#where people asked the devs if the characters id as pan or bi

[tutti-says]

ReRe: Sexuality, labeling theory, and accepting your own ignorance in BG3 fandom

One thing I have learned in my life is to,well, learn. Discourse over companion sexuality surged on Twitter at a time I just happened to be on yesterday. As I preached my own QT about the characters being playersexual, I happened upon a tweet about this word being bi/pan phibic due to its history.

While I was confused, I took my post down and decided to find out the root instead. I began my usual route: asking questions and running a search on google. To me at a surface understanding, the term playersexual encompassed the gambit of all sexualities-allowing the player character (PC) to choose whomever they wish to romance. For those who are unfamiliar- BG3 is a dnd set CRPG where the PC is able to engage in romantic interactions. The more special part of BG3 is that these romances can play a substantial part in the overall story of your playthrough. And as most of the western hemishphere probably knows the name Astarion, it suffices to say that these companions and possible romances are important to the playerbase. Though the numbers aren't in yet, there is a sizeable chunk of queer persons involved in the BG3 fandom and it only takes a cursory glance at twitter in order to realize that. And of course, representation of queer romances plays into that. So, while I thought the term would resonate with people of the freedom to choose, the term "player -sexual" as Larian devs described the companions, only druged up old wounds. And I was very, very ignorant on this. From my conversations, I learned that the term was coined in the time of Dragon Age 2 by a confirmed biphobic dev in response to fans praising bisexual characters. As well, it was brought to my attention by my mutual Mish that Larian winning awards for inclusivity, while also using this term, left people feeling like the devs were once again erasing the canon sexuality of pansexuals. For context, Niel Newbon spoke in response to a question that Astarion is pansexual. This can be confirmed in game by Lae'zel possibly sleeping with Astarion during the night of the Tiefling party. The companions aren't just sleeping with any PC no matter what, but with other NPCs as well. Once my moot on twitter, mon, pointed this out-it suddenly made sense. I was wrong. There are some more conversations surrounding this topic I would love to expand on later, but for the point of this already being long I will save it. At first, I thought the problem of labels was solved by the term playersexual, but it turns out that label was stuck on to cover sexualities and their validity. Ignorance is often used as an insult; a euphamism for stup[id. However, ignorance in itself is nuetral. It is neither good nor bad until the option to learn is put forth, and the ignorant make a choice to learn or not. Unfortunately, most cause of discourse is rooted in willful ignorance, or refusing to acknoowledge and understand knowledge when presented. I don't use the words attached to phobics or isms without careful consideration. In this instance I do believe the word playersexual to be pan or bi phobic due to its history. I do hope that Larians reconsiders this word in the future. I can't win every war, but I can learn which wars to fight with not being afraid to be wrong and learn different. thank you <3

#halsin #wyll #auntie ethel #jaheira #shadowheart #karlach #tav #bg3 tav #bg3 #bg3 dark urge #bg3 astarion #bg3 spoilers #baldurs gate 3

[bosspigeon]

everyone in stardew is canonly bi/pan aren't they? or do those people mean like, they find him boring (he is not) and therefor he is straight? I'm confused.

it was a post thats like “here’s my headcanon on this character’s sexuality” and i was like “okay sure” but then i saw harvey got “straight” and i went blind with rage

#pidge replies #and i mean the characters in sdv are 'playersexual' #which is the creators being lazy in most cases #and trying to claim representation #when they dont really offer it in any major way and just leave it up to player interpretation #so calling them bi/pan usually gives the creators too much credit #but at the same time trying to apply straightness to them is just... weird as hell #its complicated #it just reminds me of the whole 'playersexual' bullshit of the da2 times #where people asked the devs if the characters id as pan or bi #and they're just like :) #and then if you play a female character and romance anders you never find out about his relationship with karl #stuff like that #i feel like its giving the creators too much credit to say they're 'canonically' anything #but its also shitty to try to apply straightness to characters who are definitely Not That just makes me side eye you so hard