When it comes to the T of LGBT, it's extremely complex and often than not, subjective. It's like opening a can of worms.
How should we judge and classify people? By their DNA? By their feelings? By the surgeries they undergo? By legal documents? By the main opinions of society? By the medical and scientific community? Etc.
What is a "real" man or "real" woman? Do we decide it based on biology? DNA? Self-identification? Do we even need to obsess over what makes someone "really" their gender they identify as? Are we all supposed to be what our DNA says? Why should we treat our DNA as an ultimate authority?
I've seen the can of worms many times. They say a lot of things when you open your mouth, they aren't pretty things.
I dunno. DNA, yes. Feelings come as a factor when it comes to self-identification. No. Yes. Nope. Kinda.
Yeah, biology. DNA kinda falls into the biology bag so yeah. Self-identification is attached with feelings, so the "realness" doesn't apply here. I mean... you kinda obsess over the entire LGBT thing to the point of things happening in the Megaten wiki. Well... yeah, DNA pretty much dictates you are of a certain sex no matter what, how you indetify as is another issue. Cuz it is, realistically speaking I can't be black even if I decided to identify as one and went through a reverse Michael Jackson surgery cuz my DNA says I'm white, I will look black but my DNA will say otherwise.
Say that in a 100 years or more scientists find my post-surgery black skeletical remains, they will do research and will pretty much say that my DNA, or at least the shape of my skull and other bones, that my skeleton was from a white male in his early 20s, DNA is pretty much ultimate authority and says what we are. However, I understand self-identification on trans people is another issue that has nothing to do with DNA but how they perceive themselves.
This almost was like philosophical quiz... but yeah, thanks for sharing your thoughts.
The problem with DNA is that you can't actually tell someone's "DNA sex" just based on their sex organs at birth, you would have to actually do a DNA test and even that doesn't show actual gene expression. Expression of DNA into sex organs is much much more complicated than just XX vs XY. Expression of DNA into brain structure is even omfg way more complicated than that. Even if we forget gene expression, there are many people who are neither XX or XY DNA-wise. They may outwardly appear to be 'male' or 'female' but may have XXY, XYY, XXXYY, XXXX, or other combinations of more than 2, for example look up Klinefelter Syndrom. In truth, even the thing that some people swear makes human biology "either male or female" actually exists on a complex multidemensional spectrum.
Regardless, It may be (doubtfully) useful to prominently point out what one may assume based on inference from the game dialog regarding Erica's birth sex on a medical chart or something though in my very honest opinion anyone making claims to understand the situation beyond inference is reading things into it that may or may not be true depending on the observer. Certainly they never discuss Erica's DNA in the game dialog so we cannot actually know if her DNA is XX, XY, or some other combination. Likewise there are many other possibilities regarding Erica's backstory that are not explored by most people discussing this game but that can make the whole conversation irrelevant.
I'm going to be uploading a couple of videos of all the cutscenes from the Rapunzel game, one for normal mode and one for extra so I am just wondering whether it would be better suited on the main Rapunzel page or on the Rapunzel Story Transcript?
Also just out of curiosity, what did you think of the novel adaptation? It seems everyone I asked about it hasn't read it, at least not entirely so I just figured it will be nice to hear from someone else who has read the whole thing.
I'd like to see the vids first before I make a decision.
As for the main novel, I found it enjoyable and I like the backstory. I find "The Mysterious Tale of Rapunzel" better tho, simply because it's totally new. If you could help write up the plot summary for The Mysterious Tale of Rapunzel, that'd be great.
I was planning on doing the whole rapunzel story in one go once it's finished but I suppose I can make a start on most of it soon.
It is interesting that you enjoy the Rapunzel story more than the adaptation because it's a different story. I think as odd as it sounds I just feel like there was more possibility and direction with the adaptation because of the possible routes and maybe also because I favour C over K. I also suppose the fact that it's a prequel of sorts makes me think the ending is kind of a foregone conclusion. I am though still very much enjoying the Rapunzel and the links to the witches which I felt was a bit too casually brushed under the rug inn the game. I kind of feel like they shouldn't have included the whole thing with Erica saying she was the witch even if it is a red herring which I think it is, it all just kind of felt a bit unnecessary.
Yup, I'll likely start summarising the plot for the Rapunzel novel tomorrow when I have enough time to re-read all the current sections so far.
The way the novel will wrap up should be interesting. I'm just curious about how explicit it will be about what happens; whether it will outright say X is Z and so forth or it'll be left open to interpretation.
Will probably start working on the Rapunzel characters tomorrow as well.
My thoughts are that it's an enjoyable novel, but feels a bit like glorified fan-fiction (even if it's official), since there's no mention of barely anything in the actual game. In addition, there's a Sophie in the game who's Morgan's wife, while there's a "Sophie Mallow" in the novel who's apparently a completely different character. Heck, there's even a "George" who's mentioned but apparently a different character than Georg Valença. Rule of thumb when it comes to writing is that you don't give characters similar names since it gets confusing (unless you're deliberately trying to confuse such as the C or K -atherine).
About the actual plot, Freddie didn't know that his own girlfriend had a brother, which felt like a silly plot twist. How does that even happen? Then the novel gets a bit of a downer ending with Sophie's and Stella's deaths, which is a bit depressing. And it's a bit... weird at times. Like, there's a moon in the nightmare with Stella's face? And Freddie decided to leave a file containing the video game at the bar, instead of giving it to Vincent and friends directly? (Of course, Boss needed to get a copy of the code in order to create the Rapunzel game, but still...)
Overall, it was enjoyable and suspenseful, but I can't help but feel it's a bit glorified fan fiction. At the end of the day, it's still official so we have to cover it. >_<
I did notice the Sophie and Georg/George thing. It's weird, I initially kind of liked the brother twist because it wasn't something I really expected at all but now that you mention it and I had time to think about it, it really doesn't make sense that Freddie who has been seeing Stella for years and has presumably working with Georg for quite a while to not know of their relationship especially with how close Stella claims to be to Georg.
It's also weird that Freddie is still alive in the normal world since isn't there supposed to be just one man who survives it every hundred years? I get he didn't make it to top, didn't get his wish and he's possibly being watched for the rest of his life before going to hell but he still technically survived. I was suspecting for Freddie to either die or somehow just get trapped in the nightmare or maybe even somehow get trapped in the rapunzel game he creates and it turns out he is the prince you play as in the game. In the end he just survives, is being watched, writes up the game and might go to hell.
One of the little things I did like near the end was Catherine liking the idea of living with a human but Freddie not being eager to do such a thing, the way it was written kind of hints at the idea of the true cheater ending (my favourite).
So overall, I did find it to be an interesting plot but the ending was kind of disappointing and I was hoping for a bit more insight on the game's characters or more interesting original characters. I do much prefer the first novel adaptation of the game's story. If it's any consolation, apparently on one of the first few pages in the novel (which isn't translated in the fan translation because it's not part of the main plot) there's a short disclaimer saying something along the lines of- "the settings and stories in this work are not directly related to the main part of the game and do not represent the official opinion of Atlus." So if you want you can basically declare this whole novel non-canon and if you like to extrapolate like me, you can say that because this disclaimer wasn't in the other novel, it makes the other novel canon.
Anyway, I have rambled on way too long now, so now that the novel summaries are done, I'll see if there are any other interesting pieces of content that could be added to the wiki sometime. Later.
Maybe the fact that both Stella and Sophie died meant that he was free from the nightmares? Not sure.
Thanks for adding the summary! Please don't use colloquial phrases like "flat" tho. And I think the wiki is pretty good. If you know how to get the Kindle version (or PDF version) of the Venus Mode artbook, lemme know.