Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="shannona" data-source="post: 8491698" data-attributes="member: 42455">It wasn't a review, it was a historical overview of the supplement, albeit one written in July 2014: my perspective and discussion would be quite a bit different now given the discussion of biological essentialism that has mainstreamed since then. But I find it likely that what I described was what people were saying about the supplement at the time.So I mentioned the two main streams of response that I'd seen about the book. It's not an explicit either/or as you state: it's two responses that appeared in peoples' discussions. Obviously there can be more possibilities. However, if there were discussions of more problematic elements that I'd found at the time it's likely I would have included them. (Can't say for sure that I didn't: that was seven and a half years ago, and I wrote 2+ histories every week for years.)The Legacy Content warning was added at the end of all my product histories two years ago, so yeah it might not be totally in sync with the rest of the article. Unfortunately, I no longer have permission to edit them at this point, and haven't for at least a year or two (maybe longer, but sometime last year was the first time I went to fix a typo and discovered I no longer could).The next version of these histories, with expansion and a more modern perspective, is going to appear in a series of "TSR Codices". GAZ10 is toward the start of Book IV, and I'm starting Book III next month.</blockquote>

Verification