This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.5
PTR
10.2.6
@ Feminism
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Skreeran
http://youtu.be/-UrazpEFb9w
Post by
asakawa
I saw Anita Sarkeesian's
video
linked from Boing Boing a while ago but hadn't heard any of the nasty stuff that followed. I'm only glad to say that I have never known or played games with anyone with the kinds of attitudes mentioned there.
Post by
Gone
Haha this kind of cracks me up. This, I believe, is indicative of the hypocritical attitude that some people associate (perhaps unfairly) with feminism.
https://scontent-b-iad.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/q71/1379837_10153391754210515_15797254_n.jpg
Post by
Skreeran
I feel like you're putting words in their mouths, though.
Barbie, the girl with a thousand jobs, is a lot more progressive than, say,
Star Sapphire.
A lot of people then say that even though female comic book characters are sexualized, so are the males, see
Wolverine
.
But it's not really the same thing. Female heroes with skimpy clothing and huge busts are appealing to males as a sexual icon, but male heroes with huge muscles and lots of weapons are also appealing to males, not sexually, but as a masculine ideal. They don't portray those male heroes that way as fanservice to women, but as badasses to appeal to men.
In America, at any rate. I've been watching a new anime called Kill la Kill, and it swings pretty hard in
both
directions
as far as fanservice goes.
Post by
asakawa
Are you saying that He-man exists and men don't have any issues with trying to live up to unattainable standards of manliness or are you saying that feminists should also campaign to raise awareness of similar issues that men have with masculine toys?
Do you see what I'm getting at?
I think a pretty solid argument could be made for there being many extreme representations of masculinity in the culture that can give younglings a warped sense of normality about such things. Now whether this is an serious issue for either gender is an interesting discussion that is worth having, and a subject worth studying (with science
!
).
...But, do you think that trying to undermine a fair point with a dumb meme/image-macro is an appropriate response to a fair concern? I notice you've done a little to distance yourself from the opinion there and yet you still posted it.
Post by
Gone
Are you saying that He-man exists and men don't have any issues with trying to live up to unattainable standards of manliness or are you saying that feminists should also campaign to raise awareness of similar issues that men have with masculine toys?
I was saying that... the picture is kind of funny and it made me laugh.
And also that it also reflects an attitude that people have towards feminism, in which they seem to believe that it only advocates equality when beneficial towards women. I also believed that I specified that this is an unfair attitude, and I've also said many times over in this thread that real feminism is pro-equality, so no need to jump all over the post, I didn't mean for it to seem that I agreed entirely with the sentiment of the picture.
Post by
asakawa
Happy to climb down out of there, sure ^_^.
I think the word "perhaps" felt like the slight distancing of someone who wants to agree with the thing they linked rather than someone linking something they don't agree with.
With that clarified, feel free to substitute all my "you"s with "they"s.
Post by
Gone
Happy to climb down out of there, sure ^_^.
I edited that cause I realized I came off as a bit rude, sorry bout that :/
Post by
asakawa
Oh no, not at all. I didn't read it as rude, just a little frustrated at being misunderstood. No problem.
Post by
Adamsm
Barbie, the girl with a thousand jobs, is a lot more progressive than, say,
Star Sapphire.
Depends on what you mean by progressive; that image that you linked is the Predator(the Entity that powers the Star Sapphires) having taken over someone's body. However, the Star Sapphire corps come in all shapes and sizes, and not all of them have their $%^& out. Heck, Carrol Ferris, who is a Star Sapphire at times, is also the head of a massive multinational corporation, that creates airplanes and fighter planes for the government and private businesses.
And yes, the idea that a corp that runs off Love is powered by a being called the Predator, who has been a stalker near rapist in other comics is a big much.
Post by
Gone
Barbie, the girl with a thousand jobs, is a lot more progressive than, say,
Star Sapphire.
Depends on what you mean by progressive; that image that you linked is the Predator(the Entity that powers the Star Sapphires) having taken over someone's body. However, the Star Sapphire corps come in all shapes and sizes, and not all of them have their $%^& out. Heck, Carrol Ferris, who is a Star Sapphire at times, is also the head of a massive multinational corporation, that creates airplanes and fighter planes for the government and private businesses.
And yes, the idea that a corp that runs off Love is powered by a being called the Predator, who has been a stalker near rapist in other comics is a big much.
On the other hand, Power Girl.
Post by
Adamsm
Oh aye, I know.
Edit: But I'm a massive Lantern fan so....
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Here's my gripe with the whole feminism in media issue.
I am not sexist.
You'll have to take my word for it. But since growing out of cooties and into puberty I have never excluded girls from anything and I have treated every girl in my life with just as much respect as anyone else.
But I'm also attracted to girls. Skimpy outfits turn me on. Seeing a girl in distress who I can help kicks into gear my protective instincts. These are just aspects of my sexuality and psyche. They don't make me treat women worse.
So, I take serious issue when those two things are equated when it involves media I habitually consume. If you want to see female super-heroes who are more dressed, that's perfectly fine with me. It's your preference, and you are entitled to not be persecuted for your preference just like me. If you want to get rid of feminism, that's fine too. Treating women badly is not a good thing, and should be stamped out. But as someone who is fine with skimpy clothes on women in my media but is demonstrably not sexist, I will not let myself be the target of propaganda and guilt-tripping, and I will stand up for myself and my likes.
Post by
asakawa
I don't think that your view is incompatible with a mature and sensible approach to feminism. The realities of sexuality don't have to impinge on goals of achieving a true and workable state of equality.
Cosplayers (just as a for instance) who want to express their nerdism through costume but also want to feel sexy, maybe showing a lot of cleavage, aren't going against feminist ideals and nor are people who find themselves physically attracted to them. However, the person who thinks that the cosplayer, being dressed like that, clearly won't mind them touching her boobs is where the problem kicks in.
I think it's good to have awareness raised and to get people to seriously think about how they handle themselves in various situations. Personally I don't think the point is that Princess Peach or Chun-Li are forces of corruption on society in themselves but that they are examples of when something becoming the norm can assert a negative force overall. It's like the
Bechdel test
doesn't tell you whether the film is good or even, really, whether it is sexist but it's a very interesting lens through which one can look at the broader output of fiction.
Post by
Eccentrica
The Bechdel Test, while interesting, is rather presumptive in my opinion.
Take, for example, the Lord of the Rings. I am rather a traditionalist and prefer works of literature to their movie counterparts so I reference the book. There are a handful of named female characters who appear in the book (I don't speak of mere mentions, but actual appearances). None of them speak to each other. Strictly by the criteria of the Bechdel Test this work of art is not woman-friendly.
The Test assumes it is therefore anti-Feminist, but that could not be further from the truth. All the female characters play very important roles, they just don't happen to get together over mead and discuss the day's events.
It also assumes that I ought to like something more, or that something is more tailored to me if it does include female characters.
The problem that I have with this is the same problem that I have with the Feminist movement in general: it seeks to make me feel bad or guilty for the choices I make and for my taste in things. Feminism was supposed to be about choice, but I find my choices constantly derided. Ironically its now other women deriding my choices. They seem to feel I am some sort of traitor for daring to spend some years at home to raise my own children, or for enjoying spending time participating in activities that were traditionally in the female domain (cooking and baking from scratch, knitting etc.).
Likewise the Bechdel Test, by labelling a film woman-friendly or not, imposes a judgement.
In any event, why should all things be all inclusive? Better yet, why are men continually being stripped of the privilege of having exclusivity while women may retain it? A perfect example of the latter is the Scouting and Guide organizations in Canada. Boy Scouts are no longer called Boy Scouts, it's now just Scouts and girls may enrol. The Girl Guides remain Girl Guides and prohibit boys from joining. This is a horribly, nasty example of Feminists wanting to have their cake and eat it too.
Post by
asakawa
The Bechdel Test itself simply gives works of fiction a pass or fail (a simple boolean result) based on three simple criteria. It does not make a judgement about the work's worth or quality. I don't know anyone that has ever used the test as an absolute way to decide on whether a work is good or otherwise something in which it is worth partaking. As I said, I think quite clearly, in my previous post, it's an interesting way to look at the total output of fictional work (or other large group of data) rather than a good way to judge any single work.
It's like asking "does the black man die first in this film?" (a common trope). The number of films that "fail" this test is amazingly high but does that tell you anything about how valid or 'good' the film Full Metal Jacket is? Of course not.
What I'm saying is that you saying "the Test assumes..." is not correct. Some people who have used the test to make their point may have assumed that and you may have assumed they spoke with authority but I don't think it's the case. Also, by rallying against this absolute stance that hasn't been invoked in this conversation you're missing the point that is really being made, that it really does say something interesting about, for example, Hollywood's overall output. I am interested in seeing Jason Statham crash cars, growl at people and even get involved in weirdly homoerotic oil wrestling (in the Transporter, really!) but I'm also interested in seeing genuine female relationships and one of these things is being better served by mainstream movies than the other.
Similarly if you have been personally pressured or derided for your choices by someone claiming to be a feminist authority then I'm very sympathetic but that doesn't mean that they did speak with authority or that that is what "feminism", as a movement, seeks to achieve.
True feminism (in my mind at least) seeks to endow women with agency not take it away. If you've been criticised for your free choice to do anything, but in this case to do traditionally "female" activities, then you've encountered a fool not a feminist - but there are more fools in the world than feminists so it's not entirely surprising.
Essentially I would ask for you not to 'throw the baby out with the bathwater'. You've clearly encountered some frustration at the hands of those claiming to be feminist but I still see a world where, were I to have a daughter, she would have fewer opportunities, fewer freedoms, be more presumed about, prejudged and dismissed than if I had a son. I think that wanting to fix this sometimes misfires and people become the thing they're trying to rally against but that shouldn't colour one's view of the wider issue.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
The Bechdel Test itself simply gives works of fiction a pass or fail (a simple boolean result) based on three simple criteria. It does not make a judgement about the work's worth or quality. I don't know anyone that has ever used the test as an absolute way to decide on whether a work is good or otherwise something in which it is worth partaking. As I said, I think quite clearly, in my previous post, it's an interesting way to look at the total output of fictional work (or other large group of data) rather than a good way to judge any single work.
It's like asking "does the black man die first in this film?" (a common trope). The number of films that "fail" this test is amazingly high but does that tell you anything about how valid or 'good' the film Full Metal Jacket is? Of course not.
What I'm saying is that you saying "the Test assumes..." is not correct. Some people who have used the test to make their point may have assumed that and you may have assumed they spoke with authority but I don't think it's the case. Also, by rallying against this absolute stance that hasn't been invoked in this conversation you're missing the point that is really being made, that it really does say something interesting about, for example, Hollywood's overall output. I am interested in seeing Jason Statham crash cars, growl at people and even get involved in weirdly homoerotic oil wrestling (in the Transporter, really!) but I'm also interested in seeing genuine female relationships and one of these things is being better served by mainstream movies than the other.
The test, however, is a measure of gender bias, not sexism, and the assumption (or argument) being made is that a measure of gender bias in media is apropos to the discussion of sexism. Now I agree with that to a degree, however, it's almost never presented in the neutral matter you are presenting it, at least in my experience. It's always given directly as evidence of sexism. I disagree that gender-bias is sexist, and arguing for that is something that is always glossed over whenever I have witnessed the Bechdel test invoked.
Post by
Skreeran
Here's my gripe with the whole feminism in media issue.
I am not sexist.
You'll have to take my word for it. But since growing out of cooties and into puberty I have never excluded girls from anything and I have treated every girl in my life with just as much respect as anyone else.
But I'm also attracted to girls. Skimpy outfits turn me on. Seeing a girl in distress who I can help kicks into gear my protective instincts. These are just aspects of my sexuality and psyche. They don't make me treat women worse.
So, I take serious issue when those two things are equated when it involves media I habitually consume. If you want to see female super-heroes who are more dressed, that's perfectly fine with me. It's your preference, and you are entitled to not be persecuted for your preference just like me. If you want to get rid of feminism, that's fine too. Treating women badly is not a good thing, and should be stamped out. But as someone who is fine with skimpy clothes on women in my media but is demonstrably not sexist, I will not let myself be the target of propaganda and guilt-tripping, and I will stand up for myself and my likes.I can't speak for all feminists, but I don't have a problem with superheroes in skimpy clothes. The problem is A: when that character has a poorly defined personality and is mainly used as fanservice while the men handle the actual fighting, and B: that comic books almost exclusively pander to straight male sexuality, and cut more than half their readerbase off.
An example of sexy superheroines done right might be
Empowered
, a comic about a sexy lady in skintight clothing who likes to have sex, but also has a really well defined personality and is the main character in her series.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
...and cut more than half their readerbase off
DC did a poll of readers of their new 52 series and found that 93% were male and 7% were female. You can argue about what came first, the chicken or the egg; however, the fact of the matter is that historically the target demographic for comics is young males, and the numbers continue to show that. Do you know for a fact that given a perfectly gender neutral comic would attract equal numbers of both genders? Do you know if overall readership would go up? These are marketing questions which I don't think are particularly relevant to the issue at hand.
Post by
asakawa
I dunno, I mean, I can't defend that way other people make their points. The Bechdel Test isn't evidence of anything, it's not "science" and it doesn't do (or seek to do, this isn't a failing) enough to draw any conclusions, ie. "Hollywood is sexist". However, it does have something to say that is worth consideration.
I've been mulling over an idea lately that's not fully formed and pertains much more to racism than sexism but my feeling is that words like "racism" and "sexism" are, at this point, probably counter-productive in most discussions. For instance if I were to do a bad Indian accent someone might ask in a stage whisper "is that racist?!". The pertinent and important question, I think, is, is it discriminatory? We don't need words for specific "isms" with all their baggage, we already have words to describe the problematic behaviour and focussing on whether something is (to bring it back to this discussion) "sexist" misses the important question of if it is discriminatory or otherwise problematic.
So, applying this notion to this question of gender bias; is gender bias in media discriminatory? Well, isn't all "bias" inherently discriminatory?
There's another question here that I think is much harder to unknot and that is to do with the responsibility of "The Media" in their portrayal of characters. This is another one where very few individual works are clearly out of line in their portrayals but when viewed as a whole there are some definite unhealthy trends that aren't just related to gender but race and sexuality, even age.
Nobody wants Tarantino to go back and rewrite Fabienne in Pulp fiction to have a conversation with a woman at some point about something other than Butch. I don't want someone to re-edit Full Metal Jacket to have someone else die before "Eightball".
The trends exist, however, so if we can agree that their are negative repercussions to trends like these then we can, I'm sure, agree that there is something afoot within the system that could and should be remedied.
Maybe it's consumers and purely market driven.
Maybe it's focus tests and skewed demographics.
Maybe it's the MPAA applying biasses to their certifications.
Maybe it's producers funding certain types of film.
Maybe it's studios buying certain scripts.
Maybe it's studios hiring certain writers.
Maybe it's not enough diversity amongst up and coming writers.
Maybe it's not enough diversity amongst teachers, teaching prospective writers.
Maybe it's society as a whole!
I'm labouring the point here but I'm trying to say that few would dispute that the Bechdel test reveals a genuine phenomenon. I think that the issue that phenomenon represents runs far deeper and is more important than simply saying "Hollywood is sexist". That would possibly be scapegoating but more likely stopping the investigation too soon.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.