Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ganymede81" data-source="post: 7124058" data-attributes="member: 6812267">Yet again, this weirdly formalist argument of yours is flimsy. It is little more than sticking to your guns for its own sake.It also relies on the implausible fantasy that there is some qabal of people out there that forced WOTC to make this change. It is like saying, "I would staunchly oppose the Illuminati using their tech-assassins to mind-control WOTC staff into deleting the phrase "hermaphroditic features.'" I mean, I agree that that scenario would be bad, but it is still fantasy.This simply isn't censorship, though. WOTC listened to feedback and adapted to it; that's a far cry from the suppression of ideas that censorship entails. WOTC realized that, in a foreward intended to demonstrate the GLBT inclusiveness of D&D, using a hermaphrodite to appeal to a diverse intersex population is pretty reductive. They acted accordingly. Case closed. There isn't even an inherent problem in describing Corellon as hermaphrodic in other parts of the book or in other supplements; literally the only issue was its place in a very specific paragraph.Thinking otherwise is a flight of fancy.You're thinking the stuff Derren's actually posting, but you're not posting it.It's possible I'm jumping to conclusions. Though, with how badly this thread has gone off the rails, I do not hold out much hope.</blockquote>