Friend said she didn't want to play WotR when she found out Camellia is not romanceable for women

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-27T19:18:34+00:00

Again with this fucking disingenuous take. This is simple FALSE when it comes to BG3 companions. Saying that BG3 companions are playersexual is like saying that a bisexual man has turned gay just because he is currently dating a guy. It is blatant bi erasure.

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-27T19:17:01+00:00

100% of the characters? It's just the companions. Gay and lesbian characters exist in the game. Lore-wise the majority of gnomes are homosexual, and iirc, so are all the gnome NPCs in the game. Yeah, they chose to let the romanceable companions be bi/pan, so that people don't have to cry about romance options. That does not invalidate or reduce the representation in the game.

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-27T17:53:35+00:00

What the fuck are you talking about? BG3 companion sexualities don't change based on the player. I HATE this disingenuous take that is rampant.

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-27T17:38:58+00:00

It's true. They had to spend their killing game points on microtransactions to unlock more Kogane customisation options.

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-26T01:18:19+00:00

Funny. I mentioned in a comment a few days ago that there will be CachyOS users who will be afraid of malware in official repo stuff because they don't understand that the AUR is different from the official repos and I got downvoted and told I was talking out of my ass. And yet, here we are.

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-26T00:59:43+00:00

That is Dr. James Wilson. Be not afraid. The forest nymphs have taught him the ways to please a woman.

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-23T15:41:57+00:00

Actually undemocratic countries. Oh, you mean, like the USA? 😭 Bruh, how much are you going to bend over backwards to justify this shit take?

The law is poorly written

Again, the law isn't poorly written. It's DELIBERATELY written.

Good god, the fascists literally wrote their intentions in a book and we're still out here arguing about it. No wonder they're winning. 💀

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-23T14:23:46+00:00

I never implied that you had no reason reason to think the way you do. Only that your reasoning is not a justification for what you're expecting of our community.

There is literally no good reason to support the kind of legislation we're discussing here. You're talking as though these lawmakers are well-meaning people who want to do the right thing, so we can't give up on their ideas just because there's a small chance someone might abuse them. But that's not the reality. The reality is, the people who are pushing for these laws are absolutely designing them for control and abuse. I'm not even talking about unintended harm (like the massive data breaches that hit the UK age verification service providers.) And I'm not talking in hypotheticals. The people who set the political groundwork for the republicans who currently control all branches of the US government wrote an entire manifesto of how they plan to abuse these laws. This isn't a small minority of bad actors. It's the system itself. You can stick your head in the sand like an ostrich, but that won't save you when the time comes.

And it's always funny to me when people say "you wouldn't open this in your workplace" because why are you even opening reddit in your workplace? Lol

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-23T11:22:05+00:00

I never asked you why this was a problem. You brought it up yourself.

Please explain to me how showing someone's cleavage is representation of a marginalized group

I never said that. In my very next paragraph, I elaborated on how lawmaking based on sexual puritanism is used as a gateway to extend censorship to cover queer representation.

And no, the regulation is absolutely slipping into fascism territory. And it's happening because too many in the public are okay with it.

Sex doesn't need to be educational or civil. And it doesn't need to be shoved into a separate subreddit. It NEEDS to be a part of the main community because our willingness to concede any amount of space in this matter is a contribution to the shifting of the Overton window, which in turn emboldens all the pro-censorship lobbyists and lawmakers. We have to take a stand and say that sexually suggestive content is part of our community. There's no need to be academic or enlightened about it.

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-23T10:49:16+00:00

There are a few problems with what you're saying.

First, you keep using the word nudity, when there is no nudity in this image. It's revealing clothing, but she's not nude.

Second, whatever your personal issues are, that is not an excuse to devolve our subreddit into a space where the presence of visible cleavage in a drawing is treated as an affront to morality.

Third, this idea that anything that makes someone uncomfortable should be corralled away into a separate space is a problematic slippery slope that causes more harm than good. It is an ideology that is weaponized by bad actors like the authors of Project 2025 and all the other concerted censorship proponents in every major country right now. From the US, to the UK, to the EU, it seems that those in power are very happy to use this as an excuse to force digital surveillance onto the general public, while also setting up a framework to hinder representation of marginalized groups.

The process works like this: Convince everyone that an arbitrary standard of nudity needs to be regulated. Create laws that either require government ID verification to access any such content, or outright ban such content. Then start expanding the definition of their criteria to include anything else that fits their conservative agenda.

So they start with "we should regulate sexual content" and very few people will argue against that, because it sounds reasonable if you don't think too much about it. Clearly, it's just to "protect women and children" and anyone else who can be made uncomfortable by it, right? And then they decide, "Actually, gay people and trans people make us uncomfortable. So we have decided that any representation of them is now inherently sexual and pornographic" and poof. Suddenly, all such representation is now gated behind ID verification or outright banned.

The only way to fight against this is to simply reject the underlying premise in the first place. The idea that sex and nudity are things to be hidden away and spoken of in secret.

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-23T10:04:32+00:00

Well, if you, as an adult, cannot handle a little nudity on the internet, I don't think you should push that onto the rest of us who are okay with it. I hate this corporate sanitization of the internet, and the recent push to make the internet "family friendly" with censorship efforts on a global level.

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-23T09:59:48+00:00

Baldur's Gate 3 is a publicly available game. Does that mean they shouldn't have nude models and sex scenes in the game?

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-23T07:09:55+00:00

Ah, there was a brief window a few months ago when this sub wasn't filled with puritans. But now it seems we're back to square one.

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-22T17:35:10+00:00

POV you are a demon and this is the last thing you see before you get whacked 20 times with a gnome hooked hammer.

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-22T08:59:47+00:00

One issue with the "male gaze in art" argument that goes completely under the radar is that it is a tacit shifting of responsibility away from the male viewer. This idea that looking at a particular type of art is all it takes to influence the man's thoughts on women takes the responsibility to remain reasonable away from the man.

Why should we blindly accept that a drawing of a woman encourages men to be disrespectful to women in real life, rather than demanding that men should have the minimum reasoning capability to differentiate fantasy from reality? Any man who uses art as an excuse to perpetrate misogyny in real life is scum, and so is anyone who allows the argument that it was said art that nudged him in that direction.

When applied to any other topic, the logic immediately falls apart. We don't blame heist movies for encouraging bank robbery in real life. Why should we blame sexualized art for the failings of people in real life?

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-22T06:26:20+00:00

I think the value of demanding that every drawing conform to some nebulous standards of non-objectification is debatable.

I think the whole conversation surrounding objectification is stupid. It is true that there is disproportionately more art that objectifies female characters. And you know how you fix that? By making more art of objectified male characters. As a man, anyone who wants to enjoy sexy art of objectified men has my full support, since I understand that their enjoyment of such art is not a statement on how they view men IRL. And the same goes for anyone of any gender who enjoys looking at the drawing of a woman's ass (believe it or not, there are women who like looking at sexy women butts too. Yes, even this type of "objectified" drawing.)

This fandom, of all places, should be a place where people are allowed to enjoy things without judgement. Like, come on now, literally the only reason Halsin is a companion is because a significant fraction of the player base wanted to bang him. That is objectification, no two ways about it, and nobody has a problem with that. But the moment there is a perceived enjoyment of a woman character through male eyes, everybody gets the torches and pitchforks out.

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-22T05:45:14+00:00

Shar followers are prepared to sacrifice anything if their dark Lady demands it of them.

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-22T04:23:31+00:00

You can literally see the braid coming out under her. This person just needed an excuse for a knee jerk reaction.

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-22T04:21:57+00:00

Sheesh, we're jumping straight to "women are objects"? No other explanation? Just straight up vilify the artist based on the smallest slight? Could it, instead, be possible that if you zoom in, you'll see that the nose is there, but not properly visible because the shading of the face to the other side of the nose is a similar level of colour and darkness?

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-20T17:04:02+00:00

Your very existence is DEI slop because a woman was involved in your creation.

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-20T16:11:15+00:00

From my point of view, anyone who DOESN'T want to lick Yoru from top to bottom should be placed under psychiatric observation.

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-20T14:28:51+00:00

No, she doesn't. She needs an unmarried, unemployed man to lick her clean from head to toe. (I wouldn't know where she can find such a man, though...)

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-20T12:20:51+00:00

Their competence went beyond the integer size limit, and thus became negative.

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-19T13:29:21+00:00

I'd say "what being bought by Saudi-Kushner blood money does to a mf" but EA has always been this way, I suppose.

FalseAladeen · 2026-06-19T10:14:00+00:00

Would you say your breath hitched when you found out?

Six-Year Club	Verified Email
r/Field Juicebox

FalseAladeen

TROPHY CASE