Thread Closed
(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?