She said it was sexist, she didn't say it was misogynistic.
An she didn't say that at all. Her point is that males are just as bad, but rarely get called out on it. (compared to females).
You're not getting the concept pal. :cactuar:This is why it's a false equivalence:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Sue#Criticism
She quoted one as saying "Every time I've tried to put a woman in any story I've ever written, everyone immediately says, this is a Mary Sue." Smith also pointed out that "Participants in a panel discussion in January 1990 noted with growing dismay that any female character created within the community is damned with the term Mary Sue."
Smith quotes an issue of the Star Trek fanzine Archives[9] as identifying "Mary Sue" paranoia as one of the sources for the lack of "believable, competent, and identifiable-with female characters."
Cantor interviews her sister Edith, also an amateur editor, who says she receives stories with cover letters apologizing for the tale as "a Mary Sue", even when the author admits she does not know what a "Mary Sue" is.
Gary Stu is not nearly as casually and readily applied. Not is it's effect on writers of male characters, ever been documented as inhibiting creativity. Nor has there ever been a community where any male character created is called a Gary Stu. Nor does this happen with Gary Stu: At Clippercon 1987 (a Star Trek fan convention held yearly in Baltimore, Maryland), Smith interviewed a panel of female authors who say they do not include female characters in their stories at all. She quoted one as saying "Every time I've tried to put a woman in any story I've ever written, everyone immediately says, this is a Mary Sue.
Female writers not incluing female characters in their stories at all is a highly unnatural and disturbing state of affairs, especially when done out of fear of a two word label.
If you can get on a panel, you're not likely to be a bad writer, or writing "self-indulgent special snowflake characters who always get their way" But they've been scarred regardless, such is the damaging potential of Mary Sue. Without that label, "critics" would have to admit that they don't want female characters getting involved. Or involved too much, and certainly not the star.
Does all that apply to Gary Stu? No. So "Gary Stu" is not a valid rebuttal to the idea that Mary Sue is sexist as Mary Sue often masks sexism in a way Gary Stu does not.
Does all that apply to Gary Stu? No. So "Gary Stu" is not a valid rebuttal to the idea that Mary Sue is sexist. We know "Gary Stu" exists. That's not the point.
(Gary Stu has no business being used either)
Yami Yugi (The Pharoah [Yugioh]) almost always wins (only ever lost twice and once was against the modern day version of himself). Tyson from Beyblade never lost clean in a singles battle in season 2 and 3. Kid Goku from Dragonball GT. All decent.
If it were a female in Yugi's role though the accusations of Mary Sue woud pile up extremely fast. An ancient spirit titled the queen of games who wins any game she tries to play is admired by her friends and has two dudes one liking the younger and the other the older persona. She wins every tournament she enters and wields the three gods of Egypt.
MAAAAARRRRY SSUUUUEEEEEE.
No, but it's evident that the female ones are more readily called bad. And god help her if she tries to romance the fan favourite.
"Marty" would never have come first. Understand that the amount of female power fantasy characters are VASTLY outnumbered by the male ones in published media. Thus females had a greater need to add women avatars to live the power fantasy with characters they could directly relate to, and express it through fanfics. The predictable backlash resulted in Mary Sue.
Ask yourself what is wrong with a young inexperienced writer publishing a story that makes her feel powerful. What does calling her character a non-character (Mary Sue) really accomplish beyond being upsetting? I'd say that's troll posting.
Dehumanizing the writer has no place in even semi intellectual discourse.
