Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Temple of Kraden News: Welcome to the Temple of Kraden! ------ All worshipers may enter the Most Holy Place in single file, reflecting on the bountiful blessing Kraden hath provided unto him or herself since their last visit. Head coverings are not necessary, as true penitence and humility are found within. The Priests and Priestesses of Kraden endeavor to remind all that fresh orange juice is heavily preferred; only whores use frozen.
Greetings, heathen. Perhaps some fortuitous blessing of Kraden's grace hath led you to our humble Temple, or perhaps you are simply curious about this strange and wonderful cult. Should you be willing - and dare to hope - to achieve enlightenment, the door opens before you. Lo! Leave your old life behind! For once you step through, you become something more than just yourself.

You become a Kradenette.

Are you willing to make the rapturous plunge? Do you have what it takes?



One of us! One of us! One of us!



Already one of us? Make your presence known:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
[SSB] Gender General Cafe; for discussing gender stuff
Topic Started: Mar 23 2015, 09:20 PM (6,329 Views)
Crash
Member Avatar
Wheey! I've became a human being!! I am very handsam!

In a personal communication, I totally understand "I feel" versus "you did this" or "this is the way it is"

But in a group discussion about a topic, or a debate or whatever, it's not really necessary; you're the one saying it, so of course it's what you think or feel.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nell
Member Avatar
The Pretender
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
It might seem obvious to some of us, but a lot of people actually do go around believing that they are "telling it like it is", and then project that belief onto other people.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ShinyGirafarig
Member Avatar
Giraffes are adorable.

I posted this in Slumber Party but no one responded to it. Let's put it here.

I decided to look up some Anita Sarkeesian because to be honest I barely had any interest in her and with all this Gamergate stuff might as just well understand what's going on and I found she does not consider female character's who have traits considered stereotypically masculine not feminist such as the girl in True Grit. I feel upset at this thought. I am very much a tomboy in real life and I do not do many stereotypical things such as work out problems as a group and prefer solving issues on my own and on a recent midterm I only got a B because I was told I was more intellectual in a paper that wants more of my feelings and I suck at discussing my feelings. Apparently if my whole life was transferred to a fictional character I would be considered a "man with boobs" by her. It's fine to get some traits usually stereotypically seen as feminine represented positively as well but don't you dare say I am not a real woman or a real feminist or fictional characters woman do identify with as not real women or feminist characters either.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ceremonial Dentist Fridge
Member Avatar
Spirit
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I haven't seen the video, so I can't really comment on it. Pretty sure Sarkeesian is recognised by most sane people as being generally well-meaning but fudging a lot of the finer points of feminism. I wouldn't let anything she says get to you.

It does point to an interesting question though: the origin and value of femininity. Is femininity inherently valuable to anyone, or is it a collection of traits that has been passed down within a patriarchy for the implicit purpose of removing power from women? Is femininity something we should try to preserve and reclaim, or is it really just a construction that disempowers its host? Does it matter? Should we as feminists be striving to emphasize femininity as a valuable source of power in contrast to masculinity, or should we be trying to shed these disempowering traits in favour of gaining access to powerful masculine ones?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ShinyGirafarig
Member Avatar
Giraffes are adorable.

I think nurturing is considered a feminine trait and we sort of need that for raising the next generation, right?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sundancer
Member Avatar
Stargazer

Terri
Apr 23 2015, 10:13 AM
I haven't seen the video, so I can't really comment on it. Pretty sure Sarkeesian is recognised by most sane people as being generally well-meaning but fudging a lot of the finer points of feminism. I wouldn't let anything she says get to you.

It does point to an interesting question though: the origin and value of femininity. Is femininity inherently valuable to anyone, or is it a collection of traits that has been passed down within a patriarchy for the implicit purpose of removing power from women? Is femininity something we should try to preserve and reclaim, or is it really just a construction that disempowers its host? Does it matter? Should we as feminists be striving to emphasize femininity as a valuable source of power in contrast to masculinity, or should we be trying to shed these disempowering traits in favour of gaining access to powerful masculine ones?
Generally speaking my feminism is one that strives not to deprive others of their choices, even if those are not ones I personally agree with. Not that these things should be unquestioned, but I shy away from imposing regulatory pressures that imply there is one "right" way to be feminist or to be a woman or to be feminine/masculine. And I don't disagree with reclaiming femininity, either.

"Femininity" is expansive and is not limited to cis women as is generally implied by patriarchal structures; trans people, cis men, non-binary folks, agender folks, everyone can access femininity, and I don't think there's an inherent disempowerment to being "feminine". It is really a construction, but that doesn't make it easy to shed or meaningless, and it doesn't have to disempower the person expressing it. There is, however, disempowerment within the context of a patriarchal society when one is perceived as feminine, whatever that might mean to the onlooker. Personally I'd feel it to be a replication of patriarchal power structures to say that "as feminists" a certain course of action has to be taken that essentially buys into an existing and inherently oppressive system. Making it a primary goal to "access masculinity" frames the actions within a narrowly defined scope that is intrinsically unbalanced in its definition, on account of who decided that was the symbol of power in society (men, in a patriarchal system). And anyway, many people find that reclaiming their femininity is an empowering act, so on some level I'd say the efficacy of that act has already been addressed -- it's not for everyone, but it works for many people, whether they are women-identifying or not.

tl;dr: femininity is not the problem, the system is the problem

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ceremonial Dentist Fridge
Member Avatar
Spirit
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Oh yeah, I think everyone should get to make their own choices. Feminism is part of a process of changing the system so that people have the space and knowledge make informed choices though, right? Or any sort of activism, really. I mean, there are definitely "wrong" ways to be feminist (see that blog that was posted here a while ago). I don't mean to come off as bashing femininity; I honestly don't know how I feel about it, hence why I'm asking for your thoughts. I don't disagree with anything you said, Sun.

Perhaps I'm just sour because of the gender studies class I took last year; the vibe was very much we are feminists even with our high heels, which isn't bad in and of itself, but it was also bizarrely exclusionary--it wasn't "women can be feminists and wear high heels," it was "feminists wear high heels." As a non-heel-wearing feminist, I was put off by the assumption that our ultimate goal was to practice both feminism and femininity at the same time. Our lecturer said, for example, that even though she dislikes the message in Blurred Lines, when it comes on the radio of course we shake it, because duh, feminists are still girls and a girl gotta dance. I don't know, I feel like she'd gotten a lot of flack for her femininity in the past and just came back swinging way too hard. Made me start to wonder why we're so attached to femininity in the first place. I got a poor grade in that class, and I don't know if it's because I grossly misunderstood feminism or because she did.

I've gotten a bit rambly, whoops. Obviously the solution is that anyone can be a feminist, whether they present as masculine, feminine or otherwise. My concern is whether the desire to protect femininity (and its many useful traditional values, such as nurturing) as a whole discourages women from accessing traits that traditionally fall outside the feminine sphere.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ShinyGirafarig
Member Avatar
Giraffes are adorable.

Terri
Apr 23 2015, 12:58 PM
Oh yeah, I think everyone should get to make their own choices. Feminism is part of a process of changing the system so that people have the space and knowledge make informed choices though, right? Or any sort of activism, really. I mean, there are definitely "wrong" ways to be feminist (see that blog that was posted here a while ago). I don't mean to come off as bashing femininity; I honestly don't know how I feel about it, hence why I'm asking for your thoughts. I don't disagree with anything you said, Sun.

Perhaps I'm just sour because of the gender studies class I took last year; the vibe was very much we are feminists even with our high heels, which isn't bad in and of itself, but it was also bizarrely exclusionary--it wasn't "women can be feminists and wear high heels," it was "feminists wear high heels." As a non-heel-wearing feminist, I was put off by the assumption that our ultimate goal was to practice both feminism and femininity at the same time. Our lecturer said, for example, that even though she dislikes the message in Blurred Lines, when it comes on the radio of course we shake it, because duh, feminists are still girls and a girl gotta dance. I don't know, I feel like she'd gotten a lot of flack for her femininity in the past and just came back swinging way too hard. Made me start to wonder why we're so attached to femininity in the first place. I got a poor grade in that class, and I don't know if it's because I grossly misunderstood feminism or because she did.

I've gotten a bit rambly, whoops. Obviously the solution is that anyone can be a feminist, whether they present as masculine, feminine or otherwise. My concern is whether the desire to protect femininity (and its many useful traditional values, such as nurturing) as a whole discourages women from accessing traits that traditionally fall outside the feminine sphere.
Having SJWs as teachers/professors are the worst. Got no credit in one of my courses from one of them. I consider SJ as for equality for everyone without being nasty to people with privilege who do not mean any harm to people with disadvantages in life and SJW as haters of white, male, cis, hetero, Christians regardless of their actual merit.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jenn-uh
Member Avatar
hunny bunchkins sugarcube lettuce chamomile sweetie pumpkin schnitzel fries

It's important to remember that because we're human, no one can practice feminism perfectly. We all [radio edit] up.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nell
Member Avatar
The Pretender
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I am also not sure which video you're referring to, but doesn't sound like I've seen it, either. (There's another considerably older discussion of Feminist Frequency in another thread in the Slumber Party.) Bear in mind my background is cultural studies, so that's my bias.

Sarkeesian's contribution to feminism and GamerGate has never been the content of her videos (which are, I think most people would agree, not particularly groundbreaking, insightful or persuasive - there's a dearth of representations of women in video games? No, really?) but that she became the site of a pretty massive conflict by merely attempting to put a feminist/pop culture reading of video games into mainstream view. Would she have been harassed less if her arguments were more waterproof? Seems doubtful.

As to the value of her content - there is a huge amount of discourse, both academic and popular, on what makes a 'strong female character' ('strong' here encompassing a variety of different values), and one of the questions that gets raised a lot if whether creators should just focus on creating 'strong' characters of any gender, or if there's something particular about female characters that needs to be represented in particular ('women are just people, too', so the argument goes). Ripley is often touted as one of the strongest female characters in film history, and she was scripted as a man, so what's wrong with so-called 'men-with-boobs'? Of course, Ripley's function as a mother became key to her character in the subsequent films, so she's not entirely a man with boobs. The debate continues.

My opinion on the matter is that representation of female characters is something that needs to be examined generally, both as a quantitative thing (because women are underrepresented in games), but also in terms of diversity. Some types of women are more frequently represented than others. 'Men with boobs' is one of them. Prostitutes are another. Lolitas are a third. Crazy witches are a fourth. Rape victims. Absent mothers. Etc. The issue, to me, is not that 'feminine' female characters have greater or less value than other types of female characters, but that there are fewer of them, and they seem to be less well-done as a whole. So for people who look for a feminine character to identify with in a game or a text, there is less available to them, which (cultural studies would say) sends certain messages to them about the legitimacy of their own identity. And some people have also argued that men-with-boobs is barely a step in the direction of diversity, lack of diversity being the common theme amongst many feminist analyses.

I would be interested to hear from you guys what you think makes constitutes a 'strong female character' and which side of the argument you fall on.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kula Diamond
Member Avatar
atlus tracts

i never understood the "man-with-boobs" argument

i mean women can act in any way they want as long as they don't harm anybody :p
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ShinyGirafarig
Member Avatar
Giraffes are adorable.

Nell
Apr 23 2015, 05:08 PM
I am also not sure which video you're referring to, but doesn't sound like I've seen it, either. (There's another considerably older discussion of Feminist Frequency in another thread in the Slumber Party.) Bear in mind my background is cultural studies, so that's my bias.

Sarkeesian's contribution to feminism and GamerGate has never been the content of her videos (which are, I think most people would agree, not particularly groundbreaking, insightful or persuasive - there's a dearth of representations of women in video games? No, really?) but that she became the site of a pretty massive conflict by merely attempting to put a feminist/pop culture reading of video games into mainstream view. Would she have been harassed less if her arguments were more waterproof? Seems doubtful.

As to the value of her content - there is a huge amount of discourse, both academic and popular, on what makes a 'strong female character' ('strong' here encompassing a variety of different values), and one of the questions that gets raised a lot if whether creators should just focus on creating 'strong' characters of any gender, or if there's something particular about female characters that needs to be represented in particular ('women are just people, too', so the argument goes). Ripley is often touted as one of the strongest female characters in film history, and she was scripted as a man, so what's wrong with so-called 'men-with-boobs'? Of course, Ripley's function as a mother became key to her character in the subsequent films, so she's not entirely a man with boobs. The debate continues.

My opinion on the matter is that representation of female characters is something that needs to be examined generally, both as a quantitative thing (because women are underrepresented in games), but also in terms of diversity. Some types of women are more frequently represented than others. 'Men with boobs' is one of them. Prostitutes are another. Lolitas are a third. Crazy witches are a fourth. Rape victims. Absent mothers. Etc. The issue, to me, is not that 'feminine' female characters have greater or less value than other types of female characters, but that there are fewer of them, and they seem to be less well-done as a whole. So for people who look for a feminine character to identify with in a game or a text, there is less available to them, which (cultural studies would say) sends certain messages to them about the legitimacy of their own identity. And some people have also argued that men-with-boobs is barely a step in the direction of diversity, lack of diversity being the common theme amongst many feminist analyses.

I would be interested to hear from you guys what you think makes constitutes a 'strong female character' and which side of the argument you fall on.
A well liked feminine, nurturing, female characters (remember there are men with feminine traits in media as well) is Mrs. Brisby from Secret of Nimh (from movie for sure, can't remember book so much and I know movie was way different from the book) who was a mother character who did everything she could for her children.

We need more mother main protagonists. As in she is the main focus. Not a secondary character. The first major character. But then again we need to work on mothers who actual have some role in media besides being a sitcom mom in the first place (See Marge and the Fox Animated show clones).

Also here is a indirect link to that Anita video. I am not directly linking the youtube video or her site on purpose:

http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2011/03/13/is-true-grits-mattie-ross-not-a-feminist-character/

Quote:
 
i never understood the "man-with-boobs" argument

i mean women can act in any way they want as long as they don't harm anybody :p


How I wish some would be okay with us and ask for more reps for other personality traits and not put us down in the process.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ian889
Member Avatar
Death comes to all of those who oppose me.

Personally I don't value one over the other, and can enjoy both. I liked both Katara who I saw as more feminine and Korra who I saw as more masculine. The same can be said about many of the characters in the Witcher series (Particularly the books,) Triss I always found very feminine while Ves, and Ciri (Think Arya from GoT) as more masculine. I think strength is something that comes in a variety of ways so I like to see characters with a variety of strengths Petter Bretts "The Demon Cycle," does a great job painting all his characters of both genders with different types of strengths even the books female antagonist is painted as incredible strong. Although, personally I don't like the notion that if a female character ever needs help from a male character than she is instantly dis-empowered for the rest of the story/series/game. An argument could be made that it would be nice to see more feminine main character as opposed to a "Man with Boobs," but I think that has more to do with the lack of character type than one being more valuable than the other.

In regards to what makes a "strong," female character I don't know it's more of a feeling than a checklist. Most of the time it's like just a badass moment in a story that turns them strong in my opinion. Although, I also saw strength in characters like Colette from ToS.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Phantom Squee
Member Avatar
Sound the horn and call the cry: "How many of them can we make die?"

I heard it abstracted once that, somewhere along the line, somebody said "we want more strong female characters" meaning "strong characters, female," and somebody else heard "characters, strong female." That's one that's particularly resonated with me, so I'm very much in the camp that believes better representation of women in media means greater diversity of roles, rather than some quota on what kind of traits female characters can and can't have. I think the right idea is to focus on writing characters that have depth and dynamism regardless of gender.

Regarding your point about various character types, I think that when you start labeling any character in media by their profession or class, that's getting into tricky territory. It's very easy to reduce a character to a single label regardless of their merits. For example, I've often heard Bayonetta used as an example of a good female protagonist who has agency, but you could also describe her as the "crazy witch" archetype you mentioned, or as a "fanservice character," and not, strictly speaking, be wrong. I don't think that any of those qualities necessarily make her a poor role model, though.

Then there's the issue of verisimilitude. The topic of prostitutes in games has been brought up a lot, usually (in my experience) in the context of "X game has prostitutes, therefore it supports objectification of women." The issue with that approach is that, often, the games in question take place in a historic or real-world setting, or one closely based thereupon. Example: Deus Ex Human Revolution takes place in a dismal futuristic Detroit where many of the people you see on the street are hobos and prostitutes. The game's target audience is adults who understand what destitution means, so having a conspicuous lack of those sorts of characters would likely prove immersion-breaking. In a similar vein, something like Assassin's Creed, taking place in a setting where sex workers were historically present, could also lose its immersive quality with their absence.

As with all things, I think it depends strongly on context and execution, so my biggest issue with a lot of the debate on this topic is how reductionist it gets.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ShinyGirafarig
Member Avatar
Giraffes are adorable.

I am almost afraid how Anita and her kind would view Shantae. Very strong main character in personality, being a naive type which I find most creators are afraid to use due to fear that that it would be sexist to make a "stupid" female character, a strong female villain, passes a certain test that at least one conversation has to be something other than men so many times its not even funny. I think Anita and her kind would not look past the skimpy outfits though.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nell
Member Avatar
The Pretender
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
ShinyGirafarig
Apr 23 2015, 05:43 PM
How I wish some would be okay with us and ask for more reps for other personality traits and not put us down in the process.
There are plenty who are and do, but if you're going to focus on Anita Sarkeesian has to say, to the exclusion of what she's kind of come to stand for, there are a number of other concerns you should have with her work, too.

What I'm referring to when I talk about "crazy witch" and "prostitutes" are less about a standard professions and being a good (or not) role model and more about subjectivities and character archetypes. Only the most poorly drafted characters will have one single subjectivity, and of course there are opportunities for the subversion of character archetypes. It's not a value judgement (at least when I use it) as to whether a character is good or not, it's breakdown of observable tropes and a desire for characters who break out of tropes.

EDIT: There's also been a lot of discussion about the Bechdel test (which is more than just talking about something other than men) and its perceived limits recently, especially in film discourse, if that's something you're interested in.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ShinyGirafarig
Member Avatar
Giraffes are adorable.

Let's go to the other side. What are some fictional men that display feminine traits and treated as good characters, liked by a lot of people and not mocked, whether in the narrative of the story or by fandom?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kula Diamond
Member Avatar
atlus tracts

the only example of a feminine man that isn't mocked (by characters where mocking would be out of character anyways because KoF is full of characters that make fun of everyone) i can remember is ash crimson but he takes quite the antagonistic role
Spoiler: click to toggle
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ian889
Member Avatar
Death comes to all of those who oppose me.

If by good you mean well written I can think of a few. If you're talking about protagonists I can't think of many.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ShinyGirafarig
Member Avatar
Giraffes are adorable.

Ian889
Apr 23 2015, 06:37 PM
If by good you mean well written I can think of a few.
Those are good enough for discussion.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Learn More · Register for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Affiliates

Golden Sun Universe Golden Sun Hacking Community The Lost Waters Golden Sun Land Golden Sun Adept's Refuge Golden Sunrise

Visit the Zetaboards Theme Zone for a custom theme of your own!