For when you get back, I brought up my concerns about Geometers and how their current depiction means doing something about their cultural imperialism might constitute the conservative "Fighting the Gay Agenda" narrative on SV's LGBT Community Thread. It led to an interesting discussion with Greatoz, and apparently it's a stretch, but it's still not a good look if the only depiction of same sex couples is there. The only mention of them right now is implication based on Geometers typically marrying within gender segregated clubs if you read between the lines, and that's not a good look if that's the only depiction of them. So the book could benefit from more acknowledgement same-sex couples exist.
Also, things would benefit from depictions of Nonbinary people in groups closer to human norms.
- The Hearth-Kin miss the forest for the trees and aren't on a human gender spectrum(what about people that don't fit into any concept of gender, or multiple concepts of gender simultaneously?).
- The Golden Aegis are overly eldritch/monstrous
- The Unroyal are glowing-eyed Kemenomimi/Faunus types(If that's what's being gone for, maybe it should be more clearly said than just animal features. Maybe drop the glowing eyes, Greatoz was concerned about all the Nonbinary people being depicted as nonhuman/eldritch/monstrous and wanted to know if there were nonbinary people who were human or at least humanish).
- The Diadem have nonbinary naming conventions but they're kind of farked up.
The Geometers are really gender essentialist, conflating sex and gender, maybe acknowledge what happens with nonbinary people in the Guild in universe? I was thinking something like a Nova Commonwealth sample character that's a Geometer expatriate who left the Guild due to it's narrowminded perspective on gender.
Here's where I stared the discussion for reference.