3 ms·

Edit: Downvotes for what? Is it really enough to select a few movie posters with more men than women on it to confirm a theory? How many thousands of movies ar

by Tichy 13y ago

Edit: Downvotes for what? Is it really enough to select a few movie posters with more men than women on it to confirm a theory? How many thousands of movies are there? Does this analysis really hold any water at all? I seem to remember movies with all kinds of female characters. So I suspect that article just picks some unfavorable movies and makes a fuss. Apart from that, there may be real world reasons for less women being "heroes", that is, putting themselves into the line of fire. The simple reason being that they don't have to.

saraid216 13y ago
> I seem to remember movies with all kinds of female characters. I'd challenge you to provide an equal number of counterexamples, then. > Downvotes for what? Your last paragraph is blatant sexism, fyi.
- Tichy 13y ago
  "provide an equal number of counterexamples, then." Equal number to what? What is the number we are looking at - did anybody even count anything here? I already mentioned several female action heroes in other comments, like Underworld, Resident Evil, Buffy, Dark Angel, Aliens, Aeon Flux, Nikita. If you only count movies that are actually worthwhile, the comparison to male hero movies is not bad (I can only compare to mostly worthwhile movies). Also some things don't make sense, as somebody pointed out, WW2 didn't have that many female soldiers, so why would you expect 50% of WW2 movies to be about female soldiers? You could go on and complain that there are too many WW2 movies, but that is hardly convincing as a feminist issue. "Your last paragraph is blatant sexism, fyi." It's not actually. Would "women have boobs" also be a controversial statement? It is very obvious that it is easier for women to reproduce than for men, and it is statistically proven. Just because you can't see it (like boobs hanging off a person) doesn't mean some difference does not exist. Men get to do the life threatening jobs because men are more expendable. Women are the limiting factor in reproduction (only about one baby can be produced every nine months per woman). It doesn't mean that women can't do life threatening jobs, just that there is a reason they usually don't have to. If it is sexist to assume that there are differences between men and women, then maybe it was sexist. Then I'd have to say I'd rather be sexist and stick to science than give up logic for ideology. Edit: I wonder what is the feminist explanation for less women doing risky jobs? The patriarchy doesn't want women to be cannon fodder because they could start believing they can be aggressive and revolt against men? Or really just the media - if more female warrior movies were being made, women would be flocking to the military by the millions?
  - saraid216 13y ago
    > Edit: I wonder what is the feminist explanation for less women doing risky jobs? The patriarchy doesn't want women to be cannon fodder because they could start believing they can be aggressive and revolt against men? Or really just the media - if more female warrior movies were being made, women would be flocking to the military by the millions? http://aidanmoher.com/blog/featured-article/2013/05/we-have-always-fought-challenging-the-women-cattle-and-slaves-narrative-by-kameron-hurley/ http://aidanmoher.com/blog/featured-article/2013/05/we-have-...
    - Tichy 13y ago
      That link isn't really relevant. It's about probabilities. Of course women can pick up a gun, or make fancy careers, or murder people, or abuse kids, or whatever else you can imagine. The likelihoods for them doing it is differrent than for men, and the reason is partially in incentives.

by Tichy 13y ago

saraid216 13y ago

> I seem to remember movies with all kinds of female characters. I'd challenge you to provide an equal number of counterexamples, then. > Downvotes for what? Your last paragraph is blatant sexism, fyi.

Tichy 13y ago
"provide an equal number of counterexamples, then." Equal number to what? What is the number we are looking at - did anybody even count anything here? I already mentioned several female action heroes in other comments, like Underworld, Resident Evil, Buffy, Dark Angel, Aliens, Aeon Flux, Nikita. If you only count movies that are actually worthwhile, the comparison to male hero movies is not bad (I can only compare to mostly worthwhile movies). Also some things don't make sense, as somebody pointed out, WW2 didn't have that many female soldiers, so why would you expect 50% of WW2 movies to be about female soldiers? You could go on and complain that there are too many WW2 movies, but that is hardly convincing as a feminist issue. "Your last paragraph is blatant sexism, fyi." It's not actually. Would "women have boobs" also be a controversial statement? It is very obvious that it is easier for women to reproduce than for men, and it is statistically proven. Just because you can't see it (like boobs hanging off a person) doesn't mean some difference does not exist. Men get to do the life threatening jobs because men are more expendable. Women are the limiting factor in reproduction (only about one baby can be produced every nine months per woman). It doesn't mean that women can't do life threatening jobs, just that there is a reason they usually don't have to. If it is sexist to assume that there are differences between men and women, then maybe it was sexist. Then I'd have to say I'd rather be sexist and stick to science than give up logic for ideology. Edit: I wonder what is the feminist explanation for less women doing risky jobs? The patriarchy doesn't want women to be cannon fodder because they could start believing they can be aggressive and revolt against men? Or really just the media - if more female warrior movies were being made, women would be flocking to the military by the millions?
- saraid216 13y ago
  > Edit: I wonder what is the feminist explanation for less women doing risky jobs? The patriarchy doesn't want women to be cannon fodder because they could start believing they can be aggressive and revolt against men? Or really just the media - if more female warrior movies were being made, women would be flocking to the military by the millions? http://aidanmoher.com/blog/featured-article/2013/05/we-have-always-fought-challenging-the-women-cattle-and-slaves-narrative-by-kameron-hurley/ http://aidanmoher.com/blog/featured-article/2013/05/we-have-...
  - Tichy 13y ago
    That link isn't really relevant. It's about probabilities. Of course women can pick up a gun, or make fancy careers, or murder people, or abuse kids, or whatever else you can imagine. The likelihoods for them doing it is differrent than for men, and the reason is partially in incentives.