Without delving into that whole thing, I do think the rationale people use is deceptive. And I also think Abby and Teela's 'controversy' mirror each other well. It isn't that people had problems with these characters foundationally.Aleks wrote: Didn't people have a problem with Abby being unlikable character? That you HAVE TO play for another 10 hours and then beat the character from the first game with your own hands? That she is "too big" for post-apocalyptic measures? Because in a "realistic game it was stupid to have such an unrealistic shape"? So it's not just "reee muscle woman threatens men"? People have other problems with this game as well...but that's another story.
It's that people saw a buffed up woman that didn't act like a sex object and immediately (IMMEDIATELY) hated it.
From that hate, they needed to reverse engineer reasons for why they hate it so much. Because even most hardcore sexists won't say things like 'I'm angry that I don't want to [email protected]#$ this female video game/cartoon character.' They'll say things about the character being 'too manly.' Or having a somehow unattractive haircut. Or being 'unrealistically buff' (in a world where the original main character, in the case of Joel, was clearly in excellent physical shape, or in a world like He-Man where -every- male character is a world champion-level bodybuilder). Sometimes they use coded language like 'butch.' Sometimes they use far less coded language like 'she looks like a lesbian.' But if you know how to untangle it, you can usually see where their problem really is.
Sometimes the reasons sound good. Sometimes they're more obviously transparent. But they, in my opinion, always seem to -start- with hating the character on sight and then having to work from there to reason it out.
If you want to go into 'what's wrong with post-apoc stuff' - the answer is almost always 'everything.' Why are they riding horses, which are very difficult to maintain and feed when they're living in a world with billions of discarded bicycles? How have all the world's nuclear power plants not melted down and literally killed off everyone that survived whatever the original apocalypse event was? Why are people only malnourished when it suits the storyline, but are otherwise in virtually peak physical health, capable of running, fighting, swimming, etc. Why are they not suffering from massive vitamin deficiencies as their bodies try to adjust to what would absolutely be a huge change in diet? Why do they create these ludicrous, goofball-looking melee weapons when we have a rather full understanding of 'how do people make weapons without modern technology' in our actual real world?Ru_1977 wrote: I mean, if we're really gonna get into what's wrong with apocalyptic movies/stories/shows, what's with all the times people happen upon a car and it starts right up, even if it's been sitting there for years? I'm fine accepting characters may know how to jumpstart, and maybe the engine is tip top, but doesn't gasoline only have a few months of shelf life? Not like it ever gets in the way of me enjoying anything but still something I think about.
None of it makes sense. Which is why it's extra obvious when people only focus on the relative 'realistic-ness' of a girl having muscles in such a setting. You know, in that case, exactly what their problem actually is.
Haha. Yeah, I've had a few of those, too. I think that's how they drag people in to their weird world of sexist/racist conspiracies. Sound totally normal for a bit and then hit 'em with the crazy.Ru_1977 wrote: I had a sneak attack where I was watching a youtube video about rumors for upcoming star wars projects that took a sudden turn into "AND THIS IS WHY THEY'RE FIRING KATHY KENNEDY AND PUTTING STAR WARS BACK ON TRACK" etc. Yeesh!
She didn't smile enough. And didn't wear her 'original costume' (i.e. didn't show enough skin). And otherwise was not presented as a character that needs men to help her. That really offends a certain group of people. If Captain Marvel was a male character and virtually nothing else in the film was changed, people would have shit themselves with how awesome he was. Make it a girl and all of a sudden it's a huge problem for reasons they can never quite articulate in a way that isn't absolutely ridiculous.Ru_1977 wrote: I also STILL don't get the issue with Captain Marvel. But whatever, at least it's not like the Joker where nuts were shooting up theaters and such.
Rambo. John Wick. Punisher. Male characters can be as tough and stoic as the writer wants and it's never a problem for that same group of fans.
Bingo.Maximoff wrote: It’s always “social justice warriors ruining everything”. Can’t have a strong female lead without “pushing an agenda”. What agenda is that? That women exist? That not everything has to be about a white straight male? Boy if Adam isn’t gay in this, he is definitely metro as all get out.
As soon as I saw teela I had Last of Us 2 “controversy” flashbacks. Why isn’t this woman character thin and pretty and weak like I like my women. A woman with muscle somehow threatens masculinity.
And I don't think they're going with a gay Adam for this. I don't think Mattel is even brave enough for that. But I do think he's ultra metro. Which is totally fitting. He's a snazzy dresser that is super nice to everyone and is so confident in who he is as a person that he even...
Also bingo.MARVEL KNIGHT 2099 wrote: Which is basically the "controversy" in a nutshell. Most people who say they don't like it probably don't even know why, they just don't like it because others say it's not good cause feminism-sjw-agenda-oscar-niner-roger-wilco.
Peak example is K from earlier. Never saw the show. Doesn't care about MOTU. But somehow has a very strong notion of exactly what the show is all about and why certain elements of it are 'bad.' Wonder where those notions came from for someone that doesn't know the property AND hasn't seen the show. Gee. Hard to suss that one out.