Talk:Wyman/@comment-25294282-20170727201743/@comment-5607198-20170813025342

Um... no. The Empress does not need to "produce" an heir, not by any stretch of the imagination.

Firstly, REAL life has numerous examples of royals with no obvious heir, and that's dealt with in many ways, like "hey, this was their closest cousin, so now THEY are king/queen", not just war for a throne.

Second, she can do a thing that ALSO happened a lot in real life, which is adopt an heir, or other declare someone as her successor.

If the Empress wants to, she can appoint her pet dog as the next in line.

Beyond this, even if wyman is a woman, that doesn't mean neither of them can have kids. You dont know what kinky shit Emily gets up to (though, we do have some evidence that she does indeed get up to some kinky shit) in the bedroom

As far as homosexual relationships not being okay... She's the empress. "YOU CAN'T BANG HER, Y'ALL ARE LADIES!" "Hmm, yeah, i see your point, so lemme just make my counter-argument YOU LIVE IN THE DUNGEON FOREVER NOW ktxhbai"

Plus, in actual history, being gay wasn't exactly as persecuted as we sometimes think of. Victorian times had a particular approval for ladies keeping eachother company. Its more like, no one cared until they needed a reason to get rid of you, then "oh, yeah, he's gay, he's AWFUL lets put him in prison forever".

obviously, anti-gay sentiment has been brought to the forefront at certain times in history, and it has always been a persecuted thing, but it wasnt just this whole zero-tolerance thing.

As you say, there's nothing wrong with believing wyman is a man. I do, simply because "wyman" sounds like a masculine name to me, in my head.

But dont try and use ignorant bullcrap to defend your preconceived notions.

The whole point of leaving them genderless is that it just doesn't matter what their gender IS, all that matters is what role they play, namely emily's lover and confidante