This is a rant I've wanted to make since Bandana's sexuality was confirmed:

Well it was this strip that really bothered me, just how blatantly Rich was in our faces about it. He's just pandering to a certain crowd.

Joking aside...

There was a sort of similar situation where, when the new Zelda game was officially announced, it was popularly theorized that the protagonist could possibly be female, because they had a very feminized appearance (the character is normally very androgynous anyway), and this got a lot of people excited. And yet people would challenge people who wanted this, saying things like, "It won't make the game better or revolutionize anything, why do you care?"

And I think it boils down to this: it's people's inability to empathize. The guys who have played Zelda for the last 28 years have been represented by the protagonist the whole time- it's always been Link, the male hero. Oh, and when the newest spin-off in the series, Hyrule Warriors, had playable women (and more of them then men), people lost their **** and complained and called it reverse sexism.

But going back to the initial point, here's a fun fact: I used Bandana as an example to a bunch of people, in my hopes that a main game in the series would get a female protagonist. Because when she was revealed to be gay, it was awesome to see so many people, and not just myself, feel represented. And that's something I want to spread across all media of all kinds. Because being represented makes people feel more welcome and it helps make the world a better place, little by little.

And yet people want to take that away. For what purpose? That they're not used to seeing LGBT in their media? I think anyone who opposes LGBT representation doesn't realize how much it hurts- or worse, they know how much it hurts and that's the very reason they do it. People who have no reason to be bothered by it, no reason to complain don't accomplish anything except trying to hurt a group of people. And honestly? They succeed. That's the sad part. I loved that strip, and I very much admired Rich for, well, stepping out of a comfort zone. But the kind of comments that were going across its thread were crushing.

Anyway, to the main point of this thread: I don't think there was anything at all that was out of line with Rich's tweets. Too often, I've seen LGBT and racial minorities told to be "nice" and "on their best behavior" when people are being complete asses to them and aren't holding back; and to me, all that does is stifle people supporting themselves and each other, and encourages further mistreatment and oppression. Being polite and trying to cater to the feelings of an insensitive jerk isn't always being the "bigger person"- it's often being the foolish person instead, for knowing that it doesn't work- but trying anyway. Standing up for what's right often requires you to look like you're being too harsh, but it's really only because it's a necessary defense. If anything, his attitude just shows how important it is to him, which means more than some silly, artificial "professionalism" toward an individual it wouldn't ever get across to anyway.