RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes

Harmonixer · **03-19-2015, 02:40 PM**

(03-19-2015, 11:08 AM)Graeham Ridgefield Wrote:
(03-19-2015, 10:09 AM)Ryoko Wrote:
(03-18-2015, 08:41 PM)Bryn Wrote: Vaguely, yes. The term does describe a real phenomenon; we've all seen Mary Sues (possibly RP'd one in our younger years. Cough.), and as already pointed out, there is a male equivalent: Marty or Gary Stu. They are awful.

But as the Tumblr post states, that's Batman. And no-one bats an eyelid pun intended. In fact, he's a hugely beloved cultural icon. So I do think that accusations of Sue-ism are levelled at female characters more often, because female creations and interests are more frequently derided, attacked and seen as lesser.

For example, look at the vitriol levelled at the recent woman-centric media of Twilight and 50 Shades. It's not enough for these things to just simply be shit (they are), but hating on them becomes a kind of public performance. It's a bit like that.
Counterexample: Rhonin and Thrall from Warcraft are almost universally hated for being Mary Sues. Rhonin is a near-omnipotent time wizard and ladies man, and Thrall is Orc-Jesus, and nobody likes either of them. Meanwhile, the only genuinely overpowered female character, Jaina, mostly flies under the radar. People just dislike her because she tries to be so god damn edgy...

It's not only Jaina, either. Sylvanas is another great example for that particular setting of a character that is unfortunately given a free pass despite making very little sense and being a major example of a 'Mary Sue'.

There was a time, before I knew the lore that the concept of the Banshee Queen was super cool beans to me. I loved the Undercity and the Forsaken are a really visually appealing race, their voices were top notch and I liked quests related to them. As the years went by, I started learning more about the lore and quickly realized how fucking awful of a character Sylvanas was.

And not even in a cool way either, just how whiny and terribly put together. Then she got that new booby model and suddenly she was everyone's favorite ever!

It's no secret that WoW lore is... shaky at best. Things that are actually kind of cool are very understated and everything else is really overbearing. I think it's like that in this game too, but it's much easier for me to overlook it for some reason. Bias, I think.

In terms of the OP subject? I'm really not a fan of shit like this lately. Was it in the last few years that everyone was like 'dood, did you hear? I can be offended and someone HAS to give a shit now!' What's going to happen with future generations with the examples that are currently being set?

You can't be a victim forever. That's just a miserable existence.

Verad · **03-19-2015, 02:41 PM**

(03-19-2015, 02:24 PM)Edgar Wrote: The only thing remotely "sexist" I can identify from this thread and the tumblr post about the term Mary Sue is that Mary is a girl's name.Â

I want you all to consider this: If that's enough to warrant the title "sexist", should we be naming girls Dave and the like to avoid it?

"Hey Delial, your name is Steve now. You know, so you can be empowered and all."

Excuse me while I wait to be stabbed.

Rather, we should be naming men Jennifer.

Cirina Qalli · **03-19-2015, 02:41 PM**

If someone played a Batman-esque character in a roleplay community, I'd still consider them a Mary Sue or a Gary Stu. Doesn't matter the gender to me.

Warren Castille · **03-19-2015, 02:48 PM**

(03-19-2015, 02:41 PM)Aireiel Wrote: If someone played a Batman-esque character in a roleplay community, I'd still consider them a Mary Sue or a Gary Stu. Doesn't matter the gender to me.

That's awfully slap-dash. Can I ask you to elaborate on what's wrong with being a skilled detective?

Melkire · **03-19-2015, 02:51 PM**

(03-19-2015, 02:41 PM)Aireiel Wrote: If someone played a Batman-esque character in a roleplay community, I'd still consider them a Mary Sue or a Gary Stu. Doesn't matter the gender to me.

I'll go hide in the corner now even though my character is more like The Question.

I can understand how that's a major turn-off for some people, though. Competency in certain areas, especially hyper-competency, rarely comes off well. More often than not, it's aggravating.

Shoshopu · **03-19-2015, 03:09 PM**

(03-19-2015, 02:24 PM)Edgar Wrote: The only thing remotely "sexist" I can identify from this thread and the tumblr post about the term Mary Sue is that Mary is a girl's name.Â

I want you all to consider this: If that's enough to warrant the title "sexist", should we be naming girls Dave and the like to avoid it?

"Hey Delial, your name is Steve now. You know, so you can be empowered and all."

Excuse me while I wait to be stabbed.

Let me help you identify what people are talking about, then, since I'm pretty sure you only skimmed the essay in the OP if that's what you got out of it (because that doesn't make sense at all, at least your suggestion afterwards about naming girls after boys. Are you suggesting that girl names are inherently bad? That the author thinks girl names are inherently bad?)

The problem the author of that essay and others have is that to them it seems to them that people are far more critical of female characters, overly so, and are more likely to pin the term Mary Sue to an overpowered female character than they are to an overpowered male one, and that people are also more critical of the author's motives behind creating that female character than they would be of an author's motives behind a male character

When the author went on the tangent about the gendered names, their point was that the only time we seem to use a feminine word by default is when we're talking about bad characters. It has the implication that most bad characters are female if you aren't careful. Does that make sense?

Warren Castille · **03-19-2015, 03:15 PM**

It's a tangent, and unrelated, and off-topic, but can we please stop calling blog posts "articles?" It gives a false sense of credence to what is, in fact, someone's blog.

Shoshopu · **03-19-2015, 03:18 PM**

(03-19-2015, 03:15 PM)Warren Castille Wrote: It's a tangent, and unrelated, and off-topic, but can we please stop calling blog posts "articles?" It gives a false sense of credence to what is, in fact, someone's blog.

Eh, I just called it that because the OP did, but point taken, it's not even technically an article (unless you consider a blog on the same level as a newspaper or magazine, but I'm pretty sure the blogger doesn't so I don't)

Warren Castille · **03-19-2015, 03:20 PM**

I didn't want to be a stick in the mud over it. The term "essay" is accurate, but the sourced points are TVTropes pages. It bugs me to see that being taken seriously for criticism, especially when five seconds on Wikipedia took me to the interview with the originator herself.

I'm being a grognard about this, I am aware. Sorry.

Bryn · **03-19-2015, 03:23 PM**

I'm operating on 4 hours sleep and therefore incapable and unwilling to do anything tonight aside from slob around in my Sonic PJs and stare vacantly at moving images until bedtime, so while I'd like to answer a few very good points made in recent posts here, I'll leave it.

But I'd like to stress how bloody impressed I am that this thread still hasn't devolved into an ugly name calling fest and been locked. Go us.

Shoshopu · **03-19-2015, 03:24 PM**

(03-19-2015, 03:20 PM)Warren Castille Wrote: I didn't want to be a stick in the mud over it. The term "essay" is accurate, but the sourced points are TVTropes pages. It bugs me to see that being taken seriously for criticism, especially when five seconds on Wikipedia took me to the interview with the originator herself.

I'm being a grognard about this, I am aware. Sorry.

urf yeah the OP called it an essay, I was just remembering wrong and trying to go by what I thought Cercil was referring to it as

I apparently just have poopy short term memory

g0ne · **03-19-2015, 03:26 PM**

*drinks break time*

Come get your drinks! I brought cookies and cake as well!Â

Everyone has been doing nice, SMILE posts, so I'm going to distribute free food and drinks! Then you guys can get back at it! Smile

Erm... may I offer a drinks break, mod senpais? >///<

Edgar · **03-19-2015, 05:14 PM**

(03-19-2015, 03:09 PM)Shoshopu Wrote:
(03-19-2015, 02:24 PM)Edgar Wrote: The only thing remotely "sexist" I can identify from this thread and the tumblr post about the term Mary Sue is that Mary is a girl's name.Â

I want you all to consider this: If that's enough to warrant the title "sexist", should we be naming girls Dave and the like to avoid it?

"Hey Delial, your name is Steve now. You know, so you can be empowered and all."

Excuse me while I wait to be stabbed.

Let me help you identify what people are talking about, then, since I'm pretty sure you only skimmed the essay in the OP if that's what you got out of it (because that doesn't make sense at all, at least your suggestion afterwards about naming girls after boys. Are you suggesting that girl names are inherently bad? That the author thinks girl names are inherently bad?)

The problem the author of that essay and others have is that to them it seems to them that people are far more critical of female characters, overly so, and are more likely to pin the term Mary Sue to an overpowered female character than they are to an overpowered male one, and that people are also more critical of the author's motives behind creating that female character than they would be of an author's motives behind a male character

When the author went on the tangent about the gendered names, their point was that the only time we seem to use a feminine word by default is when we're talking about bad characters. It has the implication that most bad characters are female if you aren't careful. Does that make sense?

A lot of sense, actually, until I decide to dig into it. So here's my two cents.Â

The idea that Mary Sue insinuates some sort of hatred towards the female gender, or that female characters alone can be terrifyingly bad, is just wrong. Not long after Mary Sue was coined as a term to describe a specific character mold, and not just the name of a dumb protagonist of a poorly written fanfiction, we came up with a male analogue that meant the same. Whether you call it Gary or Marty Sue, or even John Doe, there exists a term whose mere existence completely contradicts the perceived bias towards women in the bad characters department.

These self-indulgent special snowflake characters who always get their way are universally bad whether they are male or female. We're not implying bad characters are usually, or even have to be female. If I concede anything, Mary Sue didÂ come first, but that's just because of timing, and not malicious intent. Mary Sue would still exist if Marty came first. because stupidity is not prejudiced.Â

If I'm finding anything offensive, right now, I'd say it's the Tumblr post. The question it asks seems loaded, designed to generate as much controversy and hatred as possible, and when broken down, it's quite opinionated. What does this remind me of?

Oh right. Troll-posting.

But that's just a hunch. Serious or no, this Tumblr post makes me sigh and shake my head.

Flashhelix · **03-19-2015, 05:24 PM**

(03-19-2015, 03:09 PM)Shoshopu Wrote: When the author went on the tangent about the gendered names, their point was that the only time we seem to use a feminine word by default is when we're talking about bad characters. It has the implication that most bad characters are female if you aren't careful. Does that make sense?

(03-19-2015, 03:09 PM)Shoshopu Wrote: Does that make sense?

Not at all.

Faye · **03-19-2015, 05:30 PM**

I really can't see how the term "Mary Sue" is sexist. Even if people are more given to judge female characters more harshly than male in terms on Sue-ishness (which I'm not certain is a thing that really happens on a widespread scale), it just means that the term is being overused by people with a sexist mindset and not that the term itself is sexist.

Poll: Is the term "Mary Sue" sexist? You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Yes, it is.	3.48%	4	3.48%
No, it isn't.	84.35%	97	84.35%
I'm a bit mixed.	9.57%	11	9.57%
Other, see response below,	2.61%	3	2.61%
Total		115 vote(s)	100%

« Next Oldest \| Next Newest »
Thread Closed Pages (11): « Previous 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 … 11 Next » Jump to page:

Opinion question: Is Mary Sue Sexist?

RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes