Great Article

Lore forum

Posted on Jan. 23, 2017, 4:34 p.m. by Homura_Akemi

I just wanted to point out to everyone a great article by Hipsters of the Coast (Rich Stein), if you haven't already seen it on the Daily Update on Magic's website.

http://www.hipstersofthecoast.com/2017/01/aether-revolt-womens-revolution-kaladesh/

I do not know how to link neatly, so there it is.

I don't love this article because of it's comparison of Kaladesh to America, but just for the recognition of all of the change Wizards has been doing in the story, giving better representation to women and LGBT than in the past. Thoughts?

clayperce says... #2

Homura_Akemi,
For future ref, you link like this:

[Link to article](http://www.hipstersofthecoast.com/2017/01/aether-revolt-womens-revolution-kaladesh/)
Link to article

There are also lots more tips at the 'Formatting tips' link below every Comment window.

January 23, 2017 4:39 p.m.

Homura_Akemi says... #3

Thanks so much clayperce

January 23, 2017 4:41 p.m.

RoarMaster says... #4

Who is LGBT in the magic multiverse?

January 23, 2017 6:55 p.m.

Homura_Akemi says... #5

Lol they're at least trying with some random legendary creatures like Oviya Pashiri, Kynaios and Tiro, Hal and Alena, although there's some subtle intimations in the story of a possible Chandra and Nissa relationship.

January 23, 2017 7:46 p.m.

tempest says... #6

Do you guys really see Chandra and Nissa more than Chandra and Gideon? There's no doubt that Chandra and Nissa have a connection, but it seems strictly platonic- more like the best friend who's always there whereas Gideon is protective of Chandra and Chandra even seeks physical contact when she asks for a hug. Idk. Thoughts?

January 23, 2017 8:39 p.m.

clayperce says... #7

RoarMaster,
FYI, here's ...

January 23, 2017 9:48 p.m. Edited.

Nobilior says... #8

Social Marxism at its finest.

January 23, 2017 10:03 p.m.

clayperce says... #9

At the risk of feeding the Troll ...

Nobilior, you've confused Marxism with Capitalism. Sure, Wizards benefits socially by Doing the Right Thing. But they're no charity, they're in this to make money. And by increasing diversity in our lore and cards, they make the game appeal to a much wider audience.

January 24, 2017 6:45 a.m. Edited.

EpicFreddi says... #10

My question is why is this so important? Why make such a deal out of gender/sexuallity/whatnot at all?
Don't get me wrong, in the real world the whole "comming out" and stuff is hard and a lot of people are intolerant about it, but in a world where there a skeletal dragons and god knows what, it should just be normal and worthy of any mention at all. Alesha, Who Smiles at Death was transgender (or at least a crossdresser), but her people didn't give a crap, so why should we?
I read up on it and they said she's a good "role model" - please, she's a murderous maniac that can reanimate the dead, how's that a good role model?

January 24, 2017 10:32 a.m.

The question "Why is this so important" is the kind of question that just doesn't make sense. "Let's just not make a big deal out of it" is a point of view that only holds for those to whom this isn't a big deal.

It's important to people like these characters, who should be able to see reflections of themselves in the media. It shows a reality of characters, rather than and airbrushed everyones-the-same that denies the existence of any kind of "other."

January 24, 2017 3:13 p.m.

EpicFreddi says... #12

I'm not asking for an "airbrushed everyones-the-same" like you said it. What I'm wondering is why it is important to flesh out the sexuality of these charakters so much. You don't see that with straight charakters. Every part of the sexual spectrum should be normal, that's why i think there is no point of making a big deal out of it.
But yes, that's just my oppinion.

January 24, 2017 3:30 p.m.

It's important because the base assumption tends to be "this character is straight." Same as we tend to assume "this character is male" unless told otherwise. It's important to make it clear when a character doesn't fit "the norm" so that it's also made clear that "the norm" isn't actually normal.

I also have no idea what you mean when you say "you don't see that with straight characters." You see exactly the same storytelling around straight characters - a build up of an affection that eventually develops into a relationship. The difference is, that's not challenging anyone's assumptions, so there's no dialogue around it.

January 24, 2017 3:40 p.m.

EpicFreddi says... #14

Oh man, it's really hard to have an argument in a language i do not fully speak. I can't really get my point across and tell you what I mean without sounding wrong. I have to cut the conversation here, I feel like I'm making a fool out of myself. sorry. :/

January 25, 2017 5:26 a.m.

Nobilior says... #15

clayperce

Don't worry, I don't particularly care for "trolling," I am merely stating an observation and have no intention of having an argument.

I have no confusion between Capitalism and Marxism (hence why I stated social Marxism). I doubt adding more LGBT characters really is a capitalistic move, as I doubt anyone from the LGBT would be drawn to Magic simply because of other homosexual characters. Furthermore, at most they represent 4% of the population, so its not like they are appealing to a new massive audience. People play Magic because they immerse themselves in a flavorful-rich, magical world combined with competitive and fun game mechanics. As such, I hardly see how making characters LGBT drastically pull new players into the game. Also, you must consider that this movement could push people away from the game, and I suspect that Christians as well as other similarly morally aligned groups would be less and less inclined to play the game.

As such, these changes don't seem to benefit Wizards monetarily, and is a product of social Marxism (progressive thought, or whatever you want to call it). They are based in Seattle after all, which leans heavily towards that side of the spectrum.

Hope I don't come across as some kind of jerk, as that is not my intention. I simply want to present, or rather mention, the other side of this type of discussion. Nobody benefits from any one-sided dialogue, regardless of "correctness."

January 26, 2017 1:11 p.m.

This discussion has been closed