Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Fniff]

Perhaps it would be better to think of weakness as flaws. An overly flawed protagonist is of no use to anyone, and one completely lacking in them is a Mary Sue.

[Neonivek]

Perhaps it would be better to think of weakness as flaws. An overly flawed protagonist is of no use to anyone, and one completely lacking in them is a Mary Sue.

An overly flawed protagonist tends to be an anti-hero. While one completely lacking them is often inspirational.

Flaws are not good or bad and the balance of depends on the situation.

Other M for example presented a very flawed Samus, but at face value little they did was wrong. The problem is that their execution which instead of justifying or showing us her character progression to those moments of weakness, or highlighting why she would chose her actions... The game instead just forces the issue.

That is why Other M is not only sexist but also terrible by any merit even if Samus was played by Shamus.

One major reason why "Female character weakness" tends to be looked down upon so heavily, is because they are often done at reduction of whatever role they were playing. It often turns into be "She is a warrior who has laid waste to thousands of monster... but she is still a woman and wants to be loved, someone help her small and quivering heart!" (Not that a female character's major flaw is that she has no avenue to explore her femininity lacks merits... It is just that most of the time it feels more like it is just done to force our female character to be helpless... rather then them informing us that femininity is something our female character had to sacrifice)

[Rolepgeek]

A protagonist completely lacking in flaws is a. Really fucking difficult because your idea of a flaw and my idea of a flaw will always be different and b. unrealistic and breaks my suspension lf disbelief.

Also, if her significant other was being abusive, how is it a loving relationship?

[Neonivek]

A protagonist completely lacking in flaws is a. Really fucking difficult because your idea of a flaw and my idea of a flaw will always be different and b. unrealistic and breaks my suspension lf disbelief.

Also, if her significant other was being abusive, how is it a loving relationship?

Her husband was possessed, but she doesn't know at first. The game seems to imply that before this they had a very close and loving relationship.

A certain part of me really respects her for sticking it out and another part of me was almost screaming at her to get out of the house!

---

Also another aspect is that a "Flaw" depends on the story.

Someone being honest in a setting where you need to be conniving... is a weakness.

As well a weakness can also be a strength (and I don't mean flipping a weakness so it is now a strength)

Ohh Liars game, I love you.

[Fniff]

I suppose strength works the same way. Not many people realize that in one context something is quick-witted, and in the other context it's jumping to conclusions.

[Vector]

That doesn't matter either. Weakness can be very engaging especially with horror, which is often about making the protagonists feel completely trapped.

My example of a weak female character being intriguing? Adrian from Phantasmagoria. The fact that she is clearly weak is used to heighten the sense of horror, yet those weaknesses only accentuates her wit, intelligence, and sheer willpower when she needs to find alternate solutions to a puzzle other then punching it down. As well her personal fault is her refusal to leave the house out of love (though that can also be seen as a virtue) even when her SO becomes increasingly abusive.

Weakness, explored weakness, is not a problem... even if it is for "typically woman" things. The issue is if it is undue.

Adrian's weakness comes from her being an unathletic writer and being in a loving relationship and unable to let go of it.

I said "pornography of weakness" for a reason.

[Neonivek]

Well even without putting it to its extremes. You can easily get settings where strengths are weaknesses.

An Strong Independent person can be a weak character in a setting where co-operation has genuine power.

Take any "Unbeliever" in a show and often what you really see is a strong character who doesn't buckle to pressure just because everyone thinks one way. It is a weakness in that setting because we know the heroes are right already. Yet if we were in another setting, their firm disbelief in lets say... ghosts... might be an outright strength.

For example there was a DC character who's major thing was that in his story the villains would pretend to be ghosts, aliens, and magicians and no matter how convincing the illusion he would outright refuse to believe it. This was virtuous within respect of the story. When he got folded into the DCU that very same strength made him a buffoon with him refusing that Superman is an alien and that magic doesn't exist...

I said "pornography of weakness" for a reason

My issue is that "Pornography of weakness" only so much means that it is a exploitation of a character's weakness. (Which has been done. Emporer's New Grove just dragged Kuzco through the mud because he is a total jerk with few redeeming qualities)

Yet that doesn't seem like a problem either.

Unless by pornography you are adding things like "badly done" to it.

[Vector]

My issue is that "Pornography of weakness" only so much means that it is a exploitation of a character's weakness.

I've literally seen folks saying "The only reason why anyone watches Buffy is because it gets their dick hard to see her beaten up, vulnerable, and needing a man to save her." I'm talking about stuff that encourages that point of view--that the character's weakness is something on display to be enjoyed and consumed. Since that's the standard framing for female horror characters in my experience of horror in general, I've got a problem with it.

[Neonivek]

That is fairly typical Vector from my viewpoint.

So you must mean something more specific then what I am seeing.

I am guessing you mean the turning the female character into a victim and dragging her through hell for the fiendish delight of the audience? (oddly enough this happens WAY too much in bad horror... regardless of who the protagonists are)

I never liked that in horror period.

Tomb Raider though, wasn't that. That is just how they advertised it in order to get money generating controversy (which annoys me and is an issue onto itself). At least I didn't see it.

I am trying to think of a horror game that does outright do it.

Ok I am thinking too "Protagonist"... how about that game where you are a Camera man and you can watch your anchors get torn apart and the game somewhat encourages you to let it happen (in fact it is the only way to fully explore the game is to get your Anchors get killed). It is a bad game, but for more reasons then that... but it would be a horror videogame that does that.

[nenjin]

I'd like to say that's fairly typical Neonivek obtuseness there, too.

To me, weakness for its own sake as a emotion to evoke or to give the protagonist purpose...is a movie or game where a) the SO gets kidnapped and b) there are frequent cuts to the SO in increasingly unpleasant degrees of degradation, fear, helplessness. As the protagonists story amps up, so does the amount of suffering (and the concomitant lack of affect) for the victim. When you're reaching the apex of the story, you want the audience hating the villain, rooting for the hero and feeling terrible for the victim. It's so common in media it's a formula.

An example of this in my mind in video games is like....Slaughterhouse, particularly Slaughterhouse 2 iirc, where how you get through the game affects what happens to your GF. And they don't hesitate to let you know how progressively worse her experience is getting.

[Neonivek]

It isn't that nenjin I am saying people keep writing things off as "not acceptable". I just keep saying "Context, context, context"

Your girlfriend in Slaughterhouse has no "weakness", your girlfriend is YOUR weakness. Which is the problem, to some extent. She lacks a "character".

I'd like to say that's fairly typical Neonivek obtuseness there, too.

Yeah thanks... 

[Gatleos]

I'd like to say that's fairly typical Neonivek obtuseness there, too.

I think you might have misinterpreted that first sentence in his post. The odd grammar made it a bit confusing, to be fair.

The more I hear about Anita's viewpoints, the more she sounds like the kind of "professional academic" that would rather partake in intellectual masturbation than come up with practical solutions to the problems she's "speaking out" against. Even when she does come up with a solution (the "damsel gets tired of waiting and escapes on her own" concept, which I actually liked), it ends up contradicting things she's said in the past. I'm not sure she even knows what she wants, but at least she's taken that step in the right direction.

To me, her suggestion of avoiding masculine traits in female characters is pretty regressive. The traits she lists are so broad that they can apply to anyone of either gender, but she seems to think that the only way to make female heroes is to segregate their traits entirely from the male ones. This is what frustrates me about Anita. I agree with her broad points, but the specifics just make her look uninformed. Then she receives rape threats from a bunch of idiots, forms a martyr complex and everybody looks bad.

[Neonivek]

I think you might have misinterpreted that first sentence in his post. The odd grammar made it a bit confusing, to be fair

Ohhh now Nenjin's comment makes sense. 

I was saying "That sounds fairly typical for someone's weakness to be enjoyed and consumed Vector" not "That is fairly typical Vector, always saying these things" 

(the "damsel gets tired of waiting and escapes on her own" concept, which I actually liked),

Did you like it as a solution or as a concept to a story? I am curious.

Since for me, I like it as a concept to a story. I don't accept it as a Damsel solution, since it boils down to "don't use damsels". Yet I am curious as to other people's opinions as well, perhaps there is something I am overlooking.

[Fniff]

I like it as a concept because it's something an actual human would do in the situation. Damsels are basically objects and giving them initiative is a nice spin on the whole thing. I think it was done in a short story arc by Brawl in the Family, however. Pretty well, I believe.

[Gatleos]

(the "damsel gets tired of waiting and escapes on her own" concept, which I actually liked),

Did you like it as a solution or as a concept to a story? I am curious.

Since for me, I like it as a concept to a story. I don't accept it as a Damsel solution, since it boils down to "don't use damsels".

I don't think it's a solution at all, really. I mean, I had the exact same idea for a game before I even watched that video. So did many others; it's not a super original idea. I think the ultimate solution is to not acknowledge the Damsel in Distress trope at all. Drawing attention to the subversion of that trope just makes it seem like the female protagonist is a novelty.

I do like the idea of the plot, I just wouldn't use it for the reasons I mentioned above.