it's not a cog game without trannies
plz tell me there's trannies
Actually fuck it, I will answer your super exciting and original inquiry by editorializing a little bit about one aspect I really appreciate about the series.
IMO, for the genre, and yes especially for the sort of declawed and overly politically correct stuff you can find on Choice of Games, this series does a great job of 1. presenting authentic historically-inspired attitudes about contentious issues and, more importantly, 2. presenting both sides of said issues relatively fairly. This is in contrast to a lot of fiction that either does not attempt to make any political point at all, or just superimposes modern values over the setting to avoid offending anyone, or takes the opportunity to preach obnoxiously about some pet issue. Paul clearly has his own opinions, but nevertheless his traditionalist characters actually express their views with reason and can use valid, sensible arguments, whereas the reformist types are far from being paragons of virtue and debate. This is also the approach I try to take when I am running my roleplaying campaigns, for instance.
For example, in Guns of Infinity, Countess Welles was promoting the idea of women joining the army. The position is nuanced in itself because she specifically advocated for baneblooded women exclusively (and Welles was still highly classist when it came to assuming that a great amount of merit came from baneblood alone) to be able to perform commissioned, non-frontline roles in logistics and command. Which was actually a sensible suggestion given one of Tierra's biggest issues during the war was a shortage of competent officers, given that they had to be drawn from the ranks of baneblooded men, and many officer roles had to be taken up to logistics and support duties anyway.
Her suggestion was met with a lot of outrage, particularly from older commissioned men (as it understandably would have been,) and the arguments presented against Welles were a mixture of completely reasonable points (Welles' short term solution may end up causing more harm than good in the long term, as even the officer roles suggested are not insulated from harm and society cannot absorb the losses of its women anywhere as easily as it can absorb losses of its men,) to patronizing-if-valid emotional appeals (people would not like to see the likes of their sisters and mothers die terribly in war) to chauvenistic and knee-jerk ("we must protect the gentle temperament of m'ladies who would swoon upon seeing their first drop of blood OwO.")
Moreover, Welles herself clearly wanted to be
more than some sort of support officer and acted with hubris bordering on recklessness, as if to give instill some caution about the kind of behavior her ideas might inspire. Which is what ultimately puts her in mortal danger and, in our playthrough, kills her. Had you met her in a more intimate setting, you would know her as a woman of great conviction and genuine martial skill, yet one almost as idealistic and removed from the realities of war as Elson was as a cornet. And, in playthroughs where she survives the second battle of Kharingia, I believe the protagonist finds her bloodied, shell-shocked, and disabused of the idea that war is solely an exercise of glory and empowerment - she ends up holding onto her principles, but gains an appreciation for some of the cultural resistance towards her, and learns to respect the sort of war she proposes women should partake in.
Personally I really like this presentation of contentious issues. Paul is clearly a liberal progressive type but he is portraying both sides of the issue as having believable flaws and merits. You can see the same thing playing out in Lords now, with Wulfram's populist agenda being quite appealing at first glance, and addressing a genuine problem with widespread poverty and the burden of war taxes, but becomes more peculiar as the less obvious sides of the issue are examined. Yet how many of the men who oppose him are doing so out of sheer loyalty - be it opportunistic or knee-jerk - to the King and army, rather than out of genuine understanding of the nation's geopolitical predicament?
That being said, I have a feeling that the type of person whose first engagement with fiction boils down to "TROONS LMAO!?!?!" may have trouble appreciating such nuances.