Lets not go full "Everything is political" please. Just because a story's setting has x, doesn't mean everything around it is about x.
Right now about half of the plotlines revolve around slavery, but at its beginning stages, only Lin was related to the subject. Otherwise it was only a background issue.
Kali's story was all about her distant relationship with her family, and its only recently that the focus was set on the slavery issue.
So no, just because there was slavery in the beginnings doesn't mean that it was a political story. The politics came on much later, when Runey started to expand the lore, with Cornwall and Sylvia's story.
It's true that the game has become more overtly and pervasively political than it was at the start, but the issues/politics have been there from the beginning.
Kim's existence is forgettable at best, and it won't even stop her at all: Vanessa fucking blackmails Kali into being lectured, otherwise she will ruin her chances of a social life in this college, and NOBODY tells her anything about this being wrong. Not Kim nor Nala (therefore approving of her behavior).
I feel like it's worth pointing out that Nala wasn't around for that, and wasn't really made aware of it once we met her.
How the fuck did MC not intervene when his girlfriend is being threatened? Oh right, he is a "good guy" that will get blackmailed into being lectured.
I agree that Vanessa's demand was unreasonable, at least given what the player knows about MC and Kali. But what should MC have done?
I guess Kali, MC or Kim could have said something, even if it wouldn't have changed how things played out. I felt like it was already clear (given her yelling earlier) that Vanessa was being far too belligerent. I don't feel like the absence of one line pushing back at Vanessa really would have changed the tone of the theme.
I forgot the standards for "good guys" according to the author. Just sit down and get "eDuCaTeD"
You insist on projecting stuff onto Runey that he just doesn't believe. It's not a good look.
And she doesn't get called out for any of this. Its just tiresome to keep repeating this. I will address it yet again below.
Then that lies on how the characters (or how they were written) don't react to the scene (her behavior) at all.
"She makes herself look bad" works only on a meta level. If nobody calls her out in the scene, it just looks like every character approves of her behavior, and therefore it just looks like the author wanted this character's behavior to be approved of.
This is my problem, not the character herself, but how the scene she is in was written.
Again, I didn't complain about her in the previous update.
There are all sorts of ways for media to convey a message, and not all of them involve a character explicitly voicing the message. If you want a character in the story to tell you "The moral of the story is X", that's fine, but it's unreasonable to get mad when that doesn't happen. Reading subtext is a pretty essential skill for analyzing media, and I don't feel like you applied it to this scene.
Anyway, I think I'm done with this conversation. It's not going anywhere. Feel free to respond to this message, since there's no reason I should have the last word just because I'm dropping the conversation.
)
