| hershel_layton said: I read it. My criticism was on a whole though. Not just to transgender(they do have it bad), but other people that demand everything is diverse and have all groups feel represented. The only reason I don't want it for Link is because Sheik would be a more matching character. Makes everyone think she's a boy(even though she isn't in OoT). Also, the article had problems. First off, nintendo never dealt with otherkin. There's a difference between transforming into a badass animal and otherkin. Secondly, Anita Sarkeesian. Saying the typical audience is "30 year old white[caucasion] males" is absolutely dishonest. Do you truly think the majority of Nintendo's audience is above 30, let alone 25? Most of them are teenage-young adult men and women who love their games for original gameplay. You'll find the "white men" elsewhere, not at Nintendo. Also, look at the wording. She's so biased it's to the point where I'm cringing. The article is portraying Nintendo as some big, bad villian with the fired worker(who I have nothing against) as some angel that got pursecuted by Nintendo. Adding on, I'm quite sure Nintendo has their own reason for not making any of their current characters transgender- they just never felt the need. As I said, this is video games that we're talking about. Not everyone will be happy. But guess what? Link isn't a white male with white privilege. He's a dude that's an elf(I think). YET, the reason why I never saw the need for Link being transgender is because most of the Link's from the LoZ franchise look extremely masculine and male-like(especially the voice). The Wii U version could make him look like a girlish boy/boyish girl to allow people to pick whatever the heck they want Link to be. Male, female, transgender male, transgender female...See what I mean? Link is Nintendo's golden character(well, one of them). I'm pretty sure Nintendo will do whatever they can to keep it like that, now what I mean? They probably know what to do for the best. |
So, you read the source? Do you understand now why Transgenders and not another collective (even though they need to be represented) must be the one being represented in the new Zelda game?
And you're wrong. Sheik was definitively a man in OoT (Zelda used magic to change her body, it wasn't just a disguise. The OoT Manga confirmed this), and the transforming into an animal was definitively a move to represent the otherkin collective. Because otherwise wouldn't have made sense that Link was a wolf, wasn't it? They could have simply do what they did in Majora, change his race.
Nintendo definitively aim for the white men population, though I agree that maybe Anita got the age wrong. I do think 15 is way too short, probably mid-20. Still, we're in the same situation.
And she's not biased. She's pointing out the flaws in Nintendo's patriarchal way of thinking. That worker did nothing to deserve being fired. Yet she was kick out regardless.
I think it's too sad that Link has to be a man to be considered the Golden Character of Nintendo. They have the opportunity to demonstrate that your sex isn't what determines the Golden Character thing. Because outside Samus, there's really no diversification in Nintendo's humane-esque Golden Characters.
