you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]EveSerpent 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Transing any kind of history/character is wrong and should always be called out.

[–]marmorsymphata 11 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

I mean the character was explicitly based on the designer.

If I made a popular piece of media based on my struggles and then got diagnosed with my OCD later, it would be perfectly reasonable for me to say, "Yeah that self insert acts like x y and z because she has OCD".

[–]FediNetizen 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah, that's way more reasonable. Honestly, when Rowling retconned Dumbledore to be gay that was more obnoxious because nothing in the books indicated that and it appeared to be mostly a grab for woke points. Being trans and making a character based on you also trans is fine.

[–]zephyranthes 11 insightful - 5 fun11 insightful - 4 fun12 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

What? She didn't retcon anything.

The books are writter from Harry Potter's point of view and were often criticized for that as, having decided on it, Rowling couldn't cover events Harry had no business witnessing, had to come up with contrived excuses for him witnessing what she wanted to depict, and couldn't play off the hero's limited perspective against the reader's broader knowledge and thus lost on tension and dramatic irony - important in children's literature. (Thus Harry ended up being somewhat more of an brickheaded asshole than he could have been.)

Dumbledore's orientation was nowhere in the books because schoolchildren don't think about their teachers' sexual orientation. Hell, schoochildren are often shocked when they see a teacher outside of school. And really, a British boarding school without gay teachers? Honestly IRL sorcery would be more believable.

On the other hand, these creeps are shoehorning their gross fetishism into an existing game. Parents may have vetted the game (rated E) which was supposedly about a girl overcoming self-doubt or something, and bought it for their children. Then an update comes out in which surprise, it's eckshually about a (presumably sexually abused) boy who wants to cut off his dick.

edit: just saw the programmer, Matt Thorson, renamed himself "Maddy". So it's not any character, it's the embodiment of his sadness over not having been groomed as a child. I feel sick already, thank you.