Is this sexist?

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Mulan isn't nearly as effective if Mulan is a boy, right? Correct. You're bullshitting yourself if you think you believe otherwise. That's really what he said. That you might feel differently about Lara than you do about Nathan Drake, or whoever...

Spoiler

all characters that are memorable and male, and drastically changed the world around them with their actions, like mulan some across their worlds

and i am just doing video games, and barley scartched the surface, would i did liturature
movies music

I don't understand.

Are these supposed to be good characters? 'Cause I don't give a damn about any of them.

Genuinely not trying to be rude to you. But I don't get it.

 

[Vault101]

i think sexism is a flawed concept because people have differences and differences really do exist.
pretending that they do not exisit make the world a very bland and boring place.

thats not sexism

sexism is where somone is discriminated against unfairly because of their gender...and a related issue is when some dumbass makes sweepign statments about gender

Drives me insane that people call things sexist so arbitrarily. The second a woman has a hard time it is a big question of whether is sexist or not. Just because a girl has a hard time doesn't make it sexist is only sexist if they are having a hard time because they are a girl.

it actually frustrates me that people look into thease things too much...YOUR NOT HELPING (not you obviously) how can we have good female charachters if people freak out and cry sexism over every damn thing? baby steps people...

 

[Vault101]

Are these supposed to be good characters? 'Cause I don't give a damn about any of them.

Genuinely not trying to be rude to you. But I don't get it.

off-topic but I think those charachters are more "iconic" than actually memorable as charachters....

same as Samus Aran HOWEVER with her you can get a sense of what she's like (NOT other M...ignore that)

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Are these supposed to be good characters? 'Cause I don't give a damn about any of them.

Genuinely not trying to be rude to you. But I don't get it.

off-topic but I think those charachters are more "iconic" than actually memorable as charachters....

same as Samus Aran HOWEVER with her you can get a sense of what she's like (NOT other M...ignore that)

I'd say that was well put.

I don't play Zelda, but Link has always struck me as a bit of a blank slate... could be way off the mark.

I don't know what the 2nd one is, other than sexually confusing.

The rest are just beat 'em up characters. Which are about as uninteresting as it gets.

 

[blackrave]

I don't think that making believable situations is sexist
Oh, yes I said "believable"
No matter what games and comics say, females are physically weaker when comparing to males (and yes ladies, that's a FACT)
When woman can be dangerous it is mostly because of deception and manipulation (and even in these cases playing a "victim" is a smart choice)
So when it come to direct physical danger she is either a victim or tries to look as a victim.
That's why this is so common role of females in media (not only thought)

 

[BreakfastMan]

From your description, I think it would be sexist if all the women characters in those stories where painted in a similar light. I have no idea if they are, seeing as I have not read/watched The Hunger games or played The Last of Us yet. Now, onto your questions...

1: Trend in what? Always happened with what? This question is really freaking vague, I can't really give an answer for it because I don't know what you are trying to ask. :\

2: What is a bad thing? Making female characters whiny/vicims/powerless? Or making "strong" female characters whiny/vicims/powerless? Still not sure what you are trying to ask...

3: What may influence young women looking for role models? And how would it be sexist to assume that young women will look up to women society tells them they are supposed to be like?

 

[Abomination]

I am concerned that 'realistic' events are not going to be acceptable in media any longer.

Historically throughout an overwhelming majority of cultures and nations women have been subservient to men. The reason for this is not just unhappy coincidence. To ignore the reason how or why that happened in writing can frequently create an unbelieveable world (especially in fantasy themed media). In a world where brute-force (yes, that is how most medieval combat was resolved, via brute-force methods) martial prowess dictates one's status in society how are women considered equal to men?

They wouldn't be.

I am not saying it's a fair and just world, it isn't in the slightest. But it is an ideal fantasy setting in its reflection of gender inequality. And yes, fantasy requires realisim, people need to behave in an appropriate manner for the world around them.

Want men and women to be equal? Better make your setting give women an edge they don't otherwise have (maybe only women can be spellcasters? I don't know) because otherwise there's no reason for them to be equal.

 

[DrunkenMonkey]

I honestly think that the Last of Us is a bad thing to compare to because all you have is impressions from a trailer, no hard fact as to what kind of girl Ellie is, who knows maybe she will completely redefine gender roles when the game comes out, or not.

Well our world or more accurately our media is attempting to balance values of strength and vulnerability in females, some do it poorly i.e. hunger games, some do it very poorly i.e. twilight. I take that back twilight is the worst example of this. If I believe the jimquisition, the walking dead's clementine (if that's her name, if it's not sorry) is the best example of this balance even more so the fact that the subject is a little girl.

 

[Vault101]

I am concerned that 'realistic' events are not going to be acceptable in media any longer.

Historically throughout an overwhelming majority of cultures and nations women have been subservient to men. The reason for this is not just unhappy coincidence. To ignore the reason how or why that happened in writing can frequently create an unbelieveable world (especially in fantasy themed media). In a world where brute-force (yes, that is how most medieval combat was resolved, via brute-force methods) martial prowess dictates one's status in society how are women considered equal to men?

They wouldn't be.

I am not saying it's a fair and just world, it isn't in the slightest. But it is an ideal fantasy setting in its reflection of gender inequality. And yes, fantasy requires realisim, people need to behave in an appropriate manner for the world around them.

Want men and women to be equal? Better make your setting give women an edge they don't otherwise have (maybe only women can be spellcasters? I don't know) because otherwise there's no reason for them to be equal.

being physcially weaker on average actually isn't as much of a big deal as you are making it out to be,

I mean for fucks sake they are not made of polystyrine foam and glass they are capable of "doing shit" now and again

in ANY given settign it is society and culture that dictates a womans role, if you get a woman who is in a position of power (and this happens in hostory too) and she can manipulate and pull the strings without brute force...

in other words context is everything and it depnds on the induvidual work

 

[Abomination]

I am concerned that 'realistic' events are not going to be acceptable in media any longer.

Historically throughout an overwhelming majority of cultures and nations women have been subservient to men. The reason for this is not just unhappy coincidence. To ignore the reason how or why that happened in writing can frequently create an unbelieveable world (especially in fantasy themed media). In a world where brute-force (yes, that is how most medieval combat was resolved, via brute-force methods) martial prowess dictates one's status in society how are women considered equal to men?

They wouldn't be.

I am not saying it's a fair and just world, it isn't in the slightest. But it is an ideal fantasy setting in its reflection of gender inequality. And yes, fantasy requires realisim, people need to behave in an appropriate manner for the world around them.

Want men and women to be equal? Better make your setting give women an edge they don't otherwise have (maybe only women can be spellcasters? I don't know) because otherwise there's no reason for them to be equal.

being physcially weaker on average actually isn't as much of a big deal as you are making it out to be,

I mean for fucks sake they are not made of polystyrine foam and glass they are capable of "doing shit" now and again

in ANY given settign it is society and culture that dictates a womans role, if you get a woman who is in a position of power (and this happens in hostory too) and she can manipulate and pull the strings without brute force...

in other words context is everything and it depnds on the induvidual work

I understand that women are capable of wielding power yet the very concept of agency means they do not gravitate towards it. Agency is built upon the pregnancy cycle which is clearly required in order for society to function.

Being physically weaker on average makes a BIG difference in a setting due to how females will naturally rear children while the men are more capable and more likely to be involved in physical conflict. A woman is not going to bring her young willingly into a battleground and she can't breastfeed a child unless she is obviously in the immediate vicinity.

Also you can only have very few manipulator women leaders, the next caste will be the warrior caste and at least 90% (and that is a terribly generous figure) would be men. It is also where the 'true' power is located, the number of regicides carried out by a ruler's own troops are staggering. A woman will need incredible clout for her troops to obey her for she will lack the invaluable physical intimidation option.

Nine times out of ten the female will be subservient to males.

The reason why I find the Qunari of Thedas so amazing is how practical they are with their gender divide. There is not an argument to have women fill the same role as men but have each gender fulfill a role they are on average better suited to.

Take note that I am talking about ancient to industrial levels of technological progression - it is not a reflection upon a woman's place today. That being said one must consider how women would have been treated BEFORE in a setting and how long it would take for the status quo to be upturned.

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

You've been watching Anna Sarkeesian videos, haven't you?

You're overthinking it.

You can come up with a ridiculous number of examples of both stories with males in as the victim and females as the non-victim.

Furthermore, Hunger Games is a terrible example as the entire story is about her refusing to be controlled.

 

[Abomination]

You've been watching Anna Sarkeesian videos, haven't you?

You're overthinking it.

You can come up with a ridiculous number of examples of both stories with males in as the victim and females as the non-victim.

Furthermore, Hunger Games is a terrible example as the entire story is about her refusing to be controlled.

Overthinking it? I fear too many people underthink the issue of sexual repression and argue from a purely emotional perspective, ignoring the reasons of why and how it happened.

Ignoring the even one of the various contributing factors that forms a social tapestry can unravel a whole setting. If females are going to be on equal ground and have always been on equal ground to males then there better be a reason for it beyond the author just not liking the repression of females.

 

[Vault101]

I understand that women are capable of wielding power yet the very concept of agency means they do not gravitate towards it. Agency is built upon the pregnancy cycle which is clearly required in order for society to function.

you can't apply such broad generalisations to all storys alone, charachters in a story are induviduals

[quote/]
Take note that I am talking about ancient to industrial levels of technological progression - it is not a reflection upon a woman's place today. That being said one must consider how women would have been treated BEFORE in a setting and how long it would take for the status quo to be upturned.[/quote]
mabye in a historical setting but even then societies can all very different

Ignoring the even one of the various contributing factors that forms a social tapestry can unravel a whole setting. If females are going to be on equal ground and have always been on equal ground to males then there better be a reason for it beyond the author just not liking the repression of females.

like what?

 

[Souplex]

I think it's more an age thing than a gender thing in those two examples.

 

[Abomination]

I understand that women are capable of wielding power yet the very concept of agency means they do not gravitate towards it. Agency is built upon the pregnancy cycle which is clearly required in order for society to function.

you can't apply such broad generalisations to all storys alone, charachters in a story are induviduals

Again, this is not about the characters but the setting and the societies of the setting. A woman in power was an anomaly - possible yet improbable.

Take note that I am talking about ancient to industrial levels of technological progression - it is not a reflection upon a woman's place today. That being said one must consider how women would have been treated BEFORE in a setting and how long it would take for the status quo to be upturned.

mabye in a historical setting but even then societies can all very different

Yes they develop in different ways due to environment, religion, won and lost conflicts or any other potential anomaly the writer wishes to add to the world. The constant is that human females bare and raise children and that males are on average physically stronger and are not burdened with such "obligations" to continue society.

Look at every empire on the planet that has existed before, every major power. Look at who held the most power and what the military was comprised of. Occasionally there would be a female leader but no empire's military has ever been comprised mostly, equally or even more than a quarter of females.

The reasons for those are no coincidence.

Ignoring the even one of the various contributing factors that forms a social tapestry can unravel a whole setting. If females are going to be on equal ground and have always been on equal ground to males then there better be a reason for it beyond the author just not liking the repression of females.

like what?

An example I gave earlier was perhaps by giving females exclusive use of magic or making them similar to spiders in how females on average are considerably stronger than males - something needs to tip the balance of power.

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

You've been watching Anna Sarkeesian videos, haven't you?

You're overthinking it.

You can come up with a ridiculous number of examples of both stories with males in as the victim and females as the non-victim.

Furthermore, Hunger Games is a terrible example as the entire story is about her refusing to be controlled.

Overthinking it? I fear too many people underthink the issue of sexual repression and argue from a purely emotional perspective, ignoring the reasons of why and how it happened.

Ignoring the even one of the various contributing factors that forms a social tapestry can unravel a whole setting. If females are going to be on equal ground and have always been on equal ground to males then there better be a reason for it beyond the author just not liking the repression of females.

I disagree.

If this was the only issue, I would say as much thought s possible should be put into it.

However, there are FAR more pressing matter both having to do with equality and not.

These things are what we should put our energy into. Not figuring out if a sub-par Battle Royale clone might be be making a victim of it's female protagonist.

 

[Abomination]

You've been watching Anna Sarkeesian videos, haven't you?

You're overthinking it.

You can come up with a ridiculous number of examples of both stories with males in as the victim and females as the non-victim.

Furthermore, Hunger Games is a terrible example as the entire story is about her refusing to be controlled.

Overthinking it? I fear too many people underthink the issue of sexual repression and argue from a purely emotional perspective, ignoring the reasons of why and how it happened.

Ignoring the even one of the various contributing factors that forms a social tapestry can unravel a whole setting. If females are going to be on equal ground and have always been on equal ground to males then there better be a reason for it beyond the author just not liking the repression of females.

I disagree.

If this was the only issue, I would say as much thought s possible should be put into it.

However, there are FAR more pressing matter both having to do with equality and not.

These things are what we should put our energy into. Not figuring out if a sub-par Battle Royale clone might be be making a victim of it's female protagonist.

I'm sorry, it seems we're not talking about the same thing here. I was on a tangent about the question actually being asked in the first place and how media seems to be introducing complete gender equality without any practical reasoning for it.

Sexism in media isn't always a bad thing provided it is presented as a challenge for a female to overcome or deal with and not something for her to adhere by in order to succeed.

 

[Vault101]

[quote/]Yes they develop in different ways due to environment, religion, won and lost conflicts or any other potential anomaly the writer wishes to add to the world. The constant is that human females bare and raise children and that males are on average physically stronger and are not burdened with such "obligations" to continue society.[/quote]
so if its pre industrial it has to follow those rules? I'm not sure I entrily agree but then as I said its prointless talking in borad terms...plus its fiction remember

An example I gave earlier was perhaps by giving females exclusive use of magic or making them similar to spiders in how females on average are considerably stronger than males - something needs to tip the balance of power.

depends compeltly on setting/story, I might roll my eyes of some slim woman takes down a heavyly muscled man one on one but agian the belivability of the setting/charachters varys

for example I recently read a comic called stitched, the first arc was a self ocntained story about a group of solders stranded in afghanistan being hunted by thease almost invulnerable zombie creatures...there were 3 american solders 1 male and 2 female who became stranded after the helicopter crashed, plus 3 male british SAS troops

your probably thinking female's don't serve on front lines, which is correct.However the presance of the female solders was not completly unrealistic (for a comic about stitch monsters that is) the first one I think was a pilot, I'm not even entirly sure she was supsoed to be assigned to that mission but she was at the last minute ,in the story she was a hardass prefessional...not better than the male solders, but not exactly worse eather given the situation. The second one wasn't suposed to be there at all...she was freinds with the pilot who managed to get her to come along since it was suposed to be a routine extraction (excpet the helicopter died)she is most definetly out of her depth in the situation (but had a few moments in the story)

anyway thats an exmaple of two different kinds of female charachter (female part not being essential) which is also not completly unbelivable in how they are implemented in the story

 

[Vault101]

Sexism in media isn't always a bad thing provided it is presented as a challenge for a female to overcome or deal with and not something for her to adhere by in order to succeed.

....well duh?

thats 1.depening on the setting and story and 2.weather or not the writer wants to have gender as a factor

stories need conflict, the conflict that can come from gender is a good one, however that doesnt mean there's a big list of things "women can;t do" in a story because its unrealistic, nor does gender always have to be a thing in a story

 

[Abomination]

[quote/]Yes they develop in different ways due to environment, religion, won and lost conflicts or any other potential anomaly the writer wishes to add to the world. The constant is that human females bare and raise children and that males are on average physically stronger and are not burdened with such "obligations" to continue society.

so if its pre industrial it has to follow those rules? I'm not sure I entrily agree but then as I said its prointless talking in borad terms...plus its fiction remember[/quote]I realise it is fiction but including humans and ignoring something that has had incredible impact upon our development as a species for all recorded history and by most (non-Genesis adhering) accounts at least 10,000 years longer is foolish. There needs to be a reason it is different from human history, what made it so the story didn't follow our footsteps?

An example I gave earlier was perhaps by giving females exclusive use of magic or making them similar to spiders in how females on average are considerably stronger than males - something needs to tip the balance of power.

depends compeltly on setting/story, I might roll my eyes of some slim woman takes down a heavyly muscled man one on one but agian the belivability of the setting/charachters varys

for example I recently read a comic called stitched, the first arc was a self ocntained story about a group of solders stranded in afghanistan being hunted by thease almost invulnerable zombie creatures...there were 3 american solders 1 male and 2 female who became stranded after the helicopter crashed, plus 3 male british SAS troops

your probably thinking female's don't serve on front lines, which is correct.However the presance of the female solders was not completly unrealistic (for a comic about stitch monsters that is) the first one I think was a pilot, I'm not even entirly sure she was supsoed to be assigned to that mission but she was at the last minute ,in the story she was a hardass prefessional...not better than the male solders, but not exactly worse eather given the situation. The second one wasn't suposed to be there at all...she was freinds with the pilot who managed to get her to come along since it was suposed to be a routine extraction (excpet the helicopter died)she is most definetly out of her depth in the situation (but had a few moments in the story)

anyway thats an exmaple of two different kinds of female charachter (female part not being essential) which is also not completly unbelivable in how they are implemented in the story[/quote]The pilot example is perfect as to how females excel in certain areas, women on average make better fighter pilots. I can not remember the exact reasoning but it had something to do with the age old stereotype of being able to multi-task better. Multi-tasking in 3 dimensional space is apparently - as one would imagine - incredibly important.

But a pilot being as capable in front-line combat as front-line combat specialists is a bit far-fetched ? especially if they are British SAS - ignoring that she is a woman at all. Again, reasons are required for things to be as they are. I just feel sexism is brushed aside often because of modern societal desires rather than being resolved in a practical manner within the fiction - something that isn't actually difficult to do.