MyFreeCopyright.com Registered & Protected
What to do with Gray

Okay, these confessions are really starting to annoy me now.People are being disgusting with that ‘sex toy’ analogy for EDI. Yes, Bioware went too far when they gave her a super sexy body, even though I think the idea of giving her a body was bloody amazing (not because it meant she could have sex with Joker, but because it made her think more about the outside world and how people reacted to her as an AI, and that she could now move amongst organics freely). They decided, for the sake of money, fanservice, or anything else you could find, to make her sexy (what the hell is up with that camel toe, Bioware?)However, I decided that despite her new-found sexiness, her character was one of the best developed in the game. I’m not going to start on her relationship with Joker (which I find interesting, others cute and others creepy) but I’m rather going to focus on her character in itself. In ME2, EDI started off as the vaguely suspicious, emotionless AI which looked like a holographic ball. She then became more and more independent, questioning and even familiar with organics, and her interactions with Joker were hilarious. By the end of the game, she was as much a part of the crew as the other squad members, and she had gained an interesting personality.In ME3, by gaining that body, she hadn’t simply become a sexbot. I’ve heard a lot of people who called themselves feminists and did nothing but complain about her body and ignored her character all together, as though the fact that she had become sexy had suddenly turned her into nothing more but a toy for Joker to play with. In fact, they completely ignored her character evolution and the fact that her personality went much deeper than simply becoming a ‘robot sex doll’. During the entirety of ME3, I went from liking EDI to loving her. She was an interesting character, and provided a fascinating point of view on the relations between organics and synthetics. She was determined, funny, and deep, and asked questions that made me think for days. She was also a badass in combat and the best against Geth. Her relationship with Joker, though kind of weird, was also sweet and obviously went much further than ‘hah, look at the cripple and his sex bot’.Her body design was in bad taste, that I agree on. But Bioware didn’t treat her as a ‘robot sex doll’ in their writing, apart from the occasional poor joke. They treated her as a fully fledged character, for whom I genuinely cared. She was the reason I chose never to use the ‘Destroy’ ending for it would result in her death.So let me ask you, who is the most sexist here? The developers, who designed badly the body and then gave her a full character, or the fandom, who sees nothing but the sexy body and doesn’t look at how her personality evolved?

Okay, these confessions are really starting to annoy me now.

People are being disgusting with that ‘sex toy’ analogy for EDI. Yes, Bioware went too far when they gave her a super sexy body, even though I think the idea of giving her a body was bloody amazing (not because it meant she could have sex with Joker, but because it made her think more about the outside world and how people reacted to her as an AI, and that she could now move amongst organics freely). They decided, for the sake of money, fanservice, or anything else you could find, to make her sexy (what the hell is up with that camel toe, Bioware?)

However, I decided that despite her new-found sexiness, her character was one of the best developed in the game. I’m not going to start on her relationship with Joker (which I find interesting, others cute and others creepy) but I’m rather going to focus on her character in itself. In ME2, EDI started off as the vaguely suspicious, emotionless AI which looked like a holographic ball. She then became more and more independent, questioning and even familiar with organics, and her interactions with Joker were hilarious. By the end of the game, she was as much a part of the crew as the other squad members, and she had gained an interesting personality.

In ME3, by gaining that body, she hadn’t simply become a sexbot. I’ve heard a lot of people who called themselves feminists and did nothing but complain about her body and ignored her character all together, as though the fact that she had become sexy had suddenly turned her into nothing more but a toy for Joker to play with.

In fact, they completely ignored her character evolution and the fact that her personality went much deeper than simply becoming a ‘robot sex doll’. During the entirety of ME3, I went from liking EDI to loving her. She was an interesting character, and provided a fascinating point of view on the relations between organics and synthetics. She was determined, funny, and deep, and asked questions that made me think for days. She was also a badass in combat and the best against Geth. Her relationship with Joker, though kind of weird, was also sweet and obviously went much further than ‘hah, look at the cripple and his sex bot’.

Her body design was in bad taste, that I agree on. But Bioware didn’t treat her as a ‘robot sex doll’ in their writing, apart from the occasional poor joke. They treated her as a fully fledged character, for whom I genuinely cared. She was the reason I chose never to use the ‘Destroy’ ending for it would result in her death.

So let me ask you, who is the most sexist here? The developers, who designed badly the body and then gave her a full character, or the fandom, who sees nothing but the sexy body and doesn’t look at how her personality evolved?