Why is this so small holy moly.
I'm also fairly certain it's just "transgender" not "transgenderism"
Oops, made a little mistake.
I'm not certain of my correctness, but I have seen the word transgenderism used before. Plus the topic wouldn't sound right if it was named "Iron Bull and Transgender." 
Oops, made a little mistake.
I'm not certain of my correctness, but I have seen the word transgenderism used before. Plus the topic wouldn't sound right if it was named "Iron Bull and Transgender."
Well. You could use his name?
I've never seen transgenderism used but I tend to stay away from the discourse so >.>
I'm pretty sure they were hunting him for desertion, if I recall.
Yup, he was being hunted for desertion because when an Imperial healer found out, Krem was going to be made a slave or executed. It comes down to the same issue.
It is. If I may quote (source):
"Retroactive continuity. Reframing past events to serve a current plot need."
This new bit of lore is a reinterpretation of the Qun's stance on gender roles, as established in DAO. It doesn't precisely contradict anything, but it's perfectly clear this interpretation is new, it's fueled by concerns outside of the story and it significantly changes how the Qun is perceived on matters of gender - from complete inflexibility to rather more flexibility than it shows in anything else. That it's a retcon isn't necessarily bad. However, the fact that this changes how the Qun is perceived as significantly, for reasons that lie outside of the story, together with Bull's reaction, makes it come across as an intrusive form of author appeal.
You see, my reaction to Krem's presence was "So they have transgender people in Thedas. OK." A piece of neutral lore, shouldn't be that surprising considering the people of Thedas are basically as human as we are. Nothing to see here, people. Move on. The change to the Qun was different. It wasn't necessary to reinterpret the Qun in order for Krem's presence to be regarded as normal. In fact, only the reinterpretation of the Qun makes this scene stand out in the first place.
The lore not fitting preconceptions isn't a retcon.
Sten tells my female Tabris that she can't be a woman because she's a Grey Warden. He doesn't say she can't be a Grey Warden because she's a woman. It's an interesting distinction. Although I doubt Aqun-Athlok existed as a concept at that time, it doesn't contradict what we knew outside our own limited knowledge of the Qun. The Qun assigns roles according to what is deemed most appropriate. Lack of flexibility is in deviating from assigned roles (although there is apparently some flexibility within general roles according to Sten). So if you're in the antaam, you're there because some tamassran considered you most suited for it, despite your bits. And if you're in the antaam, you're going to be considered a man regardless of what those bits are, because that's your role.
Exploring the Qun beyond what we know of it may not be necessary, but it gives it more depth that is always welcome from a world building perspective. Real life societies are typically complex. This shouldn't be true of human societies alone, and is actually a common concern I have when it comes to the portrayal of the different races in the game. Considering the Qun is something we are not at all familiar with in-game aside from an outsiders perspective, it makes sense that we're going to get exposition now and then on things we didn't know before.
Interesting. I'm not an expert, but I think they succeeded with Krem. My impression was "a mercenary who happened to be transgender", a perfectly normal person except for one little fact. Krem's presence also didn't feel intrusive, overly focused on representation or anything like it.There is an informational blog post from the writer's perspective and I thought it may be useful here as regards writer's intent - along with the declaration that the writers really struggled with how to treat this subject with some sensitivity.
http://blog.bioware....s-krem-aclassi/
Interesting. I'm not an expert, but I think they succeeded with Krem. My impression was "a mercenary who happened to be transgender", a perfectly normal person except for one little fact. Krem's presence also didn't feel intrusive, overly focused on representation or anything like it.
It's only the retcon of the Qun that turned this into an issue. That gave it a type of presence that came across as intrusive.
Is it that there are new writers on this round? Patrick Weekes was lead on this instead of David Gaider? If that's the case, it may not be retcon as much as a new writer infusing the character with his personal motivations or intentions. Unless I dreamed it, I believe I've read an interview in which Patrick and Karin Weekes state that while they were willing to let players ask questions about Krem, they weren't willing to let players take any sort of abusive stance toward Krem. If that's true, perhaps they were writing this part from a defensive mindset and that's why Bull comes off as defensive to some?
Gaider was still the boss (lead writer) for DAI. Weekes' reign only started with the DLC
But Weekes was writing Iron Bull and Krem, or is that wrong? The blog posts I've read indicate he was the primary writer of Iron Bull and Krem. Do you know the answer to this?
But Weekes was writing Iron Bull and Krem, or is that wrong? The blog posts I've read indicate he was the primary writer of Iron Bull and Krem. Do you know the answer to this?
AFAIK he was, but DG still had the final veto power. Look, DAO made it very clear. The Qun does not tolerate transgenderism. At least it didn't in DAO, and that line was perfectly consistant with how else the Qun was presented (an inflexible, alien, and extremely conservative philosophy). Tbis was changed in DAI (at least w/r/t transgenderism) which makes this an unwelcome retcon. As Ieldra has already said, I don't have an issue with transgenderism per se in the game, and I think Krem protrays it brilliantly. I DO object to using the Qun as a vessel for discussing it especially when it changes how the Qun is regarded at (or at least near) it's very core.
Anyone following this topic might want to take a look at David Gaider's posts here where he addressed many of the points raised in this thread.
AFAIK he was, but DG still had the final veto power. Look, DAO made it very clear. The Qun does not tolerate transgenderism. At least it didn't in DAO, and that line was perfectly consistant with how else the Qun was presented (an inflexible, alien, and extremely conservative philosophy). Tbis was changed in DAI (at least w/r/t transgenderism) which makes this an unwelcome retcon. As Ieldra has already said, I don't have an issue with transgenderism per se in the game, and I think Krem protrays it brilliantly. I DO object to using the Qun as a vessel for discussing it especially when it changes how the Qun is regarded at (or at least near) it's very core.
I have misunderstood Qun views on gender and role since DAO, then.
It has been my understanding that being who fight - who live a warrior role - are men in the Qun. Therefore Krem, who fights, would acceptably be a man in the Qun. And that acceptability would not extend to someone like my Reaver, who insists upon being a warrior and also a woman.
I can see how people would view this differently, and perceive that this new dialogue is a retcon. I can also see why some wouldn't like that change in lore, or any changes to established lore. But since my misunderstanding of the Qun fits suitably for me with any retcon, I'll count myself lucky.
Thank you for the clarification.
AFAIK he was, but DG still had the final veto power. Look, DAO made it very clear. The Qun does not tolerate transgenderism. At least it didn't in DAO, and that line was perfectly consistant with how else the Qun was presented (an inflexible, alien, and extremely conservative philosophy). Tbis was changed in DAI (at least w/r/t transgenderism) which makes this an unwelcome retcon. As Ieldra has already said, I don't have an issue with transgenderism per se in the game, and I think Krem protrays it brilliantly. I DO object to using the Qun as a vessel for discussing it especially when it changes how the Qun is regarded at (or at least near) it's very core.
I do not believe the Qun is friendly to the transgenderism because they would still assign roles based upon merit and not based upon personal feelings. It is a different perception of gender, in my opinion, and not a matter of transgenderism.
The Qun and fallibilism
To put it different and a bit lengthy; the Qun believes their philosophy to be infallible and so there must be no contradictions to be found that renders it fallible. The different perception would likely come about because of this need for the Qun to remain infallible.
If the Qun states that someone of the female sex cannot be capable of combative competence on par with that of a soldier but evidence to the contrary is found because someone of the female gender displays combative competence on par with that of a warrior then that presents a contradiction.
The solution to the contradiction would be to decide that since the Qun states that someone of the female gender cannot be of combative competence and that only someone of the male gender can display such a combative competence then it follows that this person must be someone of the male gender.
Furthermore, they could explain it as being a misinterpretation of the Qun philosophy since thereby the blame would be laid at the feet of someone fallible and not at the feet of something believed to be infallible.
Krem would likely have a combative role assigned to him within the Qun but not because he desired such a role but because he claims to be of the male gender and can provide evidence to his claim by the way of demonstrating his combative competence. Had he claimed to be of the female gender or lacked the necessary skill to provide evidence to his claim then it he would likely not be assigned the role he desired.
Sten and his dialogue
Sten: "I don't understand. You look like a woman."
(...)
Sten: "You are a Grey Warden so it follows that you can't be a woman."
Warden: "That dosen't make any sense, Sten."
Sten: "So you understand my confusion, then. Women are priests, artisans, shopkeepers or farmers. They don't fight"
Warden: That's not a universal truth. Some women fight."
Sten: "Why would women ever wish to be men? That makes no sense."
Note that Sten percieves this to be a wish on the women's behalf to be men; it is not a denial of skill, it is a denial of gender. Sten would have had the oppertunity to encounter combat with opponents who are female but he percieves them as male because they fight therefore they are male.
On a related note, I do not believe the Arishok questions Hawke on their gender despite their first encounter being after Hawke has disposed of Tal-Vashoth.
One interpretation could be that it is because he assumes it to be another bizarrity of Kirkwall but another interpretation could be that the Arishok percieved Hawke as male due to their participation in a combative venture. He acknowledges, I believe, them as having skill for facing Tal-Vashoth. When the Arishok potentially challenges Hawke or is challenged to single combat during the finale of the second arc regardless of their gender, he makes no remark towards their gender.
Interestingly enough, I am not even certain the Arishok ever refers to Hawke with gender pronouns but perhaps someone can confirm or deny this for me before I rifle through the cutscene videos to be sure?
Warden: "You think they can't be women, because women don't fight?"
Sten: "Exactly."
Warden: "I'm a woman and I'm fighting."
Sten: "One of those things can't be true."
This quote is interesting to me because Sten would know the Warden to have displayed combative competence so I do not believe it likely that this would be the thing he considers to be false since he'd know it to have been proven true and so saying otherwise would be denying the obvious. It follows then that the thing he considers to be false is what gender the Warden claims to be.
Sten: A person is born: qunari, or human, or elven, or dwarf. He dosen't choose that. The size of his hand, whether he is clever or foolish, the land he comes from, the color of his hair; These are beyond his control. We do not choose, we simply are"
Note that Sten refers to things such as both physically and psychological traits, nationality and race. He does not mention gender because gender is assigned based upon role and therefore, while gender is not something a person can choose for themselves, it is not something that cannot change.
Warden: "But a person can choose what to do."
Sten: "Can they? We'll see"
Throughout the quoted dialogue, the Warden is never provided the dialogue option to claim to be male so we are never provided with the oppertunity to see how Sten would respond to such a response.
Sten does not have an issue with the Warden being a woman nor does he have an issue with them being a warrior. Sten's issue lies in the Warden claiming to be both; a female warrior because the two are contradictory to each other hence this line; "One of those things can't be true."
If the Warden had denied the former of being a woman, Sten would have been provided a solution because then there'd be no contradiction as he percieves it.
I'll most likely add a TL:DR because I should have made this post into two separate post but as I cannot copy and paste from the forums and I do not feel like copying manually, it'll likely stay one post.
A few more walls of text and I have built myself a fort of words!
AFAIK he was, but DG still had the final veto power. Look, DAO made it very clear. The Qun does not tolerate transgenderism. At least it didn't in DAO, and that line was perfectly consistant with how else the Qun was presented (an inflexible, alien, and extremely conservative philosophy). Tbis was changed in DAI (at least w/r/t transgenderism) which makes this an unwelcome retcon. As Ieldra has already said, I don't have an issue with transgenderism per se in the game, and I think Krem protrays it brilliantly. I DO object to using the Qun as a vessel for discussing it especially when it changes how the Qun is regarded at (or at least near) it's very core.
DA:O never discusses transgenderism in the Qun at all, so what you're saying is merely conjecture based upon assumptions that you made about the Qun. It's one thing to assume, due to how a particular group is portrayed, that they have certain viewpoints on issues we'd normally consider them to have, but it's another to claim that assumption -especially when there's literally nothing in the lore on it- is fact or even canon. We only learn about perceived gender roles and their purpose as far as the Qun is concerned; we never learn about whether those who fall outside of them traditionally are accepted. Apparently, as long as they are in service to the Qun, they are accepted.
If IB had stood up for Krem, but not mentioned the Qun, it would have made more sense. The Qunari mind rape or kill people because they don't like their profession, let alone their gender.
Honestly, Dorian and IB were probably introduced to make their respective cultures look less horrible for the sequel. Dorian tries to claim that Tevinter isn't full of social Darwinist blood mages that enslave mundanes, other mages, and even other magisters if they are weak. He and Bull could both be cultural apologists too, but I think they are trying to make the future setting more palatable to players. I doubt many players would like being forced to choose between the Vints and Qunari as they had been portrayed in DAO and DA2, if DA4 is set during a war between them.
I wonder at the mental contortions I am seeing here just to avoid admitting that a clear retcon is in fact a retcon. Sten said it all: Under the Qun, you are BORN to do a job [and it is the Tamerissian's job to perceive what that job is]. If you are born a woman, then you clearly aren't meant to be a man, and thus not a warrior. This philosophy explicitly denies and denounces transgenerism. That's fine. There are and have been many cultures that thought this. Just don't urinate on my head and tell me it's raining later on.
It's a pretty clear and IMHO blatent retcon to make the Qun look better.
If IB had stood up for Krem, but not mentioned the Qun, it would have made more sense. The Qunari mind rape or kill people because they don't like their profession, let alone their gender.
Honestly, Dorian and IB were probably introduced to make their respective cultures look less horrible for the sequel. Dorian tries to claim that Tevinter isn't full of social Darwinist blood mages that enslave mundanes, other mages, and even other magisters if they are weak. He and Bull could both be cultural apologists too, but I think they are trying to make the future setting more palatable to players. I doubt many players would like being forced to choose between the Vints and Qunari as they had been portrayed in DAO and DA2, if DA4 is set during a war between them.
Exactly. Under the Qun (at least as it was presented in DAO), if you are a woman who wants to act and be a man, you are obviously "ill" and need reeducation just as any person that can't function in their job any more needs treatment. Enter the Ben Hassrath reeducators. It's a direct line conclusion.
If IB had stood up for Krem, but not mentioned the Qun, it would have made more sense. The Qunari mind rape or kill people because they don't like their profession, let alone their gender.
Honestly, Dorian and IB were probably introduced to make their respective cultures look less horrible for the sequel. Dorian tries to claim that Tevinter isn't full of social Darwinist blood mages that enslave mundanes, other mages, and even other magisters if they are weak. He and Bull could both be cultural apologists too, but I think they are trying to make the future setting more palatable to players. I doubt many players would like being forced to choose between the Vints and Qunari as they had been portrayed in DAO and DA2, if DA4 is set during a war between them.
I wonder at the mental contortions I am seeing here just to avoid admitting that a clear retcon is in fact a retcon. Sten said it all: Under the Qun, you are BORN to do a job [and it is the Tamerissian's job to perceive what that job is]. If you are born a woman, then you clearly aren't meant to be a man, and thus not a warrior. This philosophy explicitly denies and denounces transgenerism. That's fine. There are and have been many cultures that thought this. Just don't urinate on my head and tell me it's raining later on.
It's a pretty clear and IMHO blatent retcon to make the Qun look better.
There is a difference between being "complicated" and being inconsistant from one game to the next. In this case it's the later. It's not my missing nuance; the two games directly contradict each other, DG's protestations notwithstanding.
There is a difference between being "complicated" and being inconsistant from one game to the next. In this case it's the later. It's not my missing nuance; the two games directly contradict each other, DG's protestations notwithstanding.
Could you if you so kindly would provide quotes or the like that you base this on? Because if you are still referring to Sten's dialogue then it is down our different interpretation of said dialogue so we'd have to agree to disagree on that.
There is a difference between being "complicated" and being inconsistant from one game to the next. In this case it's the later. It's not my missing nuance; the two games directly contradict each other, DG's protestations notwithstanding.
Still thinking like a bas, I see.
Meaning I view things as they are? Then yes, and proud of it.
Meaning I view things as they are? Then yes, and proud of it.
How 'bout dem citations?
Already been done. Sten explicitly says that you don't choose to be what you want; you simply are that. In his own words, you are a warrior or a woman, not both, and that is a choice inherent in what you are from birth. It's a very explicit denial of the very idea of transgenderism. That's OK, because not all cultures would....and the Qun strikes me as a very rigid philosophy so that's expected.....but don't expect me to see that change willy nilly and expect me to take that change seriously.
Already been done. Sten explicitly says that you don't choose to be what you want; you simply are that. In his own words, you are a warrior or a woman, not both, and that is a choice inherent in what you are from birth. It's a very explicit denial of the very idea of transgenderism. That's OK, because not all cultures would....and the Qun strikes me as a very rigid philosophy so that's expected.....but don't expect me to see that change willy nilly and expect me to take that change seriously.
Already been done. Sten explicitly says that you don't choose to be what you want; you simply are that. In his own words, you are a warrior or a woman, not both, and that is a choice inherent in what you are from birth. It's a very explicit denial of the very idea of transgenderism. That's OK, because not all cultures would....and the Qun strikes me as a very rigid philosophy so that's expected.....but don't expect me to see that change willy nilly and expect me to take that change seriously.
Retour en haut