FailWood

The whole "rest of the year is _____ month" case never sat well me whenever someone brings it up. My household never put stock into what people were or made a big deal about details like that. We knew that not everyone was exactly the same, but we still treated others as people. It was a very simple outlook on things. You're way off the mark of what I'm trying to say. I'm saying that I wish they would just pick a side they prefer and be done with it. It's the confusion behind it all that I wish didn't exist, not the people themselves.

Honestly, I'd much rather it not be a thing at all. But to give your question a proper answer; something that's a lot less "in your face", where there's not news of a rally every other day. Because I view Trans as a big monkey wrench to how the world works, and it conflicts with a personal preference of wanting things to be simple, or relatively easy to understand. None, fortunately. The only job opportunity I ever lost had nothing to do with who or what I am. If I ever did create something, then I'd make the opportunity available to everyone (age permitting of course). It's a feeling that exists, yet for the sake of privacy, I can't say who feels this way. Were there not any women in those environments at all? I've heard of women be harassed in those work environments, but I haven't heard of any instances of them being completely excluded.

For Trans and Queer, that's exactly how I feel. I don't feel like I'll ever be comfortable around them, but the atrocities they faced should never have happened. As for LGBs, I do support them. A long time ago, I was weary of the idea of two people of the same gender being lovers. However, after I attended a Lesbian wedding back when I was a kid, and saw how it was no different then any other wedding I've heard about before that one, that's when I started supporting it.

For specific people, which excludes others who aren't of those people. My point on that still stands. That's nonsense and you know it. Since when are there general environments like that these days which actively exclude women? I never said that I did personally. Do not put words in my mouth. You're pretty much saying that I can't support LGB just because I'm not any of those things. That's absurd. https://www.californiafamily.org/2018/02/good-news-law-penalizing-misgendering-with-hefty-fine-and-or-jail-time-being-legally-challenged/ This article says that people can get up to a year of jail time for misgendering another person.

That's how it happens though. To provide opportunities to a certain group of people who are commonly oppressed for whatever reason, you have to deny others not of that group a chance to grant them that opportunity. Same applies even when none of that stuff is part of the equation. Giving one person a job means you have to deny another candidate if there's no more open spots available. You sound like you understand what it is I'm saying, yet you say that I'm coming off as dishonest, which makes no sense. I find that extremely odd, given that your point was focused heavily on "Straight Pride" even though I said that Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual were the parts of LGBTQ that I do support, but then you say nothing about Trans or Queer, the parts of LGBTQ that I don't fully support. It's like you're trying to spin my words.

I have very conflicting thoughts on this subject, as someone who hates sensationalism, but doesn't wish for anyone to feel like an outcast or face abuse. Pride month seeks to stop alienating those who are LGBTQ and the abuse they face, however in a double standard fashion it also alienates those who are sexually straight and have no conflicts about who or what they are, and Pride month supporters are hostile towards them if they have even the slightest misgivings. Between the double standard nature of this and my hatred of sensationalism, it's easy to see why I don't like execution of Pride month. Just to give my own thoughts of what I think about LGBTQ: While I support those who are lesbian, gay, or bisexual, I'm not the most keen of the idea of there being trans people, even though I am against the abuse they face. The ambiguity can lead to dishonesty due to them sometimes not fully committing to one side or wanting their preference before the change is completed, and I dislike how there's nothing in the law saying they HAVE to be honest. On the other hand, there is a law saying you have to refer to them as their preferred pronoun in workplace environments, and breaking it CAN lead to jail time, which I think is absurd. Does anyone else feel a similar conflict towards this subject as I do? Where you're fine with what it's aiming to do, but hates how it was handled?

The World Cultures class I took back when I was in school didn't help with pronouncing names.

Go figure Kent and Sain get added not long after I made a poll about Red & Green duos in Fire Emblem. Nergal is still missing. Not many Primary Antagonists left to add, and it doesn't help that he's one of those "evil sorcerer" villains which isn't original, so I think his chances are slim. I was another who incorrectly thought Guy would be "Guy" and not "Ghee". So much for Ascended Heroes following a theme. While this is Florina's first alt, I don't think she fits the bill for an Ascended slot. IS's **** sucking for Three Houses continues. "Fatigue? What's that?"

It would also mean leaving Roy unpromoted for longer.

The thing that brought down their support for me was when Sully started fretting about her self image as a female knight after Stahl gets a round in after training together a few times. Even though it's a realistic worry, it bleeds into her character too much, and in her supports (I hate her support chain with Lon'qu). On the other hand, I appreciate how down to earth Stahl is. Sometimes you need a character like that, even if it means they don't stand out. Forde is a pretty good character, and the A support between him and Kyle is one of my favorites in Sacred Stones (a game that has a lot of good supports). Whenever I play Sacred Stones these days, I usually duo 5x with Ephraim and one of the two cavs, and is usually good enough to keep using.

While there's not a Red & Green Duo in every Fire Emblem game, it's there in most entries, and sometimes changes up how it's handled. Which one is your favorite from across the series? Can be from liking them as characters or as units. Edit: Apologies for any redundancy with how I made this or if it looks sloppy in any way. Was my first time making a poll. Also forgot to add Kein and Alva from Thracia 776. Mention them as your favorite for them to get a vote.

@Xenomata Nice clear. Wanted to mention that Cain has one of my favorite damaged art in the game. Looks really roughed up, but still has that intense expression of someone who won't give up.

Anytime I've tried using Setsuna, her levels are mostly either HP and Speed or just Speed. If I use Mozu at all these days, it's in Rev. She faces no real competition for EXP in her paralogue or in chapter 8, and the units you do have at that point (Corrin, Azura, Felicia/Jakob, and Gunter) make a great team for helping getting her kills or chip EXP. I've never tried Archer Mozu, as I very rarely use Heart Seals.

Fair enough, "awful" was a bit strong of a word for me to use. However, to be fair too Binding Blade Axes, my expectations towards them are going to be lower because I know they won't be reliable from the start, and that's applicable to all Axe users and not a specific one. I sometimes forget that Tonics are a thing. The issue I have with using Mozu's paralogue as an example for Birthright specifically is that it's very front loaded with units, and out of everyone who joins early, Setsuna is the last unit I would consider using that paralogue to level up. I'd rather use it level up Mozu herself or Hayato.

I got those village conversations with Lot. Does his best for those back home.