Talk:Triss Merigold/@comment-19281228-20160629030655/@comment-79.121.100.2-20171025123824

"what is biased interpretation again? That Yennefer loved Geralt?"

It's your use of that scene to "prove" that Triss did not love Geralt, or did less so (NB that might even have been true at the time after getting constantly rejected, not like it can't change later, but that's not my point). Just like you previously claimed that she impersonated Yennefer. I never said or implied that Yennefer didn't love Geralt, I merely didn't draw far reaching conclusions from the scene. That's the difference, not looking for a hidden message in every single detail with the intention of proving a preconception, which is the essence of bias.

"which constantly deminish the Geralt/Yen love story in the Witcher saga"

Never did that, and even if others sometimes do, it's much less prominent than the other way around. It's usually also casual trolling that's easily dismissed, well built up misinformation that is based on grains of truth is much worse. Finally, if I have to choose, I'd personally rather side with questioning what's established and creating a new interpretation (which doesn't mean the old becomes invalid), than with the orthodox approach of defending the status quo and elminating the alternative at all costs.

"Geralt didn't love Triss in the Witcher saga, he liked her as a friend, that is true not a biased twisting lore."

Just to play the devil's advocate, it's somewhat up to interpretation if that's because he couldn't find her attractive at all, or because he knew it would've been wrong because of his family, and Triss and Yennefer being friends. What if he never met Yennefer before? I'm not twisting the books either way, but the games in some sense already did for us, because in them, while not being aware of Yennefer's existence, Geralt ends up loving Triss regardless of the player's choices. Either that, or he might just be the victim of evil manipulation (possibly even with magic), when taking "Geralt can never love Triss" as an axiom, that line of reasoning kind of makes sense.