Jump to content

Tahu3800

Members
  • Content Count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Tahu3800

  • Rank
    Inhabitant
  • Birthday 06/29/1993

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    U.S.
  • Interests
    A lot of diffrent things

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  1. Okay, it seems to me that you're one of those people who thinks feminism is unnecessary and/or some kind of ploy. To answer your points one by one: - By all accounts, the average salary of a woman vs. a man is about 77 cents on the dollar. Many official documents are available to prove this (including items from the US Census Bureau such as this one). Your argument implies that women are, on the whole, less capable of achieving experience or credentials necessary to achieve equality in their field, which is ... I'm not even going to go into how ridiculous that is. I hope that was just a poor choice of words on your part. - Okay, so imagine that you live a block from a grocery store, and so you picked up a few bags and are carrying them home. All of the sudden, someone comes around the corner and mugs you for these groceries. You go to the police and the police, rather than going after the mugger, ask you what you were doing and wearing and they tell you how you should have avoided getting mugged in the first place. That's victim blaming. It's a normal concern for people because that is the reality for many. - So why do people vote for men? More men run for office because people doubt the mental and physical stamina of women, and yes, sexist people have just as much of a say in democratic processed as anyone else. Have you seen the news recently? - The patriarchy is not a male conspiracy. It is something that has evolved and embodies itself in gender roles and gendered products. This is a common anti-feminist argument that I see, and it's patently ridiculous. - Gendered marketing is deeply ingrained to the point that parents, whether or not they realize it, pass it on to their offspring. There is nothing inherently masculine about muscles or explosions or the color blue - heck, blue was considered a girl's color until nearly the middle of the last century. So now, companies are surveying a populace that has been conditioned to perceive certain things without genders as having genders. Boys are likely to desire "boy things" out of social conditioning - not an inherent desire to blow stuff up. - The census report you cited is one that specifically doesn't account for the aforementioned variables. Here is a study which does account for such variables: http://www.consad.com/content/reports/Gender%20Wage%20Gap%20Final%20Report.pdf It is a department of Labor report detailing why Women's career choices and not the "patriarchy" is responsible for the pay-gap. - The person being mugged should come with other people if he/she knew the areas was high in crime. People at parties "take advantage" due to intoxication and ability to get away with it. People should plan accordingly. If I walk around a high-crime area with a lot of cash and I get mugged, it is partially my fault. I put myself into that circumstance. If we're going to to ignore the choices a person made leading up to an incident, we could very easily regress to the universe being deterministic (via causality), and it being pre-determined. In every circumstance it is not the victim's fault, but people should take reasonable precautions. You wouldn't say you were at no fault if you walk into the middle of a street without checking for traffic and got hit. - That is democracy. If you don't like it promote some other form of government or work to subvert democracies. - The "Patriarchy" is a myth. Male success could be attributed to cultural factors or biological factors, but acting like it is men holding women back is absurd. If women are indeed "equal" (I'm inclined to say they are in most aspects) then they should be able to compete against it. - Marketing is based on what is profitable. I don't like it, I imagine many people do not, but that is how it is.
  2. which is why i hope that the reboot will change the gender ratios. (and also why i headcanon the gender ratios of the old storyline as 50/50) fictional characters don't have agency. they don't think independently. they were created and written about by humans. and i honestly don't know why you keep bringing up sexual reproduction/physical sex characteristics. sex and gender aren't the same thing. Sumiki basically just said all that needs to be said here, though. What I'm saying is that for this purpose, any gender referent is irrelevant. Also, once a character is created, suddenly having a character perform actions which it would not normally do, is bad writing. How is society more terrible to women than men? - The unequal pay is a myth. It takes the average salary of a woman vs a man. Not taking into account fields, experience, or credentials. If those variables are accounted for, the pay rates are statistically equal. - The feminist idea of what "victim blaming" is very different than people's normal concerns. - The reason men hold political office more frequently is because people vote for them. - I dispute the existence of the "patriarchy". You're attributing male success to a male conspiracy, I would say it is for various other reason which could be debated. - Gender marketing is based on statistical analysis of which demographics are most likely to purchase it. Not some evil ploy by the "patriarchy". They are portrayed exactly like the "male" characters. They're physically the same as the "male" characters. Why people care about a distinction without a difference is something I still don't understand. i'm pretty sure you just missed the entire point of what he said. allow me to repeat it. "physically the same" doesn't matter at all. he even set aside the depictions of female characters in-story, although those were also sub-par. the fact of the matter is, there are less than one-fifth as many female characters as male ones. that's what he meant by "token status". The point is that they are machines without differing sexes which have adopted the titles for a currently unknown reason. The fact is that the "male" and "female" Bionicle are exactly the same. They have no discernible difference between the two. What's your excuse for the Glatorian and Agori? They are capable of reproduction, and the gender ratio was outrageously skewed in that story arc no less than it had been before. The only reason that would exist is because the "females" are less valuable for reproduction than the "males" (meaning that a single female can reproduce at a rate relative to the sex inequality). Any other reason is just poor writing.
  3. yes, but if we're going to distinguish between "identical" beings by using humanlike genders, why not make the amounts of each gender equal to humans as well? if it "doesn't matter" because the genders are "the same", why do you care so much about not changing the skewed percentages? If it could be recreated I would suggest are roughly equal split, but it is established lore already. Changing it now only creates inconsistencies. As far as I'm concerned the reality (that they are non-sexual machines) is all that is relevant. What they wish to call themselves ultimately means nothing other than a referent in language. I say this because they have no sexes because they are machines that do not sexually reproduce, and there are no noticeable gender stereotypes that applies, as they act in the same manner as the "males".
  4. They are portrayed exactly like the "male" characters. They're physically the same as the "male" characters. Why people care about a distinction without a difference is something I still don't understand. i'm pretty sure you just missed the entire point of what he said. allow me to repeat it. "physically the same" doesn't matter at all. he even set aside the depictions of female characters in-story, although those were also sub-par. the fact of the matter is, there are less than one-fifth as many female characters as male ones. that's what he meant by "token status". The point is that they are machines without differing sexes which have adopted the titles for a currently unknown reason. The fact is that the "male" and "female" Bionicle are exactly the same. They have no discernible difference between the two.
  5. They are portrayed exactly like the "male" characters. They're physically the same as the "male" characters. Why people care about a distinction without a difference is something I still don't understand. The plot literally says they are bio-mechanical creations of a technologically advanced race. For all we know the sex titles may have been ignorantly adopted by the Bionicle simply because they were seeking pronouns to ease communication.
  6. I'm failing to see why this is an issue. The female characters are not shown in any derogatory manner what-so-ever. In fact, being that they are consistently shown as capable warriors, persevering and wise, I might even say that on a per-capita basis they are shown as somewhat superior to the "male" characters. They are always shown as equal in all ways to their "male" counter-parts (except in terms of population). It in no way promotes unjust treatment towards females.
  7. The Bionicle storyline is not sexist in my opinion and I'll tell you why. Before I continue, let's take note of some definitions: -------------- Male: of or denoting the sex that produces small, typically motile gametes, especially spermatozoa, with which a female may be fertilized or inseminated to produce offspring. Female: of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) that can be fertilized by male gametes. --------------- Notice the issue? In the Bionicle universe, the ability to create new Bionicle is limited to very few characters: - Mata-Nui who possesses (and is) the Mask of Life [Male] - Makuta when he creates Kraata, giving them part of his life "energy" [Male] - The Bahrag (Bohrok "Queens") who create the Krana [Females] Take note that none of these involves sexual reproduction, and those who reproduce are referred to as both male and female. In these instances, creating life is simply imbuing bio-mechanical creations with "will" or the ability to perform functions independently. No Bionicle is known to have any reproductive organs (the instance of creating life seems to be a "energy" transfer). As they do not have reproductive organs, referring to them as different sexes is an absurd proposition. There are only a few differences between the "male" & "female" characters: - Color (Blue) - Voice - Culture (Water cultures such as Ga-Koro) As the male "factions" (Fire, Earth, Stone, Ice, Air) all have color and cultural differences, this leads to the conclusion that what defines a "female Bionicle" is the voice being "feminine". It could be assumed that living in water and having specialization with holding breath has an effect on the "voice box" (or whatever creates a Bionicle's voice). Of course this could be disputed as the early Bionicle only communicated via machines noises. Meaning that this distinction has literally no meaning. So why does it exist? Primarily due to Lego's marketing campaign identifying young males as their target audience (an idea which was correct as this is the overwhelming group that bought Bionicle sets). So if you are going to claim Bionicle is "sexist" because of it's tailoring to a target audience, then you must apply this title to anything that does this (namely every business). In fact, going beyond tailoring to target audiences on the sex/gender, companies do this based on age, ethnicity, income level and nearly every other noticeable difference. This is by definition discrimination (in the original sense) Discrimination: recognition and understanding of the difference between one thing and another. Of course in the modern era, this word has taken on a new meaning: Discrimination (Common Cultural Usage): the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex. This is not Lego's intent. Lego is not trying alienate certain people, they are trying to maximize sales. Lego is a business, and as such is forced to compete with others for customers. This means doing what is both ethical and available to be done to capture target audiences for purchases. While I can sympathize with people wanting characters that better represent them, I think it is extreme to accuse a company that has brought you such a great series of such an action. It is also worth pointing out that referring to the Bionicle characters as "it" instead of pronouns kids are familiar with, makes their speech awkward. It may have been the case the Lego noticed this and decided to use common pronouns. They however would've quickly noticed that there were no females characters, so they made the Ga-Bionicle females specifically so that there are females present in the plot. Lego has taken note of their popularity of their products with female customers, and have changed their marketing practices to suit (they're not just making sets for males and females, but starting to make sets to appeal to both). The Bionicle series already has as part of its lore that the Ga-Matorans (Toa, Turaga, etc.) are female. Changing that now could cause some serious inconsistency in the established plot. Whether Lego does that, I cannot predict. It is important though to know that whether or not they keep this distinction, they use the terms incorrectly, as no physical male/female divide exist in the Bionicle lore. So is Bionicle sexist? In my opinion, No. Thank You For Reading P.S. Yes, I noticed I accidentally wrote "Seixst" instead of "Sexist"
×
×
  • Create New...