Why do people scream "Feminist Agenda" when there is a female lead?

[Redryhno]

You mean the black humans who appeared for like five minutes near the end?

Are we limiting this discussion to the movies? I just want to be clear on the rules before I get too much further into it except to say that the amount of screen time they get doesn't matter. What matters is that literally every human we see who would have had to move to the back of the bus in Alabama is in service of evil. Further, if you want to continue the line of fantasy-races-as-metaphors-for-racial-politics comparison, the Uruk-Hai are exactly what the arguments against miscegenation proselytized against: that if you mix the advanced intellect of the superior [white man/human] with the bestial strength, animal impulses, and moral failings of the inferior [black man/orc], then what results will be an abomination with no conscience but with unmatchable strength and the intellect to overcome its limitations in pursuit of evil.

I guess the books are okay too, but I don't remember them much. At least in the films, you can't go "there are evil black man->racism", not to mention there are evil white people in the series. It's just cherry picking to frame the film as racist.

Plus the orcs are corrupted elves, which are the "ubermensch" of the setting, not a completely different race who's "evil".

Well, technically they aren't. I think Tolkein said in a letter to a buddy that his biggest regret with the series was calling them corrupted elves, since he gave the elves a god that could bring their race back to an uncorrupted state by creating new life. Meaning that the guy let it happen and Tolkien was never a fan of there being an ultimate evil or ultimate good without ALOT of choices on the parts of the aforementioned parties that led them to that point. Which orcs were. And even then, he said it had alot more to do with Melkor's influence that made them that way, which he didn't particularly like himself either.

There's other theories out there, but as far as Tolkien was concerned, they definitely weren't just corrupted elves.

 

[JimB]

The problem, at least to my Danish ears, starts with the name.

Nothing I can do about the differences between English and Danish (where in English, Thor isn't just a male name but the name of the big ************ with the hammer and the wing-ears helmet), and no one wins arguing another person's personal tastes is wrong.

So we need to insert a token good black guy for those two minutes?

No. You just have to acknowledge that every black person in Middle Earth is evil, that all the good guys are white, and that since every single person in Middle Earth is imaginary there's literally no reason every black person was required to be imagined as evil nor every good guy required to be imagined as white.

No, they are still elves that were tortured until insanity and enslaved to a dark god, you can justify that they don't have much choice, but in the matter but in the end they are still evil.

And black people were cursed by Jehovah to be less than white people because...uh, of something to do with peeping on Noah while he was naked. I honestly forget and no way I'm putting "Why are black people inferior to white people, Biblically speaking," in my browser history.

 

[MrFalconfly]

The problem, at least to my Danish ears, starts with the name.

Nothing I can do about the differences between English and Danish (where in English, Thor isn't just a male name but the name of the big ************ with the hammer and the wing-ears helmet), and no one wins arguing another person's personal tastes is wrong.

But this isn't opinion.

It's language.

You can't mangle a language just because the citizenry of one country has no clue about it.

In the end we're still talking about a female character that has been renamed Stephen because she needs to stand in for her boyfriend whose name was Stephen.

It just doesn't make any kind of sense.

 

[thewatergamer]

Is it that time of the week again? *ugh*

Ok, first let's stop taking twitter seriously, it's a rubbish platform for extremist trolls to shout and pretend they are important

Second, there are two distinct groups of people that get upset with female protagonists:

10-12 year olds, (physically or mentally take your pick) that complain when they can't have all games be there power fantasy

Or 2, people like me that have no problem with female protagonists, but DO have a problem when they are shoehorned in to "tick a box" or please feminists

Yes I will say feminists, because if you are truly for equality you are not a feminist, you are a humanitarian, (you can be a humanitarian and sympathize with the MRM because that just means you sympathize with a movement, feminism indicates your political ideology, I sympathize with the MRM and Women's right's groups)there we go, simple logic

(as far as SJW goes, that term lost all meaning when Jim Sterling and Totalbiscuit got labelled "SJW'S")

 

[JimB]

God damn, I can barely keep up with all the replies. I hope this catches them.

Are you seriously going to go with the Cartman/Kyle relationship as justification?

I'm going to go with it because it's a popular example of prejudiced stereotypes that I think are fairly uncommon otherwise.

Not to mention Aragorn is routinely mentioned as also being "dark."

So wait, we're talking about the books now instead of the movies?

To say that only dark-skinned people joined up with Sauron, or that only light-skinned people fought Sauron is so incredibly shallow that I can't believe anyone actually read the books these days and say that.

I can't believe it either, since no one in this thread has said that. You seem to have a lot of difficulty reading what I have written, Redrhyno, so please pay very close attention to the order in which I am writing these words for the third time now:

All the black people who appear in the Lord of the Rings are evil.

This sequence of words does not say all black-skinned people are evil. It does not only black-skinned people are evil. It says the only black-skinned people we see are working for Sauron.

(Also, I can't be bothered to pull out the DVD and check, but I feel like at least some of the black dudes riding the elephants have bones through their noses.)

What is the simple question then?

I have asked you on multiple occasions, Redrhyno. You even reference it near the end of your post, though you're misquoting it and I assume that's part of why you can't understand it, not that it matters to me. If you seriously cannot comprehend by now that I am asking why people who insist her gender doesn't matter keep bringing her gender up, then I do not believe you ever will, and I do not choose to spend my time repeating myself to you any further.

But this isn't opinion.

It's language.

You can't mangle a language just because the citizenry of one country has no clue about it.

Sure you can. Words do not have objective meanings. They're defined by the way people popularly use them. That is why dictionaries now say one of the definitions for the word "literally" is "not literally." In American English, the name "Thor" has spent three generations referring to one single, solitary person, and to the writers and audience who speak American English, there's no dissonance here. The word means something different to us than it means to you. All there is to it.

 

[MrFalconfly]

But this isn't opinion.

It's language.

You can't mangle a language just because the citizenry of one country has no clue about it.

Sure you can. Words do not have objective meanings. They're defined by the way people popularly use them. That is why dictionaries now say one of the definitions for the word "literally" is "not literally." In American English, the name "Thor" has spent three generations referring to one single, solitary person, and to the writers and audience who speak American English, there's no dissonance here. The word means something different to us than it means to you. All there is to it.

Right but this is communication involving two distinct languages, and while the US has given a carte Blanche to anyone using English (and thereby risking communicative chaos) the Scandinavian countries have sprogn?vn (language councils) to make sure that language at least has structure.

Again, you can't mangle a language, with its own grammatical rule set just because the citizenry doesn't know about it.

Again I ask.

Why was the character renamed Stephen, just because her boyfriend was called Stephen?

EDIT:

I mean extending English grammatical rules to any Scandinavian language would be like traveling from the US to Belgium and expecting the 2nd amendment still being valid.

 

[JimB]

Right but this is communication involving two distinct languages, and while the US has given a carte blanche to anyone using English (and thereby risking communicative chaos) the Scandinavian countries have sprogn?vn (language councils) to make sure that language at least has structure.

At the risk of sounding cruel, I must admit we in America do not care about the rules of other languages. We take what words from them we want--for example, "carte" and "blanche"--and use them how we like. I'll understand if this seems unsavory to you, but unfortunately, it's one of the things you signed up for when you started reading American comics.

Again, you can't mangle a language, with its own grammatical rule set just because the citizenry doesn't know about it.

I'm afraid we can. And the proof is, we have done it.

Why was the character renamed Stephen, just because her boyfriend was called Stephen?

Because Stephen doesn't want to be Stephen any more, and because "Stephen" is not a name his girlfriend nor anyone else in the Marvel universe recognizes as being a common male name in some parts of the world, so neither she nor they see any problem with her using the name "Stephen" as an alias.

 

[Redryhno]

God damn, I can barely keep up with all the replies. I hope this catches them.

Are you seriously going to go with the Cartman/Kyle relationship as justification?

I'm going to go with it because it's a popular example of prejudiced stereotypes that I think are fairly uncommon otherwise.

Not to mention Aragorn is routinely mentioned as also being "dark."

So wait, we're talking about the books now instead of the movies?

To say that only dark-skinned people joined up with Sauron, or that only light-skinned people fought Sauron is so incredibly shallow that I can't believe anyone actually read the books these days and say that.

I can't believe it either, since no one in this thread has said that. You seem to have a lot of difficulty reading what I have written, Redrhyno, so please pay very close attention to the order in which I am writing these words for the third time now:

All the black people who appear in the Lord of the Rings are evil.

This sequence of words does not say all black-skinned people are evil. It does not all only black-skinned people are evil. It says the only black-skinned people we see are working for Sauron.

(Also, I can't be bothered to pull out the DVD and check, but I feel like at least some of the black dudes riding the elephants have bones through their noses.)

What is the simple question then?

I have asked you on multiple occasions, Redrhyno. You even reference it near the end of your post, though you're misquoting it and I assume that's part of why you can't understand it, not that it matters to me. If you seriously cannot comprehend by now that I am asking why people who insist her gender doesn't matter keep bringing her gender up, then I do not believe you ever will, and I do not choose to spend my time repeating myself to you any further.

Fine, Paul H since you don't have the patience to talk about anything other than the movies, I'm just going to leave you with this, there's alot more going on than you realize Paul H. The majority of dark-skinned people you see are a part of Sauron's forces Paul H. But there's more to it than that Paul H.

Also, PaulH, I don't know how I can keep answering this question because it all links back to one thing that I've continually answered with Paul H. People make a big deal out of her gender because people continue to hail her as being "important" to female representation when she really isn't Paul H. She's a half-hearted attempt to get sympathy points(whether the writer is doing it intentionally or not, I don't know, maybe he really does think it's good) when there's alot of other ORIGINAL characters that didn't have to displace another character to exist in the comic universe Paul H.

Spoiler

The Paul H thing was just a joke because I thought it was sorta funny how you kept putting my name in there for whatever reason

 

[MrFalconfly]

Right but this is communication involving two distinct languages, and while the US has given a carte blanche to anyone using English (and thereby risking communicative chaos) the Scandinavian countries have sprogn?vn (language councils) to make sure that language at least has structure.

At the risk of sounding cruel, I must admit we in America do not care about the rules of other languages. We take what words from them we want--for example, "carte" and "blanche"--and use them how we like. I'll understand if this seems unsavory to you, but unfortunately, it's one of the things you signed up for when you started reading American comics.

Again, you can't mangle a language, with its own grammatical rule set just because the citizenry doesn't know about it.

I'm afraid we can. And the proof is, we have done it.

Why was the character renamed Stephen, just because her boyfriend was called Stephen?

Because Stephen doesn't want to be Stephen any more, and because "Stephen" is not a name his girlfriend nor anyone else in the Marvel universe recognizes as being a common male name in some parts of the world, so neither she nor they see any problem with her using the name "Stephen" as an alias.

So the conclusion is that these writers did a shoddy job.

That's not a surprise, we knew they did a shoddy job.

One could only hope that the next generation of writers take more pride in their work (Like Herge, the writer of Tintin, who was know for thoroughly researching every aspect of the countries, cultures and people he wrote about and depicted).

 

[BloatedGuppy]

People make a big deal out of her gender because people continue to hail her as being "important" to female representation when she really isn't Paul H.

Not to get in the middle of this slap and tickle fight you have going on, but this quoted phrase is an argument I see raised quite frequently in threads like this. Basically summarized as...

"[People] do [stupid thing] because [other people] did [other stupid thing]".

Now, presumably we're all adults here, or in worst case scenarios teenagers who like to think of themselves as adults. Why is the (presumed) bad behavior of some second group justification for more, equally bad behavior? Is that not a maxim we are supposed to abandon in elementary school?

I remember during REDACTED, there was a commonly held sentiment of "They brought their politics into it, so now we're bringing our politics into it" from people who were ardently shouting that everything had become too political. The...gosh I don't know how to put this...the stupidity implicit in that absolutely spins my head around.

I'll try to TLDR...if "people" are making a big deal out of something that, in your mind, does not merit the attention, the balm for that wound is not to make an even bigger deal out of it in a different way. You demonstrate that something is "not a big deal" by ignoring it, not via the formation of armed camps.

It kind of goes to the whole "people get too offended by everything" commentary issuing from the mouths of folks who communicate an hourly basis just how outraged they are by everything around them.

 

[JimB]

The Paul H thing was just a joke because I thought it was sorta funny how you kept putting my name in there for whatever reason.

Well, thank you for waiting no longer than this to tell me you cannot be bothered to extend to me the courtesy I have shown you of not mocking you.

So the conclusion is that these writers did a shoddy job.

If that's the conclusion you wish to draw, then that's fine, but I hope you're at least not doing it for the reason that English differs from Danish. That would be like me declaring mangas are badly written because those stupid Japanese assholes print everything backward.

One could only hope that the next generation of writers take more pride in their work (Like Herge, the writer of Tintin, who was know for thoroughly researching every aspect of the countries, cultures and people he wrote about and depicted).

Thor is not and never was intended to be a depiction of Norse mythology. He is literally an alien whose presence on Earth incorrectly inspired a religion; he is Jack Kirby attempting to subvert, not to faithfully transcribe, and it's one of the most interesting ideas he ever had.

 

[Redryhno]

People make a big deal out of her gender because people continue to hail her as being "important" to female representation when she really isn't Paul H.

Not to get in the middle of this slap and tickle fight you have going on, but this quoted phrase is an argument I see raised quite frequently in threads like this. Basically summarized as...

"[People] do [stupid thing] because [other people] did [other stupid thing]".

Now, presumably we're all adults here, or in worst case scenarios teenagers who like to think of themselves as adults. Why is the (presumed) bad behavior of some second group justification for more, equally bad behavior? Is that not a maxim we are supposed to abandon in elementary school?

I remember during REDACTED, there was a commonly held sentiment of "They brought their politics into it, so now we're bringing our politics into it" from people who were ardently shouting that everything had become too political. The...gosh I don't know how to put this...the stupidity implicit in that absolutely spins my head around.

I'll try to TLDR...if "people" are making a big deal out of something that, in your mind, does not merit the attention, the balm for that wound is not to make an even bigger deal out of it in a different way. You demonstrate that something is "not a big deal" by ignoring it, not via the formation of armed camps.

It kind of goes to the whole "people get too offended by everything" commentary issuing from the mouths of folks who communicate an hourly basis just how outraged they are by everything around them.

Pretty sure the tickling parts over unfortunately Guppy(also I resent being called a teenager, I"m a spry toddler of...20-something...what year is it again? Haven't really celebrated my birthday since I was like twelve), but if we're supposed to leave it behind in Elementary school, why have SO many(not saying you) people on this forum done some variation on "good on 'em" when a politician with anti-gay views(let's get crazy and say CEOs too) has been outed as gay themselves?

People have tried steering people towards other characters that have been done better when we're talking about representation, but the ones that talk the most about it only seem to know about this one instance of it happening. It's largely something else I was talking about earlier on in the thread. The female leads that are hailed as being amazing are largely interchangeable with one another, while the actual good characters are largely ignored by people talking about representation the most.

Which to me continues to scream that people are only interested in diversity with what they're interested in with a heavily tunnelvisioned view of what's "good". Which wouldn't be bad at all if there was acknowledgment of other characters is all. But the majority of the time, they either don't know or haven't paid any attention to others telling them about these other characters so they just keep harping on about this one instance.

Just fatigue over the same points that have been ground into sand since the fake geek days more than anything I suppose.

 

[MrFalconfly]

snip

Regarding nr 1. You can be assured that isn't the reason.

Regarding nr 2. I'm not saying Jack Kerby cocked up. I'm saying Jason Aaron (the writer of fem-Thor) cocked up. Whether that's because of incompetence or laziness is yet to be determined (at least for me).

 

[Something Amyss]

People make a big deal out of her gender because people continue to hail her as being "important" to female representation when she really isn't

Wait wait wait, let me see if I have this straight. People are making a big deal out of her gender because it's not a big deal, and others are making a big deal so they must make a big deal?

Because that's how it reads to me, but that makes no sense. By all means, clarify if that's not what you meant. If anything, the response sends the message that not only is their big deal justified, but that it's also a big deal to "you," used in general sense and not specific. It seems the worst way to show people that something isn't important is to make a fuss out of it.

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

(as far as SJW goes, that term lost all meaning when Jim Sterling and Totalbiscuit got labelled "SJW'S")

Wait, since when has TB been called an "SJW"?

I thought he was "The evil leader of gamergate who wants to murder all trans people and who is a shield for misogynists"? 0_o

Jeez, I stop paying attention to the shitstorm for a few months as a time and whenever I come back, shit's even MORE upside down.

 

[Barbas]

Wait, since when has TB been called an "SJW"?

I thought he was "The evil leader of gamergate who wants to murder all trans people and who is a shield for misogynists"? 0_o

Jeez, I stop paying attention to the shitstorm for a few months as a time and whenever I come back, shit's even MORE upside down.

It's the cool new in thing to call someone, basically. It's been stuck to so many people that it has lost any meaning it may have had, presumably, somewhere, at some point. So far, on this site alone, I can recall having seen "SJW" used to refer to Jim Sterling, TotalBiscuit, MovieBob, probably Cory Rydell and Grey Carter (I don't recall seeing those last two, but I can just feel it in my blood), Marter (another question mark here), "GGers", "A-GGers", the staff of Kotaku, the staff of Polygon, me (I will be profoundly disappointed if this is not the case), likely many of my friends ad acquaintances, the staff of this site at some point and probably vast swathes of the western world. If I missed anyone out, I'm sorry!

OT: People scream about that because they're hysterical. That's what screaming is: an act of hysteria.

EDIT: Yahtzeeeee! Also Archon.

 

[Bocaj2000]

It's only when the female lead is boring and Mary Sue in order to not offend anyone. I'm okay with female characters... as long as they're actually characters.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

Wait, since when has TB been called an "SJW"?

I thought he was "The evil leader of gamergate who wants to murder all trans people and who is a shield for misogynists"? 0_o

Jeez, I stop paying attention to the shitstorm for a few months as a time and whenever I come back, shit's even MORE upside down.

It's the cool new in thing to call someone, basically. It's been stuck to so many people that it has lost any meaning it may have had, presumably, somewhere, at some point. So far, on this site alone, I can recall having seen "SJW" used to refer to Jim Sterling, TotalBiscuit, MovieBob, probably Cory Rydell and Grey Carter (I don't recall seeing those last two, but I can just feel it in my blood), Marter (another question mark here), "GGers", "A-GGers", the staff of Kotaku, the staff of Polygon, me (I will be profoundly disappointed if this is not the case), likely many of my friends ad acquaintances, the staff of this site at some point and probably vast swathes of the western world. If I missed anyone out, I'm sorry!

OT: People scream about that because they're hysterical. That's what screaming is: an act of hysteria.

In the comments sections of the episodes of the "Lets Drown Out" and "Ego-Review" series I've seen several people call Yahtzee an SJW too.

 

[Jack Action]

Wait, since when has TB been called an "SJW"?

I thought he was "The evil leader of gamergate who wants to murder all trans people and who is a shield for misogynists"? 0_o

Jeez, I stop paying attention to the shitstorm for a few months as a time and whenever I come back, shit's even MORE upside down.

It's the cool new in thing to call someone, basically. It's been stuck to so many people that it has lost any meaning it may have had, presumably, somewhere, at some point. So far, on this site alone, I can recall having seen "SJW" used to refer to Jim Sterling, TotalBiscuit, MovieBob, probably Cory Rydell and Grey Carter (I don't recall seeing those last two, but I can just feel it in my blood), Marter (another question mark here), "GGers", "A-GGers", the staff of Kotaku, the staff of Polygon, me (I will be profoundly disappointed if this is not the case), likely many of my friends ad acquaintances, the staff of this site at some point and probably vast swathes of the western world. If I missed anyone out, I'm sorry!

OT: People scream about that because they're hysterical. That's what screaming is: an act of hysteria.

You forgot Archon.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

It's the cool new in thing to call someone, basically. It's been stuck to so many people that it has lost any meaning it may have had, presumably, somewhere, at some point.

It was always a colloquial pejorative, so it can mean anything the person employing it wants it to mean. Generally speaking it's a sneer word used to dismiss anyone whose politics can be viewed as "more progressive" than the person issuing the charge, although its application has become so diffuse as to potentially include simply "anyone".