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

Kellach Woods · **03-18-2015, 08:40 PM**

oh man I'd sure like to see them try to pass this over at The Mary Sue.

Bryn · **03-18-2015, 08:41 PM**

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.

Edgar · **03-18-2015, 08:44 PM**

This subject is being given more thought than it deserves, in my opinion.

allgivenover · **03-18-2015, 08:46 PM**

(03-18-2015, 08:41 PM)Bryn Wrote: But as the Tumblr post states, that's Batman.

No, Batman is a canon sue if anything, and that's debatable.

Mary Sue and Gary Stu doesn't apply to canon characters. They're a term specifically for original fanfiction characters. In fact the term isn't even supposed to apply to roleplaying game characters unless you're RPing an original character alongside canon characters.

Bryn · **03-18-2015, 08:52 PM**

(03-18-2015, 08:46 PM)allgivenover Wrote:
(03-18-2015, 08:41 PM)Bryn Wrote: But as the Tumblr post states, that's Batman.

No, Batman is a canon sue if anything, and that's debatable.

Mary Sue and Gary Stu doesn't apply to canon characters. They're a term specifically for original fanfiction characters. In fact the term isn't even supposed to apply to roleplaying game characters unless you're RPing an original character alongside canon characters.

I don't personally see any importance in the distinction, but that may because I view the Sue problem as one of narrative value and not one of Sues being awful because they're wish fulfilment.

Madda · **03-18-2015, 08:57 PM**

[Image: 88E541D4-633B-45D1-ADC3-58D67DA724EA_zpsoyi6agdt.png]

Was relevant.

Cato · **03-18-2015, 09:01 PM**

No, it isn't.Â

I feel as though a lot of people don't actually understand what sexism actually is and so they try desperately to be pseudo-intellectuals and think far too deeply on things that most normal people wouldn't bat an eyelid at.

The term 'Gary Stu' has been floating around for years if people want a male counterpart to use to prevent breaking down over the awful, awful 'patriarchy of society' or whatever else a very vocal portion of society are screaming about these days.

I really can't stress enough how irritated I am that even fictional characters are being subjected to the increasingly bizarre 'sexism' debate. It's a pretty slippery slope and serves only to stifle creativity.

Seriphyn · **03-18-2015, 09:03 PM**

(03-18-2015, 07:39 PM)Val Wrote: After reading that article, I can't help but to roll my eyes and think that people try way too hard to find things to be offended by.

/thread

Mikh'a · **03-18-2015, 09:11 PM**

(03-18-2015, 07:39 PM)Val Wrote: After reading that article, I can't help but to roll my eyes and think that people try way too hard to find things to be offended by.

Gonna beat the dead horse here and be way too late to the party but this. Like, so much this. I didn't read the full article because I felt like.... well.. Spiderman did say it best. But someone is looking for something in this article that I hope the internet doesn't give them.

Kismet · **03-18-2015, 09:31 PM**

(03-18-2015, 08:44 PM)Edgar Wrote: This subject is being given more thought than it deserves, in my opinion.

Quoted for truth and emphasis.

SicketySix · **03-18-2015, 09:39 PM**

(03-18-2015, 07:39 PM)Val Wrote: After reading that article, I can't help but to roll my eyes and think that people try way too hard to find things to be offended by.

I came here to say exactly this. Seldom do i even join into these conversations because it reminds me how whiny and sensitive society as a whole, actully is.

Zyrusticae · **03-18-2015, 09:48 PM**

(03-18-2015, 09:01 PM)Graeham Ridgefield Wrote: No, it isn't.Â

I feel as though a lot of people don't actually understand what sexism actually is and so they try desperately to be pseudo-intellectuals and think far too deeply on things that most normal people wouldn't bat an eyelid at.

The term 'Gary Stu' has been floating around for years if people want a male counterpart to use to prevent breaking down over the awful, awful 'patriarchy of society' or whatever else a very vocal portion of society are screaming about these days.

I really can't stress enough how irritated I am that even fictional characters are being subjected to the increasingly bizarre 'sexism' debate. It's a pretty slippery slope and serves only to stifle creativity.

This is part of the problem, and this whole post is really indicative of it.

I mean, the question itself is ignorant at best and only helps to serve as fuel for posts like the above where people question if sexism is even a thing because people keep bringing up trivial shit that is really not even debatably sexist. And then I have to resist the urge to go on a long, LONG tirade about all the things that definitely prove that yes, sexism is a thing and it still exists and it's still worth fighting even if there are a bunch of annoying little idiots who try to fight it in all the wrong places, but I don't even know where to start because we're beginning from a really bad position and it's already an uphill battle even without that kind of disadvantage....

But okay. Just... for the record. Of course fictional characters can be sexist and indicative of sexist tropes and creators. How is that even up for debate? It blows my friggin' mind that this is still even questioned. Grumble, grumble, mutter, mutter.

I expect better from the RP community, but clearly my standards are too damn high. And this despite the literacy rate here being far, far higher than most other corners of the Internet.

I don't even know where to begin. I just... I can't. I can't.

Sophia_Grave · **03-18-2015, 10:02 PM**

Not sure if I agree or not, but I feel like Batman is a bad example.

I mean, he started off in, what, 1940? 1950? And has been written and refined by dozens of different people in TV, comics, and cinema. I might be completely off base, but what was Kane's original concept for the character? I'm sure it wasn't as ridiculous as what we have now. And even if it were, come on; 90% of early comics were shit anyways.

Telluride · **03-18-2015, 10:09 PM**

(03-18-2015, 09:48 PM)Zyrusticae Wrote: But okay. Just... for the record. Of course fictional characters can be sexist and indicative of sexist tropes and creators. How is that even up for debate? It blows my friggin' mind that this is still even questioned. Grumble, grumble, mutter, mutter.

I expect better from the RP community, but clearly my standards are too damn high. And this despite the literacy rate here being far, far higher than most other corners of the Internet.

I don't even know where to begin. I just... I can't. I can't.

Then begin by addressing a concern.

Who gets to decide what and who is sexist, and what and whom is justified in assuming the authority to make that decision?

Maybe there are those of us in the RP community who might prefer to see some genuine willingness to debate, rather than the usual rabid finger wagging that tumblr represents, before we're willing to engage you? Maybe some of us are a LOT more experienced in this stuff than you think, and are holding back, because we already see little hints of arrogance instead of actual, valid requests for debate?

Cato · **03-18-2015, 10:19 PM**

I'm aware that sexism exists. My post wasn't contesting it's existence - I was simply outlining that some people throw the term around to the point where it's lost much of the original meaning and impact.

I don't believe that the term 'Mary Sue' is sexist. It's often joined by the term 'Gary Stu' in pretty much any serious debate regarding those sorts of character concepts.

I think it does actual victims of sexism a disservice to take something so trivial and make it into an issue when it really doesn't need to be one at all. It's a classic case of some people reading far too deeply into things.

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 2 3 4 5 … 11 Next » Jump to page:

Opinion question: Is Mary Sue Sexist?

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