Thread Closed
(12-23-2014, 03:28 AM)hauntmedoitagai Wrote: All I got out of this is that you care more for appearance than you do personality and actions. That's fine and all, but please don't speak for others on the subject; itt's condescending at best. The bottom line is that a character can be both feminine and tough. One need not resort to an androgynous stereotype dripping with tokenism to make the point.
(and for the record, both of those portrayals paint the picture of someone that's strong and competent, irregardless of aesthetics so *shrug*)
I think it is a bit assumptive to say that I care more for appearance than actions. If anything, I am trying to say that one's appearance often showcases aspects of a person's identity. We can't affect the traits we are born with but we can choose our appearance to a degree that matches our own personality.
In real life, you can tell that I am shy because I often hide behind my hair or look down. There is a lot more to me than just that but people can see parts of my personality leak into my appearance.
Female characters that are both feminine and tough are not anywhere near extinction. You'd be hard-pressed to find an action heroine who doesn't also look pretty. I bet it would be a lot harder to find a big boned, square jawed woman who loves dresses and shoes (and is actually portrayed as sympathetic than as just straight comedy relief).
Usually you can tell if a character is sporty and athletic, bookish and shy, confident and happy, bubbly and cheerful, beautiful and elegant, lazy and sloppy, strong and muscular, fierce and intimidating, or quiet and depressed by how they look. However, that isn't a necessity nor should it be. There can be a lot of fun in characters that are ironic or unexpecting. Looks can be deceiving, as you have noted, and that can be quite a lot of fun.
But wouldn't it be sad if we only were able to rely hundred percent on how the character is portrayed? I think the original poster that you were responding to was simply pointing out that, possibly in general across all fiction, that she would like more female characters that didn't look dainty.
I don't think anyone has ever said that a female character that looks dainty can't also be secretly badass. (Or maybe even not so secretly badass!) Just that it would be nice to see more badass females that weren't dainty. If you use the same or similar kind appearance for all personality types and characters then you really aren't exploring the complete spectrum of possible identities.
How does this all tie into Au Ra? Variety, and whether or not you feel the Au Ra are providing FFXIV with more variety or just more of the same.