Print

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

[Bohandas]

I'd argue even with the "looks like" part and to some degree the "acts like" part. If they at least identify as a women, then I'd consider them well, a women. Regardless of they're an alien, a smurf, a pony, whatever.

You remind me of Sancho Panza.

[scriver]

But she looks and acts like a woman so it isn't complicated.

Or rather... used to... right?

Now she looks like an obnoxiously unrealistic ideal (with orange skin) and acts like an android with a sex drive.

Which, considering she's not supposed to be of the human species, would that be an acceptable thing if it were not antithesis to her original character?

Man, come on. Look at her. There's nothing alien about her. Not even a rubber forehead. She's a woman with some make-up splashed on. The backstory and fluff is irrelevant in the context of what we and the articles were criticising.

[kaijyuu]

What if it was a male looking character what acted, and identified as a woman?

You mean a trans individual?

Identifying themselves as a women or man is pretty much my only criteria. Looking like and "acting like" (stereotypes yay) make it far easier for the audience to determine their gender, however. Reduces complication, as leafsnail said.

What if the comic book defined Starfire as unisex or being "wasp woman shaped" with male reproductive parts?  Would people still have a problem with the untypical womanly figure?

How the character is presented is important. If the comic book goes out of its way to portray her with "womanly" attributes, and then claims something weird like unisex or having male parts, then it's going to confuse readers. If the reader thinks she's female and she "really" isn't, and is portraying these negative stereotypes, then there's still an issue.

You remind me of Sancho Panza.

I've never read Don Quixote so I hope that's a good thing xD

[SalmonGod]

And Seven of Nine is a woman (hey, actually a woman) with a piece of metal attached to her face.

I understand the criticism and I agree with it.  They subverted a formerly positive female role-model who did look and act completely human, despite having a fantastical non-human back story.

I'm trying to ask a related question.  Is the issue that even non-human female characters should be portrayed according to real world female standards of appearance and behavior for the risk of being a bad role model?  Or is the issue that they just ruined a good character?

[Bauglir]

Well, the issue is that Starfire isn't non-human except in name. She just has some funky contacts and a deep love for artificial tanning, for all I know. And also, is a nymphomaniac apparently. If she demonstrated some mode of thinking that's genuinely alien to human experience (really fucking hard for writers to do believably, for obvious reasons), or even if her physiology was visibly different enough that "female" wasn't the first and most obvious conclusion to be drawn from a glance at her, sure, I could see your question being a valid dichotomy.

In general, I'd say that if the female in question isn't a human female with the serial numbers filed off, sure, you're not obligated to hold to modern standards of human behavior. In fact, you probably shouldn't, because it'd undermine your efforts to come up with a unique species. But as long as your aliens or monsters or whatever are being employed as a means for exploring human cultures and philosophy without being so blunt about it (and doing it in a setting that lets you mix in a healthy dose of lasers, which is always a plus), I think that yeah, you're obligated to unless it's part of the message you're actively trying to communicate. If the aliens are an allegory for humans, then alien women are an allegory for human women.

[Andir]

Personal opinion here.  I think it's because they ruined a perfectly valid character's character and the woman bringing up the issue decided that was too much.  I mean, the original comic (from what I've seen) was still pretty provocative as far as characteristics are concerned.

Anyway, I'm stepping away from this.  It's probably something we could nitpick to death and I'm not going there... besides, I have "man things" to do tonight around the house.

[SalmonGod]

So the main issue is allegorical intention, which is the response I expected and agree with.

The other is that if a character isn't going to be treated as human in writing style, then it should be obviously differentiated in appearance.  Which I can kinda understand the thoughts behind, but still nags at me as a restriction on artistic expression.

[Virex]

The other is that if a character isn't going to be treated as human in writing style, then it should be obviously differentiated in appearance.  Which I can kinda understand the thoughts behind, but still nags at me as a restriction on artistic expression.

You can't make art without considering it's implications. If you make sexist art you can't hide behind artistic freedom and expect everyone to let you off the hook. Freedom doesn't work like that

[Bauglir]

I'd be okay with her appearance if she weren't also psychologically a human, albeit one with what would probably be considered a serious mental problem. Especially since, from the sound of it, her careless attitude toward sex is a result of childhood trauma or something (could be explored tastefully, but it really doesn't look like that's what they're going for; sounds more like "We need characters to have a fuckbuddy, so let's explain that Starfire's past has...").

Cthulhu in Starfire's body, though, I would not have problems with unless he got there by... unsavory means. Clearly alien psychology would serve to differentiate her from being an alien-but-not-really. For that matter, if artistic expression demands such a change from real-world norms, that's also fine, but I'd hesitate to invoke it here, because unless they turn her character around fast then this isn't really an expression I can endorse.

Now, there's a lot of "sounds likes" in there. I've only seen comments on the internet and the excerpts that have been posted, and since I don't plan to purchase any of the comics, I could well be wrong. Somebody more familiar with them could correct me if so.

[SalmonGod]

Except I see art as a way for people to honestly open their minds to the public.  It's a process where everyone gets to learn a little about themselves and each other through creation, presentation, and reaction.  The bad stuff is arguably even more important to put out there than the good stuff.  I can witness art from an incredibly misguided and even disgusting mind, so long as it's honest and open and presented with vulnerability rather than force.

I know that doesn't apply to the case of Starfire, which at a glance appears to be just purely misguided commercialism.  I just don't like to see emotional reactions turn into absolutes.

I also understand the problem of how misguided thoughts presented as art can reinforce like minds and otherwise influence culture in negative ways.  Finding a balance between this and the freedom necessary for art as a catalyst for growth is a really really tough issue.

[Vector]

Seriously, what this looks like is the usual "race of strange-skinned nymphomaniac female aliens."  That's close enough to the typical earth woman portrayal that I'm not happy with it.

Hmm... but yeah, this is an interesting discussion.  I am pretty curious.

[Bohandas]

Well, the issue is that Starfire isn't non-human except in name. She just has some funky contacts and a deep love for artificial tanning, for all I know. And also, is a nymphomaniac apparently.

The second point brings to mind a argument that could be made against the first point. For all we knoe she could have a cloaca or something down there, so the absolute level of her similarity to a human hasn't been established. On a less risque related note, have there been any official comics in which she has been operated on surgically, vivisected ba a mad scientist, or partially disemboweled? It is possible that her internal anatomy could be very different from a human's.

That said, I will say that I do dislike the new Starfire, and monodimensional characterizations of women in general, but that I dislike them for literary reasons*. Overly  monodimensional characters almost never make for compelling fiction, no matter what their overexpressed trait is, unless validly necessary to achieve some literary effect (and the only such necessity for monodimensionality likely to come up in a comic book is the occasional need for a monodimensional villian who's all evil, all the time, for no reason)


*Additionally, the new starfire is badly drawn. She's supposed to be an alien, but in half of the panels in the article that Vector linked to on the topic, Starfire looks more like a robot.

[Bauglir]

My response would be that with such obvious external similarities, differences we don't see don't count. She COULD secretly be a mass of tentacles that engulfs people and alters their memories to believe they had mind-blowing sex, but until that affects the narrative it doesn't affect the narrative.

Can't say I disagree with anything else in your post, though.

@SalmonGod

That's true, and I particularly agree with your last sentence. I suppose on further thought, I can agree with the general case (we're already agreed that Starfire's design doesn't fall under the genuine-desire-for-artistic-expression realm anyway) to a certain extent. It'd be art I wouldn't enjoy, and whose message I disagree with, and whose social impact I'd be wary of if it were popular, but I don't think I can argue convincingly that there is an inherent problem or anything that absolute.

[SalmonGod]

Seriously, what this looks like is the usual "race of strange-skinned nymphomaniac female aliens."  That's close enough to the typical earth woman portrayal that I'm not happy with it.

Which I understand to be total shallow bullshit excuse for objectifying fantasy.  Agreed there.

I just wonder at how far condemnation of such a thing should go, and whether people believe in setting absolute boundaries and why.

[Vector]

Nah, I don't set absolute boundaries.  I figure I know it when I see it.