Not true at all, because Cassandra is literally the only love interest outside the norm, which is his complaint. I personally don't care and find Cassandra attractive enough, but he can complain all her wants when the literally the only love interest to be outside the norm and usually requested is Cassandra. Using only stereotypes, I can pick out the sexualities of everyone in the party, but for Cassandra, I'd be wrong, simply because she doesn't follow said stereotype, his point: Why must the only option that singularly heterosexual for males also the only options that falls outside of the social norm for what is feminine?
Right, so that's where we disagree. You have a different understanding of "the norm" than I do.
I still think that your understanding of "the norm" is not, in fact, normal, because it relies on undefined
ostensible stereotypes. I don't think that the things you think are "stereotypical" are, in fact, "stereotypical", because there are plenty of people on this forum who, unlike Br3admax, prognosticator of prognosticators, did not successfully determine the various companions' sexual orientations prior to their reveals. There was an avalanche of complaints from disappointed men when Sera turned out to be lesbian (I say "was" even though the rockslide hasn't really stopped yet); there were also groups that thought Dorian would be interested in women and Blackwall interested in men. If these stereotypes were broadcasting their sexualities so clearly, then surely such things wouldn't have happened. And there were people who correctly guessed Cassandra would be straight, too: how did they do that, if the Signs pointed somewhere other than her being straight?
In my field of study, there are a lot of academics with crappy reasoning who make sweeping generalizations about norms and stereotypes and Cultural Traits and suchlike things. They then use these generalizations to build bad arguments about the way stuff works. I don't disagree that norms and stereotypes exist; I do disagree with using them for the basis of an argument without adequately demonstrating that they exist. Otherwise, they become logic clay, able to buttress any wild claim. And there are a
lot of such wild claims out there. I don't expect anybody in this thread, least of all myself, to adhere to academic standards of proof. But it would have been nice to have seen
some demonstration of why these things are supposedly stereotypical in a meaningful way and therefore why Cassandra is the only non-bisexual love interest that does not adhere to these stereotypes. I haven't seen anything like that. I've seen a bunch of personal opinions and sweeping generalizations, and that's it.
What gives you the right to say what he can complain about, the whole point of a forum is to voice your opinion. Sure it's a stupid one, no offense, but he has all the power to him to do just that.
I can say whether I think a complaint is reasonable or not, can't I? It's an opinion that isn't actionable. I'm not going around censoring or deleting his posts or anything, not that I have the capability to do so in the first place. I'm not talking about "right". "Unwarranted" means "there is no warrant for it", i.e. there is no logical reason supporting it. I'm not a native speaker of English, so I may have to defer to you on this, but that
is what that word means, right? And if so, that's a pretty accurate description of the way I've been talking so far, no? Have I said anything like "stfu"?
You're not going to change my opinion on how hot Cassandra is, obviously. I neither expect nor desire to change anybody else's opinion about that, either. The only thing that's really at issue is this thing about unfairness, something none of us in this thread have the power to change. And either way, I'm still not going to think it's unfair - it's just the difference between me expressing he personal opinion "okay, I don't think it's unfair but I understand why
you think so" and expressing the personal opinion "okay, I don't think it's unfair and you're being silly". I elect to stick with the latter.
And that's all I have to say about that.