Combos Browse all Suggest
Legality
| Format | Legality |
| 1v1 Commander | Legal |
| Archenemy | Legal |
| Arena | Legal |
| Block Constructed | Legal |
| Canadian Highlander | Legal |
| Casual | Legal |
| Commander / EDH | Legal |
| Commander: Rule 0 | Legal |
| Custom | Legal |
| Duel Commander | Legal |
| Gladiator | Legal |
| Highlander | Legal |
| Historic | Legal |
| Legacy | Legal |
| Leviathan | Legal |
| Limited | Legal |
| Modern | Legal |
| Oathbreaker | Legal |
| Pioneer | Legal |
| Planechase | Legal |
| Quest Magic | Legal |
| Vanguard | Legal |
| Vintage | Legal |
Enemy of Enlightenment
Enchantment Creature — Demon
Flying
Enemy of Enlightenment gets -1/-1 for each card in your opponents' hands.
At the beginning of your upkeep, each player discards a card.
Epicurus on Will there Ever Be Female …
1 year ago
I think that it's important to reiterate that Angels and Demons are genderless. So the real discussion is about masculinity vs femininity, not male vs female. That distinction is something I've wrestled with for most of my life.
To draw from my personal experience, I've long identified myself as a very feminine male. In today's sociopolitical environment, I might say that I identify as a woman. But I personally believe that doing so would be counterproductive. To say that I identify as a woman would suggest that men can't be feminine and women can't be masculine. It reinforces traditional gender roles. To relate this to the current discussion, I posit that anyone who looks at the artwork for demons in MtG and says that these genderless figures are all men, must accept their own bias which insists that only men can be masculine.
Even if that's the intention of the artists and/or designers, the interpretation of the observer is important. For example, if you look at Master of Cruelties and see a male figure, you're exposing your own biases about "what a woman looks like." Should it be skinny, long-haired, big-boobed and scantily clad? Would that look more like a woman to you? Can a woman not be big, strong, imposing and fully armored?
If that bias is based in truth (which, I believe is incorrect, but will allow the idea for the sake of argument), then what about:
Couldn't you make the argument that the artwork for these cards "look like women?"
And no, none of them are legendary creatures, ultimately they're as genderless as other cards that are much more easy to accept as such (e.g. Hezrou), and, like I am trying to posit, it doesn't say anything about actual gender either way, because however you see these cards is shaped by your social education about what a man or a woman are supposed to look like.
Now, as for angels, the breasts are a dead giveaway. Which is not to say that men never have large breasts, but the visual characterization of angels in MtG tend to follow the general characterization of women in the rest of the fantasy genre (i.e. long hair blowing in the wind, unrealistically large breasts, armor that makes them look sexy at the expense of being actually effective as armor, etc.). This, in my opinion, is what really is the type of thing that should be changed. There're certainly many ways to depict strong woman without giving them big tits and hardly any clothing. Especially in the case of angels, which like demons, are meant to be genderless. However, because the lore defines them as being manifested in the likeness of Serra - who was a human woman - it would be at least more acceptable to be able to depict them as masculine even while depicting them as female. To suggest that you couldn't is the definition of gender norm bias.
That's why I think that the reason Rosewater gives for not depicting "female" demons - if what's been suggested here is true - is utter bullshit. To suggest that the only way to depict a female demon is as a succubus, suggests that women are one-dimensional. I might argue that you could make Demonlord Belzenlok "look female" simply by putting a shirt on it. And why not? Too muscular? Too imposing? Hair too short? Breasts too small? Not showing enough leg? Ask yourself: why do you think it's impossible for a woman to look like that?