It is currently Thu Sep 18, 2014 2:57 pm



Reply to topic  [ 49 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
 Pokemon: Is it Sexist? 
Author Message
THE POWER IS ON!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:29 am
Posts: 1559
Location: Purple Ranger
I found a similar topic on Bulbagarden's forums, started by a female poster. It was highly informative. Let's look at the facts.

In the video games...

The gender ratio of Gym Leaders is almost always tilted in favor of the men. In Kanto, we originally have three women (Misty, Erika, Sabrina) and five men (Brock, Surge, Koga, Blaine, Giovanni). By GSC, the ratio has become even with the introduction of Janine, but that's only because a male character was promoted to a higher position. And another male Gym Leader was added to the ranks in the form of Blue. In Johto, we have three (Whitney, Jasmine, Clair) and five (Falkner, Bugsy, Morty, Chuck, Pryce) once again. Hoenn has four female (Roxanne, Flannery, Winona, Liza) and six male (Brawly, Wattson, Norman, Tate, Wallace, Juan). Sinnoh is the only region that started with an even four/four (despite my theory of Fantina being a post-sex op Tucker): Roark, Wake, Byron and Volkner vs. Gardenia, Maylene, Fantina and Candice.

The Elite Four and Pokemon League Champion ratio has always been male-dominated. Kanto had two women, Lorelei and Agatha, compared to three men (Bruno, Lance and Blue). Gold/Silver saw the most male-centric set of Elites ever with Karen being the only woman among a male cast of Will, Koga, Bruno and Lance. Despite Lorelei's popularity, both female Elites from generation one disappeared in the three years between RBY and GSC, yet all three males remained part of the cast in some capacity. In Hoenn, Glacia and Phoebe were the minority compared to Sidney, Drake, Wallace and Steven. Sinnoh, after four generations, finally saw Cynthia introduced as the first female champion, but the ratio was still male-centric with Bertha and Cynthia vs. Aaron, Flint and Lucian. Additionally, both "final" trainers were male: Red and Steven.

Meanwhile, it took until the third game in generation two to see the introduction of a female playable character. As of this writing, May is the only female rival in any handheld Pokemon RPG, and her starter Pokemon never even reaches its final evolution. (To be fair, the male counterpart rival's starter never does either, but Wally, who is the strongest rival in Hoenn, is not a girl.) The Frontier Brains are a four-three split in favor of the men. Many in-game female NPC trainers are stereotypically 'feminine,' as they train cute Pokemon like those from the Fairy egg group or they act ditzy and dislike Bug Pokemon like Lass.

In the anime...
Looking at the ranks of the heroes, we always have exactly one token female protagonist. So far, the female protagonist has been switched out more times than the secondary male protagonist while the primary male protagonist remains consistent. Just about the only exceptions to the male-dominated world in the Pokemon anime are villainous, or at least antagonistic, in nature; Jessie is clearly the leader of the Team Rocket trio, and the most competent villainous figure we've seen in the ten years of the anime's lifespan was a woman (J).

The first female hero character we had was Misty. She was largely a token female character: her primary purpose was to serve as a romantic foil to the male character. I'm sure as hell not a Pokeshipper, but it was clear as day that Misty had the hots for Ash. Her reason for following him halfway around the world was paper thin and laughable, so she was obviously attracted toward him. She liked stereotypically feminine things such as romance, dolls and cute things. The writers made up a crappy excuse to foist Togepi into her arms, rather than Brock the resident Pokemon breeder's, because women are generally nurturing and more caring than men. For large patches of time throughout her role as a main character, she was a merely an accessory who followed Ash around and never battled; pretty much a cheerleader in skimpier clothes or a sidekick whose mere existence pandered to shippers in the fanbase.

While May and Dawn are much closer to having equal footing with Ash, they still have never quite made it to equality. For one thing, other than May's Blaziken (who evolved from the most stereotypically cute of the Hoenn starters) and Dawn's Buizel (who inevitably got traded off to Ash's party for the much more girly Aipom), almost all of their Pokemon are cutesy. Beautifly, Skitty, Bulbasaur, Squirtle, Eevee, Piplup, Pachirisu and Buneary are all very cute Pokemon who would appeal to the typical female. May also had a Pokemon from an egg (Eevee) like Misty, a Pokemon who had a very baby-like personality (Squirtle), a Pokemon who would be considered part of the baby Pokemon pool (Munchlax) and a Pokemon who was blatantly female in design (Bulbasaur). Contests are also much more feminine in nature than Gym Battles, especially in DP where Dawn always has a pretty hairstyle and wears dresses during her appeals, because Contests promote things like appearance and style and the Coordinators collect 'Ribbons.'

Like in the games, there has only been one female Rival character so far, Zoey, and she was only introduced by region four and league six. We almost never see female trainers collecting Badges, and female competitors in the regional Pokemon Leagues have been few and far between (all of Ash's major championship rivals - Richie, Harrison and Morrison - were male). The female characters, in the anime in particular, also come with a great deal of fan service. Between Lorelei's gigantic rack, Misty's baby tee and short shorts and Candice confusing a scrap of cloth for lower body attire, there's definitely way more fanservice for male viewers than females.

In general...
It's dawned on me that almost every Pokemon type now has a token 'female' Pokemon. Even though these Pokemon might not always have 100% female gender ratios, it's impossible to ignore the obvious cuteness and girliness of their designs in comparison to most other Pokemon of their types. Normal Pokemon have Blissey, Lopunny and Miltank; Fire Pokemon have Ninetales; Grass Pokemon have Meganium, Bellossom and Cherrim; Ice Pokemon have Jynx and Froslass; even Bug Pokemon have Illumise! Nidoqueen fills the role of feminine Ground-type Pokemon, Gardevoir definitely has the Psychic-type covered, Misdreavus and Mismagius cover the Ghost-type, steel Wormadam was probably only even created to shove into this role for the Steel type, and even Medicham is noticably less muscular and 'tough' than more masculine Fighting-type counterparts (Maylene using one also doesn't help its case).

The series definitely has some sexist, narrow-minded overtones in how the characters of each gender have certain 'characteristics.' Little boy trainers like bug Pokemon; little girl trainers like cute Pokemon. Male trainers have notably 'cool' Pokemon like Gyarados. Female trainers have feminine ones like Jynx. Almost every male trainer in both the games and the anime has male Pokemon; almost every female trainer has female Pokemon. It's almost like Gamefreak and the anime writers think a trainer using a Pokemon of the opposite gender is a hideous thing; Ash's Bayleef and Aipom (and, again, Aipom eventually got shoved into Dawn's party, and Bayleef stopped showing up after the show left the Johto region) are just about the only explicit exceptions to this unwritten rule.

Additionally, female trainers are associated with the Normal type (because Normal Pokemon are cute) and the Grass type (because girls like flowers); I think Grass Pokemon have been paired with female characters in almost every major game. The Celadon Gym was 100% women; so was the Eterna Gym. Rosie from PBR was modeled after, and used, Grass Pokemon. Even in the TCG Game Boy game, the Grass Club was all women. Similarly, Bug Pokemon (because girls find bugs 'gross') and Fire Pokemon (because little boys think fire and explosions are 'cool'; not to mention that fire beats plants in general) are associated with male trainers, with almost every major Fire trainer being male (Flannery is the only exception) and the Fire Club in TCGGB being an all-boy's club.

Pokemon is definitely NOT an explicitly sexist series; indeed, the creators did make sure to include many female characters for both humans and Pokemon alike. However, reading a lot of the things I just posted, it does make you wonder if there's an implicit sexism in the series. That's not entirely impossible: Pokemon is 'targeted' for the fabled 6-12 male demographic in both Japan and in the United States, kind of like the Power Rangers franchise. However, I find this a very interesting topic because, as an American male who was part of both series' target demographic during their respective fad stages, I always found myself not gravitating toward the stereotypically 'male' bits (like using 'cool' Pokemon or liking the male leader of the Power Rangers) but instead toward the more 'girly' parts like the cute Pokemon and the female Power Rangers.

Discuss.


Tue Jun 03, 2008 2:28 pm
Profile
Pokemon Trainer
Pokemon Trainer

Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 2:52 pm
Posts: 28
Learn about gender issues before you make such claims. Thanks.

_________________
Image


Tue Jun 03, 2008 2:53 pm
Profile
THE POWER IS ON!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:29 am
Posts: 1559
Location: Purple Ranger
As enlightening as that wonderful one line response to an eleven paragraph piece was, would you care to elaborate? At all?

Quote:
sex·ist /?s?ks?st/ –adjective
1. pertaining to, involving, or fostering sexism: a sexist remark; sexist advertising.


Quote:
sex·ism /?s?ks?z?m/ –noun
1. attitudes or behavior based on traditional stereotypes of sexual roles.
2. discrimination or devaluation based on a person's sex, as in restricted job opportunities; esp., such discrimination directed against women.

1. Discrimination based on gender, especially discrimination against women.
2. Attitudes, conditions, or behaviors that promote stereotyping of social roles based on gender.

Most of my post addressed the parts in bold, based on how the female characters in the Pokemon franchise are portrayed. They promote stereotypes by being portrayed as inferior to male characters (as seen, for one example, by the fact that there just aren't as many good female trainers in-game/in-show compared male trainers). Some also promote the stereotypes that girls like cutesy things, flowers, looking pretty, romance, etc., and are portrayed as not as 'tough' as men. Others, such as Misty in the anime, exist almost entirely to serve as romantic foils or motherly figures. Thus, there are clear sexist elements here. I don't need to learn about 'gender issues' and, if you read any of my post at all before you hit the reply button with a kneejerk one-line response, you'd see that this topic was started by a woman (who happened to be a feminist) on another forum.

Thanks.


Tue Jun 03, 2008 3:19 pm
Profile
Pokemon Master
Pokemon Master
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 6:17 am
Posts: 1018
I think it's quite sexist. But in reality, more boys like it than girls. And the creators are guys too. Another reason is that the starters (and combee) have such a small chance of being male makes it seem sexist. I mean, I would think a smiling bee with three smiling faces should have more of a chance at being a girl.

I never really thought of it being sexist. But now that you mention it, it does seem pretty sexist. But as far as I know, it's more guys who like anime like Pokemon (not that girls don't like it, just that it's more boys), and girls who like other things.

_________________
Image


Tue Jun 03, 2008 3:32 pm
Profile
Pokemon Trainer
Pokemon Trainer

Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 2:52 pm
Posts: 28
Taken apart so I don't miss anything and such. Sorry.

Frost wrote:
The gender ratio of Gym Leaders is almost always tilted in favor of the men.


This is in no way inherently sexist.

Quote:
In Kanto, we originally have threewomen (Misty, Erika, Sabrina) and five men (Brock, Surge, Koga, Blaine, Giovanni). By GSC, the ratio has become even with the introduction of Janine, but that's only because a male character was promoted to a higher position. And another male Gym Leader was added to the ranks in the form of Blue. In Johto, we have three (Whitney, Jasmine, Clair) and five (Falkner, Bugsy, Morty, Chuck, Pryce) once again. Hoenn has four female (Roxanne, Flannery, Winona, Liza) and six male (Brawly, Wattson, Norman, Tate, Wallace, Juan). Sinnoh is the only region that started with an even four/four (despite my theory of Fantina being a post-sex op Tucker): Roark, Wake, Byron and Volkner vs. Gardenia, Maylene, Fantina and Candice.


Generally, males are more competitive than females (testosterone/etc). Pokemon battling would be considered a competitive activity. Just by this it can be shown that males would be favored over females, which explains the split.

In addition, the entire argument about IQ and such can be placed here since Gym Leaders are supposed to be the top of their class. Now, on average, females make up most of the top in IQ. However, the top of the top are normally males. Transfered to this situation, if only the top battler who was picked. Battling required smarts/etc. With males being in the top of the top (also being in the bottom of the bottom like Bug Trainers/etc) wouldn't it be statistically relevant to have the gym leaders show this?

Quote:
The Elite Four and Pokemon League Champion ratio has always been male-dominated.


Again, male dominated isn't inherently sexist.

Quote:
Kanto had two women, Lorelei and Agatha, compared to three men (Bruno, Lance and Blue). Gold/Silver saw the most male-centric set of Elites ever with Karen being the only woman among a male cast of Will, Koga, Bruno and Lance. Despite Lorelei's popularity, both female Elites from generation one disappeared in the three years between RBY and GSC, yet all three males remained part of the cast in some capacity. In Hoenn, Glacia and Phoebe were the minority compared to Sidney, Drake, Wallace and Steven. Sinnoh, after four generations, finally saw Cynthia introduced as the first female champion, but the ratio was still male-centric with Bertha and Cynthia vs. Aaron, Flint and Lucian. Additionally, both "final" trainers were male: Red and Steven.


In a 5 person team, of course it wouldn't be "equal" and if there was a 3 female to 2 then according to this logic, it would still be sexist. This is a case of a lose-lose situation without a way to fix it.

Again, with the first female champion, it can go back to the competitive aspect.

Quote:
Meanwhile, it took until the third game in generation two to see the introduction of a female playable character.


Because technology finally got to the level where they could handle it maybe? Don't look past the cause if it is in your face.

Quote:
As of this writing, May is the only female rival in any handheld Pokemon RPG, and her starter Pokemon never even reaches its final evolution. (To be fair, the male counterpart rival's starter never does either, but Wally, who is the strongest rival in Hoenn, is not a girl.)


Wally is also a story-based character so his gender is part of his character. Also, with both gender's pokemon not fully evolving, it would be gender neutral, not sexist.

Quote:
The Frontier Brains are a four-three split in favor of the men. Many in-game female NPC trainers are stereotypically 'feminine,' as they train cute Pokemon like those from the Fairy egg group or they act ditzy and dislike Bug Pokemon like Lass.


Many of the male NPC trainers are stereotypically masculine too. Most characters are allowed to say ~2-3 lines. Not much about characters can be deciphered about characters in that short amount of lines, so of course stereotypes will come out. However, it comes from both genders.

In regard to the fairy egg group for Lass and such, what about Bug Catchers? What about electric pokemon for the rockers? The list goes on and on. Most of the characters have to be show as stereotypes because that is all that is shown.

Quote:
Looking at the ranks of the heroes, we always have exactly one token female protagonist. So far, the female protagonist has been switched out more times than the secondary male protagonist while the primary male protagonist remains consistent.


Misty, May, Dawn
compared to
Brock, Tracey, Max

Compare?

Quote:
Just about the only exceptions to the male-dominated world in the Pokemon anime are villainous, or at least antagonistic, in nature; Jessie is clearly the leader of the Team Rocket trio, and the most competent villainous figure we've seen in the ten years of the anime's lifespan was a woman (J).


The leaders of the teams are all males.

The second part is just a hasty generalization fallacy, so it shouldn't really be addressed.

Quote:
The first female hero character we had was Misty. She was largely a token female character:


Brock was the token black if you want to argue that way. Misty isn't really a token character since she is important to the story. Plus, out of 3 characters, 1 compared to 2 doesn't really alter that much.

Quote:
her primary purpose was to serve as a romantic foil to the male character. I'm sure as hell not a Pokeshipper, but it was clear as day that Misty had the hots for Ash. Her reason for following him halfway around the world was paper thin and laughable, so she was obviously attracted toward him.


So, anything that has one character loving another is only put in there for a romantic foil? Strawman argument, I know, but still.

Quote:
She liked stereotypically feminine things such as romance, dolls and cute things.


Except for her being a tomboy, right?

Quote:
The writers made up a crappy excuse to foist Togepi into her arms, rather than Brock the resident Pokemon breeder's, because women are generally nurturing and more caring than men. For large patches of time throughout her role as a main character, she was a merely an accessory who followed Ash around and never battled; pretty much a cheerleader in skimpier clothes or a sidekick whose mere existence pandered to shippers in the fanbase.


Except she did battle. Brock shows more caring than Misty in a lot of the episodes by always making sure that everyone is fed and so on.

Misty work "skimpy" clothes because, if you look at her background, that is how she was. Pretty sure that she would change her what she was wearing on the bike day just so she could chase Ash.

Quote:
While May and Dawn are much closer to having equal footing with Ash, they still have never quite made it to equality.


Ash is the main character. Main characters are normally stronger than the supporting characters. This is common thing in most stories.

Quote:
For one thing, other than May's Blaziken (who evolved from the most stereotypically cute of the Hoenn starters)


Arguable for the cutest.

Quote:
and Dawn's Buizel (who inevitably got traded off to Ash's party for the much more girly Aipom),


This is clearly subjective.

Quote:
almost all of their Pokemon are cutesy. Beautifly, Skitty, Bulbasaur, Squirtle, Eevee, Piplup, Pachirisu and Buneary are all very cute Pokemon who would appeal to the typical female.


Maybe because the characters like those pokemon? 'Cause y'know, characters can choose what they like.

[quoteMay also had a Pokemon from an egg (Eevee) like Misty, a Pokemon who had a very baby-like personality (Squirtle), a Pokemon who would be considered part of the baby Pokemon pool (Munchlax) and a Pokemon who was blatantly female in design (Bulbasaur). Contests are also much more feminine in nature than Gym Battles, especially in DP where Dawn always has a pretty hairstyle and wears dresses during her appeals, because Contests promote things like appearance and style and the Coordinators collect 'Ribbons.'[/quote]

Ash had an egg too. Ash had a Bulbasaur too.

Contests appeal to more feminine traits. I don't see how this is wrong.

Quote:
Like in the games, there has only been one female Rival character so far, Zoey, and she was only introduced by region four and league six. We almost never see female trainers collecting Badges, and female competitors in the regional Pokemon Leagues have been few and far between (all of Ash's major championship rivals - Richie, Harrison and Morrison - were male). The female characters, in the anime in particular, also come with a great deal of fan service. Between Lorelei's gigantic rack, Misty's baby tee and short shorts and Candice confusing a scrap of cloth for lower body attire,


Males more than likely have male rivals just like females have female rivals. Also, Solidad is considered a rival by Bulbapedia, so that argument can be refuted. Oh wait, since that isn't a rival in the correct place it doesn't count, right?

Quote:
there's definitely way more fanservice for male viewers than females.


I would guess that it would be because there are more male fans than female fans. But that is just me.

In general...
It's dawned on me that almost every Pokemon type now has a token 'female' Pokemon.[/quote]

I don't think that token is the right word here since most pokemon themselves are "cute" compared to, let's say, Digimon.

Quote:
Even though these Pokemon might not always have 100% female gender ratios, it's impossible to ignore the obvious cuteness and girliness of their designs in comparison to most other Pokemon of their types. Normal Pokemon have Blissey, Lopunny and Miltank; Fire Pokemon have Ninetales; Grass Pokemon have Meganium, Bellossom and Cherrim; Ice Pokemon have Jynx and Froslass; even Bug Pokemon have Illumise! Nidoqueen fills the role of feminine Ground-type Pokemon, Gardevoir definitely has the Psychic-type covered, Misdreavus and Mismagius cover the Ghost-type, steel Wormadam was probably only even created to shove into this role for the Steel type, and even Medicham is noticably less muscular and 'tough' than more masculine Fighting-type counterparts (Maylene using one also doesn't help its case).


Compare those to "token" masculine pokemon. Most pokemon are gender neutral. Most of them that were listed aren't inherently either. Medicham, for example, clearly shows masculine traits. Wormadam is a female only pokemon, so it will obviously have female only traits. Compare it to Mothim which has more masculine traits.

Quote:
The series definitely has some sexist, narrow-minded overtones in how the characters of each gender have certain 'characteristics.' Little boy trainers like bug Pokemon; little girl trainers like cute Pokemon. Male trainers have notably 'cool' Pokemon like Gyarados. Female trainers have feminine ones like Jynx.


Most trainers have certain types that allude to their type. Stereotypes are bad and such, but using them for throw-away characters (most of the npcs) isn't automatically sexist.

Quote:
Almost every male trainer in both the games and the anime has male Pokemon; almost every female trainer has female Pokemon.


Trainers have pokemon that are the same gender as themselves. There isn't anything really wrong with this.

Quote:
It's almost like Gamefreak and the anime writers think a trainer using a Pokemon of the opposite gender is a hideous thing; Ash's Bayleef and Aipom (and, again, Aipom eventually got shoved into Dawn's party, and Bayleef stopped showing up after the show left the Johto region) are just about the only explicit exceptions to this unwritten rule.


Except for all the pokemon that aren't shown as having a gender (anime/etc). Right?

Quote:
Additionally, female trainers are associated with the Normal type (because Normal Pokemon are cute) and the Grass type (because girls like flowers); I think Grass Pokemon have been paired with female characters in almost every major game. The Celadon Gym was 100% women; so was the Eterna Gym. Rosie from PBR was modeled after, and used, Grass Pokemon. Even in the TCG Game Boy game, the Grass Club was all women. Similarly, Bug Pokemon (because girls find bugs 'gross') and Fire Pokemon (because little boys think fire and explosions are 'cool'; not to mention that fire beats plants in general) are associated with male trainers, with almost every major Fire trainer being male (Flannery is the only exception) and the Fire Club in TCGGB being an all-boy's club.


Playing on stereotypes to get people to relate to get more money. This, however, is bad. :)

Quote:
Pokemon is definitely NOT an explicitly sexist series; indeed, the creators did make sure to include many female characters for both humans and Pokemon alike. However, reading a lot of the things I just posted, it does make you wonder if there's an implicit sexism in the series. That's not entirely impossible: Pokemon is 'targeted' for the fabled 6-12 male demographic in both Japan and in the United States, kind of like the Power Rangers franchise. However, I find this a very interesting topic because, as an American male who was part of both series' target demographic during their respective fad stages, I always found myself not gravitating toward the stereotypically 'male' bits (like using 'cool' Pokemon or liking the male leader of the Power Rangers) but instead toward the more 'girly' parts like the cute Pokemon and the female Power Rangers.

It really depends on how much you look into it.


NEXT POST:

Frost wrote:
They promote stereotypes by being portrayed as inferior to male characters (as seen, for one example, by the fact that there just aren't as many good female trainers in-game/in-show compared male trainers).


Because most of the guys go into that path. More guys are better at football than girls. Is this sexist?

Quote:
Some also promote the stereotypes that girls like cutesy things, flowers, looking pretty, romance, etc., and are portrayed as not as 'tough' as men. Others, such as Misty in the anime, exist almost entirely to serve as romantic foils or motherly figures. Thus, there are clear sexist elements here.


Just as the stereotypes against boys liking bugs, explosions, fire, being tough, etc. Just because it plays off of a stereotype and off commonly used ideas (dolls with girls) which are implanted already into the mind that using these makes it easier for one-off characters to be created.

Quote:
you'd see that this topic was started by a woman (who happened to be a feminist) on another forum.


What does the author's gender have to do about anything? Also, mostly, feminists are really sexist themselves.

_________________
Image


Tue Jun 03, 2008 4:44 pm
Profile
THE POWER IS ON!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:29 am
Posts: 1559
Location: Purple Ranger
For the record, I don't agree with everything I posted in my original post. Some of it was particularly slanted in a way that might generate discussion. Most of the stuff about Misty's character and May and Dawn's Pokemon were my honest opinions though.

Some people could perceive the fact that there are always fewer female Pokemon trainers in important positions as sexist. As for me? Ehh. I dunno. It would be cool if the games had equal gender ratios but even the games that don't have them really play up the strengths of the female Gym Leaders. Sabrina? She's pretty much unstoppable in the anime and could chew up any of the male Gym Leaders in Kanto for fun. Clair is basically the strongest non-Elite trainer in Johto. Karen's the leader of the Elites in that generation too. And Cynthia being the champion can't be overlooked. They're all strong female influences in the series and Sabrina and Karen are two of my favorite Pokemon characters.

I don't see what technology has to do with being able to pick a female trainer, though. What would really be different about having that as an option in the first generation games? That one in-game sprite you see of your character at the very beginning of the adventure (and in the badge display screen), the back shot of the trainer at the start of the battle, and the overworld sprite? That's three extra sprites they'd have to draw up. That's not unreasonable by any stretch of the imagination.

I forgot about Max when it comes to the secondary male protagonist thing (probably because he's tertiary and really not at all that important outside of being May's brother). But you have a point. But, really, I don't see how Misty was all that important to the story. Her motive for following Ash was pretty lame... she forgot about that bike a bunch of times herself. She rarely contributed all that much to the plot (neither did Brock, but Brock was decidedly comic relief/an advice guy) besides pulling Brock's ear and maybe battling once every two-dozen episodes or something. With May, I could look at her as something besides a female character thrown into the mix to 1) provide shipbait with the main hero and 2) serve as the token female character for female fans to get behind. Same thing with Dawn, even though I find Dawn to be kind of bland and boring.

Hence I do have to disagree about May and Dawn being "supporting characters." Misty was a supporting character and the show pretty much treated her as such. People were so surprised when Misty actually ENTERED the Whirl Cup tournament, never mind that she pulled off a minor miracle and won the damn thing. May and Dawn's Ribbon quests and the Grand Festivals, on the other hand, are treated with almost as much importance in the anime as Ash's badge battles and the regional championships he goes through at the end of each journey. I've seen some people on Pokemon forums, though, say that the contests in the anime were deliberately made so that there could be a feminine version of Ash's quest. I guess I can see their point, but there are plenty of male Coordinators and such. It doesn't really bother me since I don't like Contests to begin with (they're really boring in-game).

I don't see how Torchic is not stereotypically the cutest Hoenn starter nor how Aipom was not stereotypically more girly than Buizel. Buizel was male, he was tough and he liked to battle. Aipom was a girl who liked to wear crowns and flowers and perform on stage. Which would the masses perceive as more girly? Aipom. Similarly, a baby chick would be perceived as cuter than a gecko or a mudfish. (And for the record I think that Mudkip is the cutest of the Hoenn starters.)

Ash had an egg. And the writers figured out the lamest possible way to pass it off to Misty with the whole "Misty was the first person Togepi saw after it hatched" thing. And Larvitar was only around for ten episodes, if that long, and Ash didn't baby it and fawn over it the way Misty acted with Togepi. Also, yes, Ash had a Bulbasaur. But it didn't have heart-shaped spots on its face the way May's did. It was also bigger than May's Bulbasaur. That's what I was talking about when I said that they designed May's Bulbasaur to be blatantly female, especially in contrast to Ash's.

Also, with the Jessie/Team Rocket thing, I wasn't talking about Team Rocket as a whole. Jessie is pretty much the informal leader of the Jessie, James and Meowth trio, which was what I meant when said "Team Rocket trio." The fact that I brought up Jessie at all was a hint that I don't think Pokemon is as sexist as my first post seems. She's definitely one of the strongest main characters on the show, even if she's usually shoehorned into the bumbling villain role.

And saying J is the most competent villain that the show has seen so far isn't a generalization. Pretty much every fan I've seen has reacted very positively to J because she's the total opposite of the bumbling villain role that JJM fill. Ash crumbled Giovanni's plans multiple times over the years. The first time he encountered J, it was considered a victory for him that 1) he didn't die and 2) Pikachu wasn't lost forever... and Ash even had the help of Jessie and James during that encounter. She's definitely the most villainous character the show's had, as she shows little to no remorse for her actions and she usually succeeds at the things she does.

Oh, yeah, and one more thing... Brock isn't black. He doesn't have an explicit race on the show, but I'm pretty sure he isn't meant to be of African descent.

I appreciate the detailed response this time around. It definitely made for better discussion. Discussion is the reason I made this topic to begin with.


Tue Jun 03, 2008 5:42 pm
Profile
Pokemon Trainer
Pokemon Trainer

Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 2:52 pm
Posts: 28
Frost wrote:
I don't see what technology has to do with being able to pick a female trainer, though. What would really be different about having that as an option in the first generation games? That one in-game sprite you see of your character at the very beginning of the adventure (and in the badge display screen), the back shot of the trainer at the start of the battle, and the overworld sprite? That's three extra sprites they'd have to draw up. That's not unreasonable by any stretch of the imagination.


Three extra sprites, editing dialog, etc. It is more than just a simple sprite change.

Quote:
I forgot about Max when it comes to the secondary male protagonist thing (probably because he's tertiary and really not at all that important outside of being May's brother). But you have a point. But, really, I don't see how Misty was all that important to the story. Her motive for following Ash was pretty lame... she forgot about that bike a bunch of times herself. She rarely contributed all that much to the plot (neither did Brock, but Brock was decidedly comic relief/an advice guy) besides pulling Brock's ear and maybe battling once every two-dozen episodes or something. With May, I could look at her as something besides a female character thrown into the mix to 1) provide shipbait with the main hero and 2) serve as the token female character for female fans to get behind. Same thing with Dawn, even though I find Dawn to be kind of bland and boring.


Who is important then? Is every non-Ash character not important? Also, is every female character token?

Quote:
Also, yes, Ash had a Bulbasaur. But it didn't have heart-shaped spots on its face the way May's did. It was also bigger than May's Bulbasaur. That's what I was talking about when I said that they designed May's Bulbasaur to be blatantly female, especially in contrast to Ash's.


That doesn't make Bulbasaur feminine though. It makes May's Bulbasaur feminine.

Quote:
Oh, yeah, and one more thing... Brock isn't black. He doesn't have an explicit race on the show, but I'm pretty sure he isn't meant to be of African descent.


Correct. However, that is how it is implied with by most watchers.

Quote:
I appreciate the detailed response this time around. It definitely made for better discussion. Discussion is the reason I made this topic to begin with.[/color]

Ah, okay.


If I deleted something it means that I generally agree or there isn't much of a need to argue it.

_________________
Image


Tue Jun 03, 2008 5:53 pm
Profile
Lite Four
Lite Four
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 6:21 pm
Posts: 3471
As an 11 year old female playing Pokemon Yellow version for the first time, I never really thought about it being "sexist." The reason I thought Kanto was primary dominated by male Gym Leaders/Elites was Pokemon attracted mainly males, and female Pokemon fans were as much of a minority as the amount of female Gym Leaders/Elites we had. I never found the game to be racist, sexist, or any of the above. After reading your post, in a way, I do think it kinda stereotypes females (see: Erika and Lasses).

Back to Pokemon being the target of young males; I think Nintendo/Gamefreak has tried to widen that range, trying to attract males as well as females (hence female "equality" in Sinnoh compared to the earlier generations), and the first female champion. I don't think they ever intended to offend anyone, and I don't think they ever did.

So to answer your question, do I think it's sexist? No, I don't, because although it does stereotype genders a bit, it's not offensive.

And one more thing...my favorite type is bug Pokemon, primarily because I hate that "females are scared of bugs" stereotype and I think it's ridiculous how strong that stereotype was in the anime (Misty was so mean to poor Caterpie ;_; ). My favorite Pokemon (Heracross) has nothing to do with that though. My second favorite type is normal, so maybe I'm not so anti-stereotype after all. :P

_________________
Image


Tue Jun 03, 2008 8:42 pm
Profile WWW
Pokemon Trainer
Pokemon Trainer

Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 2:52 pm
Posts: 28
Krisp wrote:
=So to answer your question, do I think it's sexist? No, I don't, because although it does stereotype genders a bit, it's not offensive.

That sums up my point. Thanks for saying it in a shorter version.

_________________
Image


Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:29 am
Profile
THE POWER IS ON!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:29 am
Posts: 1559
Location: Purple Ranger
Here are my honest opinions:

Was Pokemon intentionally created to be sexist? No, of course not. A video game company would have to be stupid to do something like that; it not only limits their fanbase to strictly close-minded boys, but it would give the company bad press in the media. (I don't know how liberal the Japanese media is, but you can sure that papers in the United States would be bitching.) But, kind of like how they obviously didn't design Jynx to resemble a racist stereotype, some people can interpret things differently than the creators did.

However, I do think there are unintentionally sexist elements that come with the series being marketed for the 6-12 male crowd. And that's what annoys me. In a similar parallel, Power Rangers (US)/Super Sentai (Japan) are marketed toward the same audience. Like Pokemon, there's an obvious "male majority" feeling both in number and how the women are portrayed. Female Rangers wear pink, yellow or light blue, their uniforms have skirts, there's usually only one or two women per team of five or six Rangers, there's never been a super-strong female Ranger who joins the team later in the series, they don't get special vehicles/power-ups that males do (because "little boys don't buy female action figures"), etc.

So my question is, why can't these series show little boys that not all women are the same? Ditch some of the stereotypes and even up the gender ratios. In the games, they could tone down the prominence of Lass. I don't know about you, but I always thought she was pretty lame, and it seemed like she was the main female trainer class back in RBY. (Other than Lass, we got "Picnicker" and "Beauty" back then... yeah, stereotypes again.) Or let there be a male trainer who likes to use cute Pokemon too. Let there be a female Bug Catcher class. The anime could be fixed up by something as simple as introducing a second female traveling companion. She could be tough and competitive while Dawn is the decidedly more feminine character who likes Contests and cute Pokemon. May's two major rivals (Drew and Harley) were opposite of her gender; why can't Ash have a female rival who likes to battle?

It doesn't really make sense. Some might say that Pokemon is targeted for boys, but it's really not. It's marketed for boys, but I don't know why. There are a variety Pokemon who could appeal to different sorts of people. There are tons of female Pokemon fans out there... the girls in my class liked the franchise too back in fifth grade. But then we have the "token girly" Pokemon of each type and the main female characters aren't balanced. Misty wasn't as black-and-white "girly" as May and Dawn, but she also wasn't as prominent as those two were. All of the stronger female characters have three lines of dialogue in the games and two episodes in the Anime. It's not even.

It's not bad, and I don't think there's a huge problem (though the girl on the other forums did make enough good points for me to digest the issue and make this topic here), but the problems that are there could be easily fixed. Diamond and Pearl seem to have taken steps in that regard, so better late than never?

-------------

I say this all because, like I mentioned in the first post, when I was in the target demographic of both of these franchises, I wasn't the typical 6-12 male who was like "EXPLOSIONS! TOUGH POKEMON! COOOL!!!" In Power Rangers, my favorite characters were generally the Pink and Yellow Rangers, rather than the super-cool leaders/Red Rangers who the show obviously set up with loads of crap for little boys to buy. I never told my male friends that my favorite Power Ranger was the Pink one because I felt embarrassed even though I shouldn't have.

With Pokemon, I liked primarily cute ones that other boys probably wouldn't: Seel, Jynx, Pikachu, Meowth, Butterfree and similar. Erika and Sabrina were my favorite GLs, Lorelei was my favorite Elite, etc. And, in grade school, I didn't tell anybody my favorites because I'd been seen as "girly." Boys shouldn't feel bad for liking cute things and having female favorite characters just like girls shouldn't feel bad for being competitive and liking "boy" things such as bugs. If boys and girls enjoy things "stereotypical" to their gender, that's cool too. But give them the option via exposure of different types of characters of each gender.


Wed Jun 04, 2008 6:49 am
Profile
Pokemon Trainer
Pokemon Trainer

Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 2:52 pm
Posts: 28
Frost wrote:
However, I do think there are unintentionally sexist elements that come with the series being marketed for the 6-12 male crowd. And that's what annoys me. In a similar parallel, Power Rangers (US)/Super Sentai (Japan) are marketed toward the same audience. Like Pokemon, there's an obvious "male majority" feeling both in number and how the women are portrayed. Female Rangers wear pink, yellow or light blue, their uniforms have skirts, there's usually only one or two women per team of five or six Rangers, there's never been a super-strong female Ranger who joins the team later in the series, they don't get special vehicles/power-ups that males do (because "little boys don't buy female action figures"), etc.


So, the girls appear girlish and the boys appear boyish. This is not sexist in any way.

Quote:
So my question is, why can't these series show little boys that not all women are the same? Ditch some of the stereotypes and even up the gender ratios.


Back to the competitive argument from before. This would create an unreal proportion. It would be the same as requiring all football teams to have half girls and half boys, when there are more males that are interested in football than girls.

Quote:
In the games, they could tone down the prominence of Lass. I don't know about you, but I always thought she was pretty lame, and it seemed like she was the main female trainer class back in RBY. (Other than Lass, we got "Picnicker" and "Beauty" back then... yeah, stereotypes again.)


RBY didn't have much space for data so they were relatively limited for characters, so they put prominent stereotypes in there for ALL of the characters. Why are the Hikers big fat guys? Why are the scientists skinny and nerdy guys? Repeat.

Quote:
Or let there be a male trainer who likes to use cute Pokemon too.


There are tons that use cute pokemon.

Quote:
The anime could be fixed up by something as simple as introducing a second female traveling companion. She could be tough and competitive while Dawn is the decidedly more feminine character who likes Contests and cute Pokemon. May's two major rivals (Drew and Harley) were opposite of her gender; why can't Ash have a female rival who likes to battle?


The first is just equality where equality isn't needed. There are three sometimes four characters traveling together. If you just keep adding more to stop it from becoming "discriminatory" then the cast would include 234543245432 characters to refer to each group. This becomes very problematic. Ash has fought many female trainers and is limited in rivals since most of them go away after the first meeting or two.

Quote:
Some might say that Pokemon is targeted for boys, but it's really not.


Yes, it is.

Quote:
It's marketed for boys, but I don't know why.


More boys buy the product than girls, so in order to get more people, they attract the people who are more likely to buy it. Simple economics.

Quote:
There are a variety Pokemon who could appeal to different sorts of people. There are tons of female Pokemon fans out there... the girls in my class liked the franchise too back in fifth grade. But then we have the "token girly" Pokemon of each type and the main female characters aren't balanced. Misty wasn't as black-and-white "girly" as May and Dawn, but she also wasn't as prominent as those two were. All of the stronger female characters have three lines of dialogue in the games and two episodes in the Anime. It's not even.


In game almost every character has one or two lines of dialog, so this really isn't a relative point.


Quote:
With Pokemon, I liked primarily cute ones that other boys probably wouldn't: Seel, Jynx, Pikachu, Meowth, Butterfree and similar. Erika and Sabrina were my favorite GLs, Lorelei was my favorite Elite, etc. And, in grade school, I didn't tell anybody my favorites because I'd been seen as "girly." Boys shouldn't feel bad for liking cute things and having female favorite characters just like girls shouldn't feel bad for being competitive and liking "boy" things such as bugs. If boys and girls enjoy things "stereotypical" to their gender, that's cool too. But give them the option via exposure of different types of characters of each gender.


That's the cool thing about pokemon. There are so many that appeal to everyone that you can pick and choose. Just because you would like Butterfree and someone would make fun of you, that doesn't mean that Pokemon is sexist. That reflects on how society is sexist against males.

_________________
Image


Wed Jun 04, 2008 10:21 am
Profile
Pokemon Ranger
Pokemon Ranger
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 9:39 am
Posts: 689
Location: Brazil-Minas Gerais
Well...
I never looked the franchise this way,
It does look somewhat sexist,but it isn't too serious...

I mean,in that time they aren't that genial for making history lines and plots,
So they appealed to clichés...
And by that time they aren't sure if the series would be appeling to girls.
After some time they changed some aspects...
So obviously it wasn't intentional...
Adding the choice of playing with a female character for example...
That came in the second generation(In the end,but it came).

Just to add a little to discussion...
There is a Gym in G/S/C full of girls that like bug types...

They added the Fighter girls too,
that use fighting types...

And even being minority,the female Gym Leaders were always more
appeling than male ones...In the anime for example...
Ash was butt kicked by Sabrina,Lorelei,and others that i don't remember...
I didn't see the anime for some time...
And a Bad Guy on Diamond/Pearl that uses a clefa i think...

Btw my favorites are {eevee} , {clefable} and {nidoqueen} ...
that's since pokémon blue...

_________________
Image
Get your custom sprites,avatars and signatures at Froggy's Lilypad!
My Youtube Channel:
http://www.youtube.com/user/Bushin22
Watch,Comment,Rate and Enjoy! ^_^x

*Currently BUSY with real life,so i might take a while to respond messages or RMTs... Sorry,I might be back someday...*


Thu Jun 05, 2008 6:15 am
Profile
THE POWER IS ON!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:29 am
Posts: 1559
Location: Purple Ranger
Bushin wrote:
Just to add a little to discussion...
There is a Gym in G/S/C full of girls that like bug types...

No, there isn't. There are five trainer battles in Bugsy's Gym and four of them are against male trainers. Bugsy is a boy. The only girls in Bugsy's Gym are twins Amy and May and they use a Pokemon modeled after one of the most stereotypically girl-friendly bugs (Ledyba) and a highly chibi-fied spider (Spinarak). And those are the only female trainers who specialized in Bug Pokemon as far as I can remember.

Zangy wrote:
There are tons that use cute pokemon.

There isn't an entire male trainer class that uses nothing but cute Pokemon and frequently comment on how they use nothing but cute Pokemon. The closest parallel I can see is the male Breeder class, but there are female Breeders too, and male Breeders only use cute Pokemon because all baby Pokemon are cute.

Zangy wrote:
The first is just equality where equality isn't needed. There are three sometimes four characters traveling together. If you just keep adding more to stop it from becoming "discriminatory" then the cast would include 234543245432 characters to refer to each group.

I'm not sure what your point is. The anime could care less about keeping the number of main/recurring characters in its cast down to a small amount; they wouldn't have ditched Misty or, even more importantly, May as soon as Ash was going to another region. Or even Tracey or Max. The only constant human characters so far have been Ash, Jessie and James, so the "let's not add a bunch of different characters" reasoning doesn't hold.

And there are only three main characters in the show right now: Ash, Dawn and Brock. Is adding another female character going to hurt if they provide a relevant reason for her to be there? Not at all. Or, at the very least, what's stopping Ash from traveling with two female companions (and a secondary male in the interest of equality) in his next region? We've already seen that the anime can handle four main hero characters from the Hoenn arc, but I can bet money that we'll just get 2m/1f or 3m/1f again in the Gen V-based series.


Zangy wrote:
Yes, it is.

I disagree. I went through the Pokedex yesterday and counted off the number of "cute," stuffed doll-like, and otherwise feminine Pokemon who would appeal to the stereotypical female fan. I counted off between a third and half of the Pokemon without a second thought. Most Normal Pokemon, most of the baby/basic Pokemon, the many different cat-like Pokemon, most Grass-type Pokemon, the aforementioned "token female" of each type and nearly anything else that looks cute would appeal to girls just as much as boys. Regardless, the fact that we agree that there "are so many" Pokemon that "appeal to everyone" should be enough evidence that Pokemon is not just for boys. It's universal.

If Pokemon were created with the mindset to appeal to only the typical 6-12 male demographic, most of the cutesy Pokemon would be nixed in favor of more "cool" things like robots, monsters, more dragons, etc.


Thu Jun 05, 2008 7:01 am
Profile
Pokemon Trainer
Pokemon Trainer
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 6:27 am
Posts: 30
Location: Middle of nowhere DD:
As a girl, I don't think that Pokemon is sexist at all. It's just going with stereotypes because almost all of the trainers are just throwaways that don't really matter all that much anyway. I'm not offended by anything I see in Pokemon, quite honestly. And in case you're wondering, I doni't have any "cute" Pokemon in my Diamond version team :]


Thu Jun 05, 2008 9:17 am
Profile
Pokemon Trainer
Pokemon Trainer

Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 2:52 pm
Posts: 28
Frost wrote:
Bushin wrote:
Just to add a little to discussion...
There is a Gym in G/S/C full of girls that like bug types...

No, there isn't. There are five trainer battles in Bugsy's Gym and four of them are against male trainers. Bugsy is a boy. The only girls in Bugsy's Gym are twins Amy and May and they use a Pokemon modeled after one of the most stereotypically girl-friendly bugs (Ledyba) and a highly chibi-fied spider (Spinarak). And those are the only female trainers who specialized in Bug Pokemon as far as I can remember.


Spinarak isn't a "chibi-fied spider" unless you specifically try to view it that way. Spinarak is a weaker version of Ariados. If you want to view evolution that way, all 1st stages that evolve are just "chibi-fied" versions. If you go by that slippery slope, all pokemon are chibi-fied based on the real life animal that are associated with them, which again, refutes that argument if everything follows it.

Zangy wrote:
There are tons that use cute pokemon.

There isn't an entire male trainer class that uses nothing but cute Pokemon and frequently comment on how they use nothing but cute Pokemon. The closest parallel I can see is the male Breeder class, but there are female Breeders too, and male Breeders only use cute Pokemon because all baby Pokemon are cute.[/quote]

Going by the slippery slope that you got into, the following trainers have "cute" pokemon:

ImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
ImageImageImageImageImageImage
ImageImage

And can't forget:
Image and his {cleffa}

Zangy wrote:
The first is just equality where equality isn't needed. There are three sometimes four characters traveling together. If you just keep adding more to stop it from becoming "discriminatory" then the cast would include 234543245432 characters to refer to each group.

I'm not sure what your point is. The anime could care less about keeping the number of main/recurring characters in its cast down to a small amount; they wouldn't have ditched Misty or, even more importantly, May as soon as Ash was going to another region. Or even Tracey or Max. The only constant human characters so far have been Ash, Jessie and James, so the "let's not add a bunch of different characters" reasoning doesn't hold.[/quote]

Mass tokenism basically was my point. If the point is to have equal X people, then where does it stop?

Quote:
And there are only three main characters in the show right now: Ash, Dawn and Brock. Is adding another female character going to hurt if they provide a relevant reason for her to be there? Not at all. Or, at the very least, what's stopping Ash from traveling with two female companions (and a secondary male in the interest of equality) in his next region? We've already seen that the anime can handle four main hero characters from the Hoenn arc, but I can bet money that we'll just get 2m/1f or 3m/1f again in the Gen V-based series.


That character would be assumed a token character just like Misty/etc even when they aren't. Does the percentage of male/females really matter with it though? Does the show change when that last character is a male or a female? Plus, the girl in the group normally has a crush on Ash, so having two girls would show problems over which one likes him more/etc. Whenever it is Ash, a girl, and another male like Brock/Tracey/etc it provides a separate voice of reason. If that voice of reason was a girl, it would open up more problems related to love interests/etc than a male, so the creators probably just took the easy way out.

Quote:
Zangy wrote:
Yes, it is.

I disagree. I went through the Pokedex yesterday and counted off the number of "cute," stuffed doll-like, and otherwise feminine Pokemon who would appeal to the stereotypical female fan. I counted off between a third and half of the Pokemon without a second thought.


NEWS FLASH: Basic pokemon are meant to be "cute" and such because they are babies. Babies are normally cuter than old people. This appeals to both the female and male demographic.

Quote:
Most Normal Pokemon, most of the baby/basic Pokemon, the many different cat-like Pokemon, most Grass-type Pokemon, the aforementioned "token female" of each type and nearly anything else that looks cute would appeal to girls just as much as boys.


If there are so many of them that relate to the "token female" then they aren't token. Also, if they appeal just as much to girls and boys, then what is the problem with that?

Quote:
Regardless, the fact that we agree that there "are so many" Pokemon that "appeal to everyone" should be enough evidence that Pokemon is not just for boys. It's universal.


There are so many that each one can afford to be different and appeal to a separate audience within Pokemon fans. Just because there are some that appeal to females does not, in any way, make Pokemon sexist.

Quote:
If Pokemon were created with the mindset to appeal to only the typical 6-12 male demographic, most of the cutesy Pokemon would be nixed in favor of more "cool" things like robots, monsters, more dragons, etc.


Have you seen Pokemon? Little tiny cute things get big tough and become monsters. Plays perfectly to that demographic.

fake star wrote:
As a girl, I don't think that Pokemon is sexist at all. It's just going with stereotypes because almost all of the trainers are just throwaways that don't really matter all that much anyway.


This this and this.

_________________
Image


Thu Jun 05, 2008 3:34 pm
Profile
Bug Catcher
Bug Catcher

Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2008 6:27 pm
Posts: 20
Finding more males gym leaders than female gym leaders is no correlation of sexism.

Finding more male trainers than female trainers is no correlation of sexism.

We have seen some improvements in more females, though.

For example, we had to wait until Crystal came out before we could choose to be a female player.

And then, in Sinnoh, the champion of the elite 4 is a female.

But I don't see why this matters, though. Most of the video game population are male. In fact, the majority of the posters in this forum are male.

If the percentage of males and females in the games changed, how many would be willing to bet it would attract less males?

Imagine a video game where the only player option is a female and not a guy, how many males would simply not play it? Yet few girls complained about Red/Blue/Yellow/Gold/Silver before the female player option came along.

Oh yeah - and there are no Black people in the video games or the cartoons - how many are willing to bet they are racist?

Heck, there aren't any Muslims or Judaists there.


Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:16 pm
Profile
Pokemon Trainer
Pokemon Trainer

Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 2:52 pm
Posts: 28
Neal wrote:
If the percentage of males and females in the games changed, how many would be willing to bet it would attract less males?


Depends on the girl. *cough*Tomb Raider*cough*

Quote:
Heck, there aren't any Muslims or Judaists there.


There is only one religion in Pokemon. That is the Pokemon religion.

_________________
Image


Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:34 pm
Profile
Bug Catcher
Bug Catcher

Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2008 6:27 pm
Posts: 20
True that, and true that.


Fri Jun 06, 2008 4:59 pm
Profile
Dragon Tamer
Dragon Tamer
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:18 pm
Posts: 205
Location: oh...noes.
Unintentionally, yes, I think it's blatent sexism, although you have forced alot of the opinions.

You said there were too little important female trainers, then you pointed out the mass of stereotyped female pokemon.
That was abit hypocritical but I see where you're coming from.


I think Zangy had some very bad points, I could make a long quoty-list too, but I doubt many would read it.


I don't think it's necessary for a 'token' everything, because it would look like a 'It's A Small World' show.
Even if they gave them their own area of a desert for the middle-easterns etc it would look like racism.
A wise man once said, 'You can only please most of the people most of the time', I think Nintendo done well.

_________________
Image
thanks to hammy.


Sat Jun 07, 2008 10:37 am
Profile
Gym Leader
Gym Leader
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 6:16 pm
Posts: 1013
Neal wrote:
Oh yeah - and there are no Black people in the video games or the cartoons - how many are willing to bet they are racist?


Just a tad off-topic: I believe that anyone in a cartoon show or video game who does not adhere to the majority race of the demographic/population in the cartoon/video game is nothing more than a token character (unless their role plays some sort of significance, which it rarely does).


Sat Jun 07, 2008 10:40 am
Profile
Pokemon Trainer
Pokemon Trainer

Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 2:52 pm
Posts: 28
Quote:
Unintentionally, yes, I think it's blatent sexism, although you have forced alot of the opinions.


How is having a skewed field blatantly sexist? Answer: It isn't.

Quote:
You said there were too little important female trainers, then you pointed out the mass of stereotyped female pokemon.


Again, going by statistics, it isn't too little. Stereotyped female Pokemon would include all basic pokemon. That isn't really relevant in any way.

Quote:
I think Zangy had some very bad points, I could make a long quoty-list too, but I doubt many would read it.

List them. I would be glad to back up my points and refute yours.

_________________
Image


Sat Jun 07, 2008 12:03 pm
Profile
Dragon Tamer
Dragon Tamer
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:18 pm
Posts: 205
Location: oh...noes.
Zangy, I think your taking this too seriously, quoting everything I say to try and disprove it.

The first two points weren't even aimed at you and you still attack my opinion.

Learn about irony then post. You can't strike off everything you say because you think it's irrelevant.

And yes it is relevant, all basic pokemon being female-esque, hinting at their inferiority.


Quote:
List them. I would be glad to back up my points and refute yours.


This is exactly what I mean. There is no mercy in these words. Why can't you except others valid opinions?

and don't bother replying with an even angrier font and attempting to disprove every word, because tbh you just look like a spamming noob.

P.S Yes, I have resorted to quoting.

_________________
Image
thanks to hammy.


Sun Jun 08, 2008 11:33 am
Profile
Pokemon Trainer
Pokemon Trainer

Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 2:52 pm
Posts: 28
Prof. Dom wrote:
Zangy, I think your taking this too seriously, quoting everything I say to try and disprove it.


Debating goes like that. Sorry you don't take things seriously.

Quote:
The first two points weren't even aimed at you and you still attack my opinion.


Didn't attack your opinion. Refuting something isn't attacking in any way. Sorry that you feel this way.

Quote:
Learn about irony then post. You can't strike off everything you say because you think it's irrelevant.


Learn what irony is.

Quote:
And yes it is relevant, all basic pokemon being female-esque, hinting at their inferiority.


They aren't "female-esque" at all. They are "baby-esque" because guess what? They are babies.


Quote:
Quote:
List them. I would be glad to back up my points and refute yours.


This is exactly what I mean. There is no mercy in these words. Why can't you except others valid opinions?

Because they aren't valid. If you can prove something, then it would be valid. Most of the arguments that have came from it have not been valid.

Quote:
and don't bother replying with an even angrier font and attempting to disprove every word, because tbh you just look like a spamming noob.


I don't see how a normal font is "angry" at all. Oh, and I don't see how I would be the "spamming noob" when you tried to "thread crap" on this thread.

Quote:
P.S Yes, I have resorted to quoting.

Nothing is wrong with quoting.

_________________
Image


Sun Jun 08, 2008 11:39 am
Profile
Pokemon Ranger
Pokemon Ranger
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 9:39 am
Posts: 689
Location: Brazil-Minas Gerais
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Is actually fun to see flaming wars if you aren't in the middle of it...

Zangy wrote:
Prof. Dom wrote:
Zangy, I think your taking this too seriously, quoting everything I say to try and disprove it.


Debating goes like that. Sorry you don't take things seriously.


2 guys arguing if a video game is sexist because there are more males than females...
Now THAT'S some serious business...

:lol: :lol: :lol:

_________________
Image
Get your custom sprites,avatars and signatures at Froggy's Lilypad!
My Youtube Channel:
http://www.youtube.com/user/Bushin22
Watch,Comment,Rate and Enjoy! ^_^x

*Currently BUSY with real life,so i might take a while to respond messages or RMTs... Sorry,I might be back someday...*


Sun Jun 08, 2008 11:48 am
Profile
Pokemon Trainer
Pokemon Trainer

Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 2:52 pm
Posts: 28
Bushin wrote:
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Is actually fun to see flaming wars if you aren't in the middle of it...

Zangy wrote:
Prof. Dom wrote:
Zangy, I think your taking this too seriously, quoting everything I say to try and disprove it.


Debating goes like that. Sorry you don't take things seriously.


2 guys arguing if a video game is sexist because there are more males than females...
Now THAT'S some serious business...

:lol: :lol: :lol:



Debate =/= flamewar.

Oh, and you shouldn't enter a topic if you just want to troll it. :)

_________________
Image


Sun Jun 08, 2008 12:07 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 49 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.