Jump to content
  • entries
    263
  • comments
    813
  • views
    24,766

My Lecture for the night


fishers64

2,117 views

*sigh*

 

Why does this subject keep coming up, seeing that it is a complete stack of illogic? I don't know.

 

But I guess for me the concept of gender stereotypes is dead because I naturally subvert almost every female stereotype known. This is not something woke up and suddenly chose to do for fun, it's just an irrevocable part of my essence.

 

Stereotype: "Girls don't like Lego."

Me: *pulls out cardboard box full of Lego* *shows MoC pictures*

 

Stereotype: "Girls like fashion."

Me: *walks past, wearing my usual comfortable attire with zero attention to fashion*

 

Stereotype: "Girls like animals, especially horses."

Me: *looks around for missing animals*

 

Stereotype: "Girls are less likely to enjoy courses in science and math, and rarely do they program."

Me: *pulls up Java program on my computer screen*

 

Stereotype: "Girls are soft."

Me: *rides past on mountain bike* *comes back, carrying pickaxe on shoulder*

 

Stereotype: "Girls like jewelry and painting their nails, etc."

Me: *holds up hands, revealing no jewelry or nail paint*

 

Stereotype: "Girls can't use logic."

Me: :shrugs: *walks over to computer and starts printing off examples of me using logic* *has to stop printer because I ran out of printing paper in the house*

 

It may not be an exhaustive list, but I think you get the idea.

 

:shrugs: What is all this fuss about? Is it really that hard to accept that everyone is different? For some reason, given this, I think the stereotyping problem tends to be overstated. That's because all of us defy stereotypes in one way or another, I think. Once we recognize that we defy the very things we are stereotyped as, I think it may be easier to view other people not as stereotypes but as people.

 

At their best, IMO stereotypes are theories. Like any theory, it is best not to assume it to be true. But you can't assume it to be false either. I know many girls who like horses. I know this because I talked to them and saw them riding horses. This is evidence; therefore it is a verified theory.

 

The thing is about stereotypes is that they are group theories. This, thanks to the conform-to-everyone-else thing and the agreement-makes-a-thing-true myth (sometimes, but not always) people tend to assume that they are true even though they are just theory. This is called misconception.

 

But the misconception part of it could easily be ended. "I am stereotyped as this, but the stereotype (theory) is not true because I don't like this. Therefore my stereotype (theory) about this person could be wrong, too." I never consciously thought of this logic, but I've known this, intuitivelyish, for at least a little while.

 

This is not a knock on theories. Theories are pathways to truth. The secret is telling a theory (what you think could be true) from what actually is. Theories can be verified. You can ask the girl next to you whether she likes horses or not, or observe her painted fingernails. In fact, sometimes such theory is a bridge to get to know the other person - unlike with some people *raises hand* who are so wacky and subvert everything you know so much you don't even know where to begin.

  • Upvote 8

38 Comments


Recommended Comments



I guess the part that confuses us the most is you seem to be frequently advocating against stories and movies and media writing interesting and original women when you are one.

 

That implication comes from a strong opinion (from what I have gleaned, anyway) that it's not really that big of a deal. And what we are trying to convey to you is that it really is.

 

For example, my opinions are just piggybacked from the experiences of people I know and discuss these topics with routinely. Another example; the women in the linked topic who were arguing their case.

 

 

You state that the integrity of the story should matter. Well clearly to a lot of people representation is an inseparable part of story integrity.

  • Upvote 7
Link to comment

When it comes to my amateur stories, I find myself writing more males than females into the narrative simply because it reflects the environment in which I live. I have four brothers and the majority of my cousins are boys. Perhaps most importantly, I am myself male, so it only makes sense for me to draw on my human experience when developing main characters.

I realize that this probably only speaks poorly to my ability as an author, but conforming to "idealistic" gender ratios is something I haven't much considered, and not something I believe would help my stories.

When I consider this topic I always think of the works of J.R.R. Tolkien, especially The Lord of the Rings. Although it is not a historically representative text like the Vietnam war stories or what have you, the context of the story demands a male cast that outweighs the female cast. It is still a work of incredible beauty and reveals great truths about the human experience, but the idea that "men and women need to be the same in every single way" isn't present, and I don't believe it is worse for that.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment

I guess the part that confuses us the most is you seem to be frequently advocating against stories and movies and media writing interesting and original women when you are one.

I'm sorry, but it's just not true. If you want to write interesting and original women in your story, I welcome it.

 

It's just that I don't think it MUST BE #1 PRIORITY when writing. Other things must be considered.

 

That implication comes from a strong opinion (from what I have gleaned, anyway) that it's not really that big of a deal. And what we are trying to convey to you is that it really is.

:shrugs: I like Bionicle. I liked/followed Bionicle for five years and this didn't even enter into my head. Not until I joined BZP did I see this.

 

I have liked many series with a male majority. The gender of the characters does not impede my enjoyment of any franchise.

Now I don't watch a lot of "popular" TV partially because that emphasizes lies about women, but that's just the tip of the iceberg - the characters are stupid. People are way more intelligent IRL than TV makes them out to be, and I don't have time to waste on such insanity.

 

There's a difference between defaming women and having an imbalanced gender ratio. The former is an inherent lie that destroys the logic of the story. The latter is truly not a big deal at all. Don't confuse the two.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment

Well, the problem with stereotypes has a lot to do with the way people think about them. There's a big difference between saying "lots of women like horses" or "lots of men like sports" and saying the same thing about ALL men and women. And if a story is big enough in scale, it's easy for the latter to be implied if the story supports the stereotype again and again without offering any sort of counterpoint.

 

Furthermore, stereotypes become problematic if writing tends to defy stereotypes about one group without doing the same for the other. This is where gender ratios in media can be problematic. So many stories (including BIONICLE, Hero Factory, and, until recently, Ninjago) feature a heroic team of boys with just one "team girl". The boys on the team will have diverse personalities, while the girl will tend to fit into one or two archetypes, without much room to explore female diversity.

 

This leaves female fans with fewer female characters to relate to. And while society is progressing to the point that people are comfortable identifying with a character of the opposite gender, it's simply not fair that girls should so often be forced to do so if they want a character who really reflects their personality, while boys have a wide range of male characters to choose between.

 

Obviously I agree with you that certain stories could not be told with female characters in equivalent roles. After all, if you want to write a story about a society or a part of society where one gender is absolutely rejected (for instance, Disney's Mulan), then having equal male and female representation in equivalent roles could completely undercut the story's themes and messages.

 

At the same time, as long as male and female characters are unevenly represented in media, it is important that storytellers not use these justifications as an excuse not to bother with creating diverse female characters. That starts to cut close to old-school gender prejudices in other fields, like business (for which women were long considered unfit due to stereotypes about them being unassertive, fickle, and prone to mood swings).

 

And you shouldn't fabricate a justification where it is not supported by real life. BIONICLE is a good example. Yes, gender ratios in the BIONICLE universe were incredibly skewed, but the official story's reasons for this were perfectly arbitrary from a real-world perspective. There's no storytelling reason that elements like Air and Ice couldn't be female, or why genders had to be tied to elements at all. It was purely a matter of toy sales: it was well-known that action figures of female characters didn't tend to sell as well as action figures of male characters, so fewer female characters were introduced. I would say this was an understandable marketing decision, but a very poor storytelling decision, since there was no need to create flimsy rules to justify imbalanced gender ratios when it could have just represented the genders unevenly (like in the Glatorian, Ninjago, Chima, or Hero Factory sets) without imposing rigid restrictions that would affect future official characters and fan-created characters alike.

 

Just because you can come up with a story where an overwhelmingly male cast is justified doesn't mean you should when there are so many other kinds of stories to choose from.

  • Upvote 7
Link to comment

I don't really want to get drawn into this argument, but while both sides make good points, I will mention that I tend to agree with fisher's points on the matter more so far.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment

The "stack of illogic" here is the idea that in a society with a near 1:1 ratio of men to women, nearly all roles of power, be it political, economic, religious, etc, are dominated by men, and that this unequal representation is reinforced through media outlets, and that people are actively arguing against fixing that.

 

Also, this entry just reinforces something that has driven me crazy for years now: BZPower members do not use the word "logic" correctly.

 

The other thing here, is that you have supremely missed the point. Congratulations, you are a special snowflake who isn't like the other girls. You are smarter and better and cooler and less likely to fall for media manipulation! Except, that none of that matters when it comes to the conversation being had in that topic. The conversation is about the role of women and their representation in media. Considering all the scholarly sources actually posted in there, it would be a "stack of illogic" to say that there is not a problem with the stereotypying of women in modern media, and to say that the representation of women in media is problematic.

 

There is so much more to say, but I'm so angry about this nonsense in here that I can't even put these things into words right now. Suffice to say you've missed the point entirely.

  • Upvote 11
Link to comment

I'm not like the female stereotypes, either. I'm actually a dog.

 

letmeinornah_zps7b4510ed.jpg

 

 

Actually, I was amused by your stereotype breakdown and wanted to fill it out for myself. :)

 

 

Stereotype: "Girls don't like Lego."
Me: *was really into Bionicle but kind of appreciates LEGO from the side nowadays* *mostly buys Friends and Mixels sets because I'm poor and they're cute* *also wanted more girls in the Lego Movie*
Stereotype: "Girls like fashion."
Me: *loves clothes* *is becoming a lolita so as to wear frilly poofy dresses with bows*
Stereotype: "Girls like animals, especially horses."
Me: *desires kittens you have no idea*
Stereotype: "Girls are less likely to enjoy courses in science and math, and rarely do they program."
Me: *hated math in school, enjoyed science, did some programming in college but eh* *wasn't for me* *loves programming games tho* *but is an amateur*
Stereotype: "Girls are soft."
Me: *doesn't have to wear lotion* *ever* *also I just shaved* *feel my legs* *so smooth* *blue belt in taekwondo tho*
Stereotype: "Girls like jewelry and painting their nails, etc."
Me: *me too omg*
Stereotype: "Girls can't use logic."

Me: *spills your fruit* *excellent comeback* *10/10*

  • Upvote 10
Link to comment

@DeeVee: I am sorry to have offended you. :(

The "stack of illogic" here is the idea that in a society with a near 1:1 ratio of men to women, nearly all roles of power, be it political, economic, religious, etc, are dominated by men, and that this unequal representation is reinforced through media outlets, and that people are actively arguing against fixing that.

Arguing against fixing that is very bad, yes. I agree with you.

Also, this entry just reinforces something that has driven me crazy for years now: BZPower members do not use the word "logic" correctly.

How did I use the word "logic" incorrectly?

log·ic [loj-ik] Show IPA
noun
1.
the science that investigates the principles governing correct or reliable inference.
2.
a particular method of reasoning or argumentation: We were unable to follow his logic.
3.
the system or principles of reasoning applicable to any branch of knowledge or study.
4.
reason or sound judgment, as in utterances or actions: There wasn't much logic in her move.
5.
convincing forcefulness; inexorable truth or persuasiveness: the irresistible logic of the facts.

In this case, I think I was using definition #3, and applying it to this branch of study or thought, but I could be wrong.

Also illogic is not a word - I use the term to mean "reasoning glitches" or "not thinking things though" (i.e. something that makes no sense).

The other thing here, is that you have supremely missed the point. Congratulations, you are a special snowflake who isn't like the other girls. You are smarter and better and cooler and less likely to fall for media manipulation! Except, that none of that matters when it comes to the conversation being had in that topic. The conversation is about the role of women and their representation in media. Considering all the scholarly sources actually posted in there, it would be a "stack of illogic" to say that there is not a problem with the stereotypying of women in modern media, and to say that the representation of women in media is problematic.

I agree with you here. Look, the stereotyping of women in media is an out-and-out lie. It's an illusion riddled with misconceptionitis.

 

But women aren't helpless people that believe every lie that's shoved in their faces. If I were addressing an audience of women right now, I could make a nice moral speech telling women to "rise above" all the media stereotypes and embrace what they really want...but I'm addressing an audience of guys, and such language strikes me as silly anyway. People can learn to resist these sorts of things. That doesn't mean that the problem shouldn't be solved. It's legitimate.

 

But this world is full of illusions and misconceptions and problems and things that aren't right (like this, which is a lie told to women and a legitimate problem because people believe the lie). If I got mad at every lie I encountered and at all the people who believed it, I would have a highly shortened lifespan.

 

The other thing I believe is that you can't force people to do anything. You can't force writers to stop producing this lie, and you can't stop people from believing it for a little while. You can enlighten people with the truth all day, and they will still ignore you. At the end of the day, the only person you can really change is yourself (and what you write). I don't know about you, but I learned this the hard way many times. :shrugs: So no need to get worked up about it.

 

This is where the my thoughts about not freaking out come from. I'm sorry if this offends you. Right now I'm not exactly sure why you're offended, sadly - if you could make that more clear with capital letters and more exclamation points, that would be good. :(

 

* * *

 

Lastly, this is a blog. I'm trying to talk about something that is skewing my opinion and influencing my views on the topic, okay? And you may be right; the fact that it does influence my judgement may be fallacious. But it does influence my judgement, regardless of whether or not it should. It makes me think that there are less people out there who believe this media lie than is made out to be.

 

And that was the real point of this entry; to explain why I might not be the most reliable being in analyzing this debate, since some people were saying that I was in that topic. And also to clarify my position and suchnot. It was not to be condescending or offend people.

 

I hope you can understand that. :(

 

* * *

@HH: Lol @ dog. Confused with the response to "girls can't use logic." but whatever. :D

 

Also, lol @ how people are posting in the middle of the night to this entry. :P

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment

But women aren't helpless people that believe every lie that's shoved in their faces. If I were addressing an audience of women right now, I could make a nice moral speech telling women to "rise above" all the media stereotypes and embrace what they really want...but I'm addressing an audience of guys, and such language strikes me as silly anyway. People can learn to resist these sorts of things. That doesn't mean that the problem shouldn't be solved. It's legitimate.

Nobody here is every going to argue that women are helpless little creatures that believe everything they are told about themselves. But one doesn't have to look past, well, themselves, to see how media representation of women (and men) has set up stereotypes and perceptions of both of these genders that are part of the cultural zeitgeist. Again, a ton of actual scholarly sources were posted in that topic, but you must have ignored them to be making the point you are making now. No matter how smart an individual is, society and culture are made of conglomerates and social movements made up of a social, shared consciousness.

 

The conversation at hand has never been "are these stereotypes legitimate," because of course they're not.

 

We all know that, because we are on here having this conversation. I know that the idea that all women are passive or submissive is garbage, because I only have to look two feet to my left and ask Maddison something and she will definitely refute that. Stereotypes are obviously not applicable to indviduals very frequently, and even when someone falls into a stereotypical interest group in one way, they fall out of it in another, as evidenced by Becca's post above.

 

As Bryan said even further up, the problem here is that you are consistently seen to argue against the idea of greater inclusion in media, and it seems you reach deeper and deeper into the depths to come up with reasons why. You make decent points, but then you take those points to false conclusions. You're right, we can't force writers to stop producing these works that perpetuate false perceptions, roles, and representations of women, but we can and we should change the world around them so these works are the outliers and the ones viewed as weird and uncomfortable. And we do that by spreading education and by demanding the status quo change, and we do so by applauding, visibly, publicly, purposefully, the moments when big companies, big media moments, big characters, challenge that status quo themselves. Because if they can see that, yes, there is a market for this, that having a movie full of strong, smart, independent women who don't define themselves based on their relationship with a man, that this won't tank their profits, that this gives them a positive public perception, they will continue to move that direction.

 

Yet here you are saying that striving for that is "a stack of illogic" which is both disgustingly dismissive and is, itself, a "stack of illogic". The world is set at an almost exact 1:1 ratio of men to women (with women globally having a slightly stronger lead currently), yet, again, men make up the majority of all power roles in the world. This is your world. Your entire post internalizes so much of that stuff it is ridiculous. All your "I'm not like the girl stereotypes" things are an attempt to prove yourself not a part of the "stereotyped girls" set-up by showing how much better you fit into traditionally male-dominated aspects of society. There's nothing wrong with those ideas or interests at all, whether male or female or intersexed or trans or whichever, but it reads like "I don't have these problems because I don't subscribe to femininity at all, and women who do are the problem" and there's some straight-up misogyny in there.

 

This is your world. You are a woman who, at some point in time, is going to run into these problems in your life. People are going to assume you are weaker, dumber, more passive, etc, at some point in time. It will happen. And what we are trying to say is that not only should it not, but that part of making sure that this changes, that we can say to future generations that this is a thing of the past, is to increase visible recognition of women in power roles on media, because media is propaganda, because it does define the shared cultural consciousness, and by influencing that, we can change this.

 

I debated going through and adding some more caps and exclamation marks, but I felt the point was made without them, just as it was the first time.

  • Upvote 11
Link to comment

 

 

But women aren't helpless people that believe every lie that's shoved in their faces.

 

But we do believe so many lies fed to us. It doesn't make us helpless. Countless women, men, and other people believe the drivel that the media and other sources lay before us and ingrain in us. A lot of sources don't even realize the harm they're doing. Men come to expect things from women. Other women expect things from women. People shame women for not being some sort of norm. You know this; I can tell from this blog entry because you fight to be who you are. The struggle you have is real. Women damage their bodies and their lives trying to lose weight. Girls of color in our culture believe they are not beautiful because they are not white. They try to straighten their naturally curly hair. Women try to wear clothes that make them unhappy. They are shamed into speaking quieter and not laughing as loudly. They are told to "be like this so guys will like you". And it's good that you fight that. It's good that you decided to be yourself. But this doesn't mean all other women are going to do this. Too many of them don't even realize what is happening, and that's why we're having this problem.

 

I've known so many girls and women who try to be what we are told to be, verbally and by implication. Shave your legs because you have to. Cover that face with makeup. Be cute. Be dainty. Be submissive. Be feminine. No man will want you if you don't. No one will respect you if you don't. I starved myself. I picked at my face until it bled trying to get rid of acne. I'm in therapy because I have anxiety and depression resulting from expectations that I should be a certain way "because I'm a woman". I'm not alone. I'm nowhere near being alone. Countless women have hurt themselves, hurt each other, been killed, settled for less, been denied privileges given to others, and ended their own lives over this stuff.

 

But at the same time, there's an overwhelming voice that tells us something else. You shouldn't shave. You shouldn't wear makeup. Don't be cutesy. Be outgoing. Be a STRONG WOMAN who likes fighting and guns and "manly" stuff. Don't be what we told you to be, and you'll be praised as "not like other girls". This compliments some women by shaming the lifestyles and preferences of others. This is also very, very wrong.

 

I copied this from something I can't share as a whole:

 

 

Does your brand of feminism remove barriers for women, or simply move them around? Does is expand options for women, or does it just shift them? You don’t liberate women by forcing them to choose option B instead of option A. What is comfortable for you might not be comfortable for someone else, and it’s entirely possible that what you see as oppressive, other women find comfortable or even downright liberating.

 

 

The point isn't that we shouldn't do certain things because they're a stereotype. The point is that you need to be who you are and don't shame other people for being who they are. People in our culture seem very concerned with telling women what they can and can't be. That's the problem here. And like Pat said, we're gonna come across this stuff in our lives no matter what. We can be all they tell us, and they say we're trying to hard and we're mindless conformist bimbos. We can completely ignore it, and we get ignored or told to "freshen up", "smile", "reinvent our wardrobe", "don't speak up for ourselves". We can do our own thing, and we still get fussed at for "being or not being a certain way".

 

Now, I'll get to why I'm saying all this on this entry. I don't like speaking up on things like this because I get nervous and have trouble expressing myself, especially on BZPower. Guys on BZPower have tried to shame and argue with me too many times, and also done the same to many other girls. But unless they're trans and lived through these struggles, they don't have that firsthand experience. They may accept what we tell them happens. Some of them see all this garbage at work in the world. They want to help. That's why DV and Makaru speak up. I always appreciate what they have to say. They've learned from women around them, such as myself, Nukaya, and Tufi Piyufi.

 

You say you're speaking to an audience of guys, but to be honest, several women are reading this blog entry. They read the topic about more female characters in the next Lego movie. They love the idea of more women being represented. I know this because they're my friends. But why don't they speak up? I wonder if it's because of the backlash we've received, both here and in other faucets of our lives?

 

In the end, yeah, the only one you can control is you. You have to go into this stuff being willing to let go and know that you're not going to change the entire world by yourself and in one go. But I'm not going to give up or fall into "all or nothing" thinking. I haven't changed the minds of plenty of people. But I have friends now who have watched me and what I say and support, and they understood and now stand beside me. Some of them are content creators who are writing excellent balances of men, women, and non-binaries in their works. Would that have happened if I hadn't been fighting and speaking out on my blog and other internet spaces where they could see? I'm not sure.

 

Other, greater content creators have seen this huge outcry for equal representation. That's part of why we have the Lego Movie creators so ready to include more women in the first place. We shouldn't get angry over every single lie told to us, no. But I think getting fired up over feminism is a really excellent cause. Why? Hey, I've got another quote.

 

 

 

"Collective movements for social justice do not gain traction through niceness. American women did not gain the right to vote by skipping down Pennsylvania Avenue while whistling cute songs about suffrage: they picketed, they marched, they yelled, they were arrested. Abusive partners and [sensitive content removed] will not be stopped by women having heart-to-hearts with their violators over coffee, because ghosts cannot talk and broken fingers cannot lift a latte. The patriarchy cannot be shattered by good vibes. In order to bring about change, old and oppressive structures must be destroyed. Destruction is not negative if what will grow from the rubble is something that will create a safer, healthier, stronger society."

 

We don't have to explode or lose our minds. I mean, in this entire post I'm not upset or angry. But as a woman, I want to speak up. My voice is important here because it's about the representation of women, the lack of which has discouraged and hurt me inside. I am passionate about my cause and ready to educate anyone willing to listen to me. And if people don't, okay. But I'll still speak out. I'll still speak up for equal rights and representation and a proper treatment of all women.

 

 

We need to see more varied women in our media because it reinforces that we all exist outside the stereotypes and we're more than what people say we should be. There are just as many women in this world as men (I hear that it's more women than men actually but I'm not sure atm.) So why are there way more men in so many movies and comics and games? And why is this so when women and girls are close to half of the consumers of said media?

 

 

If we can have something as "nonsensical" as a giant floating cloud city or mecha cyborg pirate with a live shark on his arm in a movie, then we can have something as "nonsensical" as more female characters, too.

  • Upvote 16
Link to comment

Also, lol @ how people are posting in the middle of the night to this entry. :P

 

It's the middle of the day for me. Haha. :P

 

-Rez

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment

@DeeVee:

Again, a ton of actual scholarly sources were posted in that topic, but you must have ignored them to be making the point you are making now.

I at least skim-read the articles in question, and I did address those points - in a PM to the person who cited them, because B6 kindly asked that the discussion be removed from the topic. The first was about a theory of hedgemony, the second was about relevant stats that showed there are less girls in stories.

I did take them with grains of salt though. The first was talking about a theory that media elites communicate ideas to the masses and thereby control them. It also talked about alternative media that provides a counterpoint. But eventually the alternative media becomes mainstream - unless the public at large has an opposition to it that doesn't erode.

Unless it's actually true. The public at large has an opposition to truth. Otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation either, since if the public welcomed truth, they would rail against all these lies and the writers who produce them would be out on the street already.

The second article talked about statistics of women in films in 2008. I don't need stats to tell me that women get misrepresented in film and on TV. This doesn't account for other mediums, such as books and music, which sometimes portray women in a realistic light. Again, that doesn't mean that this isn't a problem. I do acknowledge that it might apply to the discussion in the topic, because it was talking about a film. But one realistically represented film isn't going to change those stats. Hollywood will still produce junk. One outlier doesn't change the status quo.

As Bryan said even further up, the problem here is that you are consistently seen to argue against the idea of greater inclusion in media, and it seems you reach deeper and deeper into the depths to come up with reasons why.

My point in that topic was the ratio of male-female characters is a subordinate point to integrity and needs of the story you're writing.

The ratio of the characters is actually an independent point to representation.

Consider:

Story 1: One girl, who is a genius creative problem-solver, becomes a private detective and hires five guys to assist her. She keeps all five of them at arm's length and solves several important mysteries that have an impact on the world around her.

Story 2: Five girls who are "society conforming" vie for one guy's attention at a party.

Which story portrays women in a better light?

But I move beyond the realm of hypothetical: Consider the Mentalist, for example. The ratio is 3:2 guy/girl ratio for the main cast, but all of the women in the story are portrayed realistically. Don't confuse ratio for representation.

This is your world.

Oh please. I don't own the world, and I certainly don't control it. The odds of me obtaining world-altering power...aren't that high. Realistically, though, I'm going to die, and all the control I get, if I do get it, will end. I'm just passing through.

You agree that we can't change the writers, but you think we can change the world? The world is harder to change than a few writer's minds. People aren't going to change for certain just because of this post on a blog or a few more girls in a brickfilm. There's a chance (possibility) that a few people might think a little different, but that's it. You're exaggerating your own impact to change things.

Your entire post internalizes so much of that stuff it is ridiculous. All your "I'm not like the girl stereotypes" things are an attempt to prove yourself not a part of the "stereotyped girls" set-up by showing how much better you fit into traditionally male-dominated aspects of society.

NO. no no. This was what I was afraid of. I didn't mean that at all. I was trying to explain why I sometimes have trouble understanding these discussions. I even explained near the end that being so different has its disadvantages. There's nothing wrong with any of the "stereotypes" I listed or people who follow them. I'm really no better than anybody else, and my uniqueness is not something to look down on other people because of.

It's just how I am. :shrugs: It has its assets and liabilities, like any other aspect of myself.

You are a woman who, at some point in time, is going to run into these problems in your life. People are going to assume you are weaker, dumber, more passive, etc, at some point in time.

It has already happened. I usually prove them wrong or shrug it off or both. What they think doesn't change what I can do.

And what we are trying to say is that not only should it not, but that part of making sure that this changes, that we can say to future generations that this is a thing of the past, is to increase visible recognition of women in power roles on media, because media is propaganda, because it does define the shared cultural consciousness, and by influencing that, we can change this.

Micronic influence that doesn't warrant all this fuss, but whatever.

@HH: I'm not going to repeat myself again, as you and DV's points overlap a bit, but I'll address a few things.

I've known so many girls and women who try to be what we are told to be, verbally and by implication. Shave your legs because you have to. Cover that face with makeup. Be cute. Be dainty. Be submissive. Be feminine. No man will want you if you don't. No one will respect you if you don't. I starved myself. I picked at my face until it bled trying to get rid of acne. I'm in therapy because I have anxiety and depression resulting from expectations that I should be a certain way "because I'm a woman". I'm not alone. I'm nowhere near being alone. Countless women have hurt themselves, hurt each other, been killed, settled for less, been denied privileges given to others, and ended their own lives over this stuff.

But at the same time, there's an overwhelming voice that tells us something else. You shouldn't shave. You shouldn't wear makeup. Don't be cutesy. Be outgoing. Be a STRONG WOMAN who likes fighting and guns and "manly" stuff. Don't be what we told you to be, and you'll be praised as "not like other girls". This compliments some women by shaming the lifestyles and preferences of others. This is also very, very wrong.

There is lies on both sides of this argument, yes. I just haven't addressed the other side of the argument because it gets into stuff that breaks the rules here. At least, I'd have to lean on that to make a good argument.

Also it's way off topic.

I copied this from something I can't share as a whole:

Does your brand of feminism remove barriers for women, or simply move them around? Does is expand options for women, or does it just shift them? You don’t liberate women by forcing them to choose option B instead of option A. What is comfortable for you might not be comfortable for someone else, and it’s entirely possible that what you see as oppressive, other women find comfortable or even downright liberating.

 

Indeed. Boingy. I would like a society where everyone is free to embrace their true preferences and make choices based on that.

Or just the truth in general. :)

The point isn't that we shouldn't do certain things because they're a stereotype. The point is that you need to be who you are and don't shame other people for being who they are.

Agreed.

Now, I'll get to why I'm saying all this on this entry. I don't like speaking up on things like this because I get nervous and have trouble expressing myself, especially on BZPower. Guys on BZPower have tried to shame and argue with me too many times, and also done the same to many other girls.

Sorry to hear that.

Although I can't really relate, sadly. I enjoy arguing and refuse to be intimidated. :P But me =/= everyone. I get that.

You say you're speaking to an audience of guys, but to be honest, several women are reading this blog entry. They read the topic about more female characters in the next Lego movie. They love the idea of more women being represented. I know this because they're my friends. But why don't they speak up? I wonder if it's because of the backlash we've received, both here and in other faucets of our lives?

This blog isn't visible to guests. And I'm realistic - the majority of BZPower is guys, so I naturally tailor my response to that audience. I barely even think about it anymore.

But if the idea that girls are supposed to be passive is myth, girls are a lot more assertive than you make them out to be. :shrugs: It's a lie. Don't believe it. But you can only speak for yourself and I can only speak for myself. The truth is varied and probably somewhere in between.

Other, greater content creators have seen this huge outcry for equal representation. That's part of why we have the Lego Movie creators so ready to include more women in the first place.
[...]
If we can have something as "nonsensical" as a giant floating cloud city or mecha cyborg pirate with a live shark on his arm in a movie, then we can have something as "nonsensical" as more female characters, too.

Remember the end to the first film? Finn's sister is being introduced into the story as a storyteller, and she will probably introduce more female characters into the narrative. It's not nonsensical. It makes perfect sense.

All of this IMO started with some bad wording in a news article that implied that that director wanted to throw girls in for the heck of it. I don't think that's true - I think the director recognized the above and brought in the female characters accordingly. But that's just me.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment

 

 

This blog isn't visible to guests. And I'm realistic - the majority of BZPower is guys, so I naturally tailor my response to that audience. I barely even think about it anymore.

 

But if the idea that girls are supposed to be passive is myth, girls are a lot more assertive than you make them out to be. :shrugs: It's a lie. Don't believe it. But you can only speak for yourself and I can only speak for myself. The truth is varied and probably somewhere in between.

 

Just because you didn't seem to understand what I was saying there: the girls I was talking about are real live actual members I know who spoke about this elsewhere, and were too frustrated and afraid of backlash to respond to anything related to this discussion, not guests or people I figured exist. But yeah, BZP discussion is dominated by men. But there are definitely several women listening in, and I'm not just guessing at that.

 

Sure there are assertive women in this world, just as there are many passive, aggressive, and passive-aggressive ones. But assertiveness is a set of tools, not a personality type, and even women who know how to be assertive may choose to keep silent in certain situations rather than risk someone on the internet being horrid to them or getting in to an argument with someone who just wants to shut them down. This is incredibly common around the internet and in our society as a whole, and sadly has tended to create a lot of passive women who'd rather not speak up.

 

 

 

Remember the end to the first film? Finn's sister is being introduced into the story as a storyteller, and she will probably introduce more female characters into the narrative. It's not nonsensical. It makes perfect sense.

I used the "nonsensical" bit (notice the quotations I used up there) due to some people in the discussion saying that it wouldn't "make sense" to have a larger amount of women in certain media, which is funny because so much of the Lego movie didn't technically "make sense" in the first place, in a real world sort of way. That argument just baffles me to no end.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment

My point in that topic was the ratio of male-female characters is a subordinate point to integrity and needs of the story you're writing.

 

The ratio of the characters is actually an independent point to representation.

 

Consider:

 

Story 1: One girl, who is a genius creative problem-solver, becomes a private detective and hires five guys to assist her. She keeps all five of them at arm's length and solves several important mysteries that have an impact on the world around her.

 

Story 2: Five girls who are "society conforming" vie for one guy's attention at a party.

 

Which story portrays women in a better light?

 

But I move beyond the realm of hypothetical: Consider the Mentalist, for example. The ratio is 3:2 guy/girl ratio for the main cast, but all of the women in the story are portrayed realistically. Don't confuse ratio for representation.

The two are not as distinct as you wish they were. I am in no way saying that a story where a strong woman is outnumbered by men but wields the power of the narrative is a bad thing, but ratio is a substantial and important part of representation. Again, women actually outnumber men in the real world (though not by more than a few percentage points, the point remains). Yet you would never know that by looking at our fiction and media.

 

For the representation of women in media to be both realistic and positive, women should function in the majority of stories at an equal ratio. Whether this is "realistic" for scenarios that involve military action or political power is irrelevant- media shapes culture, and culture shapes media. If more women are not just active, but powerfully present, girls and women can see themselves represented and feel that they even belong in the conversation. You're trying to separate ratio from representation, but the two are linked and need to be. Women should be able to see themselves represented equally, even in numbers, in their media. Because that's real life, women are everywhere. (Duh)

 

Micronic influence that doesn't warrant all this fuss, but whatever.

I'm confused, are you saying that we have a "micronic influence" over media, or that media has a "micronic influence" over culture? Because while the first could be argued form certain point of views, I suppose, sociologically speaking the second idea is ridiculously absurd. Media has a massive and powerful influence on culture. It is, indeed, one of the most powerful forms of influence wielded in the world. If you think otherwise, you are at best naive and at worst deluded. Sociologically speaking, this concept is pretty well settled, which is why when companies, especially media companies, make these moves, and do so publicly and vocally, they should be publicly applauded.

 

As for the first idea- you and I both have control over media. Though it's a small influence, sure, we have one of the most important things media conglomerates crave: our time and money. If we refuse to give troublesome media influences either of those things, they change. And as media changes, culture changes, and that in turn pushes media even further, which feeds the culture, etc. We have more power than you want to admit, and your apathy is alarming.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment

The two are not as distinct as you wish they were. I am in no way saying that a story where a strong woman is outnumbered by men but wields the power of the narrative is a bad thing, but ratio is a substantial and important part of representation. Again, women actually outnumber men in the real world (though not by more than a few percentage points, the point remains). Yet you would never know that by looking at our fiction and media.

 

For the representation of women in media to be both realistic and positive, women should function in the majority of stories at an equal ratio. Whether this is "realistic" for scenarios that involve military action or political power is irrelevant- media shapes culture, and culture shapes media. If more women are not just active, but powerfully present, girls and women can see themselves represented and feel that they even belong in the conversation. You're trying to separate ratio from representation, but the two are linked and need to be. Women should be able to see themselves represented equally, even in numbers, in their media. Because that's real life, women are everywhere. (Duh)

 

I don't think ratio has to be important. Sure, there are more women in the world, but are there more women in a private detective's office? To represent that as such would be inaccurate. I think it can be agreed upon that the majority of police/detectives/etc. are men. That doesn't mean that women aren't capable of the job; in fact, there are quite a few policewomen out there. But the fact is, more men take up jobs in the police force, military, etc.

 

Again, I think that ratio equality isn't as important as you're making it out to be. I certainly agree that a movie with 5+ guys with substantial roles and only 1 woman with an insignificant role is a bad one. But I see no harm in a movie with 3:2 men to women, or 2:3 men to women, or even 4:2 men to women. It really has to do with how each person is represented and how they interact with the other characters. As Fishers said, you can have a good story with one perfectly represented, strong woman and five other men, but if you have five men and a poorly represented woman, you ruin it. In my opinion, representation has to do more with character interaction than with ratio. Just my $0.02.

 

-Rez

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment

Just because you didn't seem to understand what I was saying there: the girls I was talking about are real live actual members I know who spoke about this elsewhere, and were too frustrated and afraid of backlash to respond to anything related to this discussion, not guests or people I figured exist. But yeah, BZP discussion is dominated by men. But there are definitely several women listening in, and I'm not just guessing at that.

OK, yeah. I kind of live in an "internet vacuum" so to speak - I don't follow facebook, tumblr, etc at all. I also know that I'm not the only girl on BZP.

 

Again, I'm not saying my attitude is right just because I have it. :P I'm just trying to understand why this keeps getting a big deal made out of it. Thank you for clarifying. It really helps.

 

I used the "nonsensical" bit (notice the quotations I used up there) due to some people in the discussion saying that it wouldn't "make sense" to have a larger amount of women in certain media, which is funny because so much of the Lego movie didn't technically "make sense" in the first place, in a real world sort of way. That argument just baffles me to no end.

:shrugs: In terms of the Lego movie's genre, etc, its probably not going to hurt from having more female characters. But you also have to consider why they didn't have more female characters in the first film - there were reasons for that brought up in the topic as well. It really depends on the story you're telling.

 

To this point and DV's first point, I agree with Reznas.

 

I'm confused, are you saying that we have a "micronic influence" over media, or that media has a "micronic influence" over culture?

 

The latter.

 

As for the first idea- you and I both have control over media. Though it's a small influence, sure, we have one of the most important things media conglomerates crave: our time and money. If we refuse to give troublesome media influences either of those things, they change. And as media changes, culture changes, and that in turn pushes media even further, which feeds the culture, etc. We have more power than you want to admit, and your apathy is alarming.

I don't support this stuff at all, and it's been around since before I was born. If this lie gets killed, another, possibly more creative, one will surface in its place. It's just how this world works by my own common observation. I've already told more than a few people not to believe the lies circling around this topic, and that might help. But people will always believe lies (like this) because they want to, and that's just a fundamental aspect of the universe. You can make it so this lie is outdated and weird - maybe. Maybe not. But you will see others come up, and still more, and so on...why waste the effort?

 

As HH points out, there are people who are hurt by this lie. But that's true of any lie, no matter if it has media influence or not.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment

Hahli Husky and DV are super great and know what they're talking about much more than I do, but I might as well try and add something here.

 

I don't think ratio has to be important. Sure, there are more women in the world, but are there more women in a private detective's office? To represent that as such would be inaccurate. I think it can be agreed upon that the majority of police/detectives/etc. are men. That doesn't mean that women aren't capable of the job; in fact, there are quite a few policewomen out there. But the fact is, more men take up jobs in the police force, military, etc.

Except you don't seem to realise that the reason there aren't more women in roles such as those is because of sexism? And that there would be much more women in work like that if women were afforded the same opportunities as men? And that the unequal ratio of men to women in media is a part of this problem?

 

 

Again, I think that ratio equality isn't as important as you're making it out to be. I certainly agree that a movie with 5+ guys with substantial roles and only 1 woman with an insignificant role is a bad one. But I see no harm in a movie with 3:2 men to women, or 2:3 men to women, or even 4:2 men to women. It really has to do with how each person is represented and how they interact with the other characters. As Fishers said, you can have a good story with one perfectly represented, strong woman and five other men, but if you have five men and a poorly represented woman, you ruin it. In my opinion, representation has to do more with character interaction than with ratio. Just my $0.02.

I get where you're coming from, but I think you're again missing the issue. Sure, in a perfect world, the ratio of men to women in any particular story wouldn't be such a huge deal. But where we are, the ratio of men to women in media and stories and whatnot is constantly skewed towards the men, so it's kind of a big deal? The problem is that an unequal ratio towards the men is the norm. And it really, really shouldn't be.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment

Except you don't seem to realise that the reason there aren't more women in roles such as those is because of sexism? And that there would be much more women in work like that if women were afforded the same opportunities as men? And that the unequal ratio of men to women in media is a part of this problem?

I get where you're coming from, but I think you're again missing the issue. Sure, in a perfect world, the ratio of men to women in any particular story wouldn't be such a huge deal. But where we are, the ratio of men to women in media and stories and whatnot is constantly skewed towards the men, so it's kind of a big deal? The problem is that an unequal ratio towards the men is the norm. And it really, really shouldn't be.

 

There certainly is a lot of sexism in this world. I can definitely agree with this. But I still don't think we would see a huge increase in female police workers/militants if there wasn't any sexism. No matter how you want to approach things, men are "generally" stronger than women. This isn't always true, but men are built differently, and their interests are different. Because of this, I think that naturally, men are more capable for such jobs. I'm not saying that women aren't at all capable, I'm saying that because men are built differently than women, there are bound to be jobs that men are better at, and jobs that women are better at. It goes both ways.

 

I think you're right. Lots of movies skew the ratio towards men. But there are good movies out there that have ratios like I mentioned. LoTr/The Hobbit movies certainly had more men than women, but the movies are still rock solid, and it's understandable why there are more men. Regardless, the movies still have strong female characters. Arwen, Lady Galadriel, Tauriel... (Thank you, Roablin, for initially using this example)

 

Again, you're right. It shouldn't be this way, and I personally think it should change. But there are certain movies that are perfectly fine with ratios like 3:2, 4:2, etc. That's all I'm saying, and I think that's basically what Fishers is saying is well. I may be wrong though.

 

-Rez

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment

Again, you're right. It shouldn't be this way, and I personally think it should change. But there are certain movies that are perfectly fine with ratios like 3:2, 4:2, etc. That's all I'm saying, and I think that's basically what Fishers is saying is well. I may be wrong though.

 

-Rez

Exactly. +400 mega-bonus points. Thank you. :)

 

Someone who gets it, finally! :lol: YES!

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

What exactly can these +400 mega-bonus points buy? Better yet, can I sell them? :P Got a bit of Razcal in me... (Chima references for the win, yeah?)

 

-Rez

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

I think part of the reason that society has less women in commercial jobs than men (and why by extension, the media depicts fewer of them) is because in traditional families, the woman will raise the children while the father earns the bread. This seems obvious to me, but some of you seem to dislike this reality. What is so wrong with this? Why should our society place a greater importance and emphasis on working in the field than on raising the next generation?

 

I hope no one minds more references to Tolkien, but I feel that he really illustrates my points. The men are the warriors in LotR, but does that lower the importance of women? I think not, because they are the ones that raise the next generation. The men are essentially sacrificing themselves for a greater cause: the continuation of their race. And the women are an integral part of that cause.

 

And of course, we see that women can excel in positions that men traditionally fill, such as when Eowyn kills the Witch King. However, I think it is clear that Eowyn is not more important than any other woman just because she can fight. Because she had no children, she was completely free in choosing her path, but the fact that she chose a nontraditional role does not make her "better" than the other women who stayed behind, it just means that she will be mentioned in history books. And that is the way of life.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment

Roablin, I have to take your first paragraph piece by piece, because it is a doozy.

 

I think part of the reason that society has less women in commercial jobs than men (and why by extension, the media depicts fewer of them) is because in traditional families, the woman will raise the children while the father earns the bread.

This is very much true. This is something that would be great if changed, because society is slowly moving away from that mentality. Society has men taking care of children while women work. We have women working while women take care of children. We have men working while men take care of children. We have single parents pulling dual-roles. Society is also slowly getting used to the idea that not everything is pivotal around the nuclear family. You don't have to have kids. It's not the most important thing in the world. Where your day-to-day life isn't centered around what you are doing to raise a child.

 

This seems obvious to me, but some of you seem to dislike this reality.

Correct, up to the point where you use the word reality. See above for more. We have centuries of film telling these stories. 99% of the time. We can start focusing on other stories finally.

 

What is so wrong with this? Why should our society place a greater importance and emphasis on working in the field than on raising the next generation?

Precisely. I too think it is ridiculous to make the guy the hero all the time. To have the male actors paid obscenely more than female actors. I agree that we need to work to change that ideal.

 

 

Also, more generally speaking; Literally no one is making the argument that all stories all the time need to be 1:1. No one. The argument for representation is this:

 

Write good women. Write strong women. Write vulnerable women. Write flawed women. Write evil women. Write incorruptible women. Just write more women.

  • Upvote 10
Link to comment

Guest
This blog entry is now closed to further comments.
×
×
  • Create New...