same side of the argument as his wife, more or less, though I don't think that men can't write feminist characters and I don't think of Wheedon specifically in terms of whether he writes feminist characters so much as the claim of "stong women."
What does this have to do with transmen, you ask? Well, it has to do with minority representation in general.
Ashley, his wife, contrasted female characters in movies to Will Smith. Now, I know not everyone can be Will Smith, but the point she made was that you generally don't see Will Smith struggling with adversity. And while my Will Smith viewing days somewhat date me, that is generally true. Will Smith is a badass fighter pilot who is only kept out of NASA because his evil vagina-having girlfriend uses her body to make other men feel good. He's a badass top secret agent who ends up running a clandestine operation. He's a badass cop, who is paired with a slightly less badass cop who is also black but generally not in a way that he has to suffer adversity.
Her idea was to start at the end. Start past that. And I don't think every story should do that, but I think more should. Not every story has to make gay out as a struggle, and there's no reason for conservation of detail when it comes to sex/sexuality/gender identity/race/whatever. Not every event in a minority's life is necessarily about them being a minority. And if we make everything about the struggle, then that's all people think of.
I found myself realising I more or less do this when writing. The stories I write could probably be done 97% the same with a male character in the first place, and a chunk of the remainder would only need to change either the other party's sex or the character's sexuality to accommodate. There are like two instances that deal with sexism in any way, and they're fairly minor. I could throw in polemics about the institutional issues of her former line of work, but I don't. It's not that kind of story.
Also, yes. This goes right back to the "can't win" thing I mentioned before. If this was any more central, it would almost certainly be "shoving it down our throats," or in other words "this concept exists."
As such, I imagine a man who does his job, deals with his story, and then pees sitting down is probably too much for a lot of people.