Quote from HarbingerI really don't understand the relevance of having to have homosexuality be a part of everything we see/do in life. In situations like the one described by the OP it to me seems like something shoe-horned in to please a minority of the fanbase that has been asking for it.
I don't feel something that is not visible and does not further a plot like gender preference is something that needs to be labelled on every character or needs to be pushed into every form of media.
There was an author who's name I can't remember was asked during an interview why they didn't have any homosexual characters in their series and the author replied with: "Of course I have homosexual characters in my books but since there is no difference between someone who is gay or straight other than the gender of the person they love, why do you feel the need to separate and label these characters from the rest?"
Furthermore and this isn't trolling, I'm serious. If WotC decided to make a card that symbolized a relationship between a leonin and a human would people decry that WotC is trying to promote bestiality? People are probably going to claim that I'm spewing vitriol but thats not the case as I'm all for equality among sexual preference. I just honestly don't understand and this doesn't really excite me probably because of that.
I just love mindless hypocrites who whine about "you don't need to shove homosexuality" while having absolutely no issues with heterosexual romantic relationships. Pray tell, what relevance did Serra and Ferox's relationship had to the overall plot? None. What relevance did Toshi and whats-her-name had? None. What relevance did Jace's interest in Emmara had? None, absolutely fricking no relevance given that if anything it only made the plot slower and more awkward.
Visibility is an extremely relevant part of social progress; this is why pride parades exist. And the "homosexual character for the sake of looking progressive" thing honestly is an extremely, extremely stupid statement considering the rarity of such events; name me one LGBT character written for LGBT appeal who hasn't been a fleshed out character beyond "s/he's gay". The only LGBT characters that I can think of that have been 100% shallow are camp gay stereotypes meant to be offensive comedy.
Moderation Action: Infraction for Flaming
Please don't call other users "mindless hypocrits". That's flaming, plain and simple.
~kaburi
2
So you don't believe it's okay to depict gay characters in MTG? Does one card with a hint at a gay relationship suddenly turn MTG into a "gay cardgame".
What's next, no people of other races?
Seriously, this is verging on homophobic.
Moderator Action: Warning for Flaming
Calling a user homophobic, racist, or any other invective is considered flaming. Please don't do this.
~kaburi
2
It says something when the most exciting card in a set is a reprint from another set.
(Thoughtseize)
1
You make it sound like it the only valid decks were countering decks and decks won soley on the back of the spells those days. The decklists of that day were much much more varied.
You had very creature heavy decks like mono-green stompy, red sligh, 4 colour-green, white weenie, zoo, marogeddon/ernhamgeddon. A quick glance at magic dojo archives should tell you the environment was much deeper than that.
What was amazing was that these decks were fully functioning alongside creatureless or control decks like counterpost, counterhammer/efreet, prosbloom (combo), squandered stasis (lock).
It was an awesome time in Mtg and a golden age because you had so many viable strategies that were slowly killed off (LD, Discard, etc)...
Some players, myself included, actually loved draw-go with an efreet.
So far this definitely doesn't feel like an enchantment heavy / enchantment matters block beyond the gimicky enchantment creature border. With a third spoiled I was expecting a lot more than this.
1