Having a sexualized character isn't a bad thing. Having the first female Cid be so vastly different from previous Cids in a clearly sexist way is a bad thing, especially if you take a moment to acknowledge that women are sexualized far, far more often than men already. I know you've said repeatedly that "she's fictional" and you believe "Final Fantasy is better than most," as justification for ignoring the disparity between how males and females are treated by media, but that doesn't mean the negative consequences we all deal with go away just because you don't care.Originally Posted by Loony BoB
This is not the case, I just don't think that Final Fantasy is the trigger for that kind of thing, nor do I think that having a sexualised character is a bad thing.
First you don't care about how the gender disparities between the treatment of fictional characters negatively impacts society, and then you're unable to judge attractiveness by any criteria but your own. Knowing you as long as I have, I'm having a hard time believing you're honestly so unable to step outside of your own perspective. I think you're being stubborn.
If I were to re-do the tally, with the corrections Psy pointed out, I would put Hope and probably Gau as "attractive males" and Realm as an "unattractive female." Hell, let's put Kimahri as an attractive male too, since he has pecs. That would make the male characters 30% unattractive and 14% for the females. So the males are only a little more than twice as likely to be permitted to be unattractive. "Unattractive" people would be the elderly, the non-fit, children under 14, and non-humanoid (Red and Cait Sith). I think it's notable that females are always young and humanoid.
First, you're ignoring the socialization that comes with the difference between what men and women find sexy. Second, you're way off base about what women find sexy. Third, you're ignoring the difference between "sexy" and "sexualized." Fourth, you keep going back and forth between "men are sexualized too" and "the media obviously treats men and women differently." Which is it? Or is this just back to confusing "sexy" with "sexualized" because you have some notion that a woman in a bikini humping a car hood is equal to a man in a suit standing in a place...?See chionos' post.I definitely disagree with you on the first two though. Especially the second one. For your second point you are being very daft.Same for the next paragraph you put in, about how there is only one guy who is sexualised because he has an open shirt. I would love to hear from a large group of people who consider themselves to be bisexual to describe what outfits they consider sexy on a guy and then on a girl. I suspect they will not markedly different - in my experience, this is the case, anyway. Girls are generally seen as having a sexy appearance if they are fit and dress skimpy. Guys, if they go around wearing nothing but underwear and showing off their full body, don't tend to get the same treatment. Again, I asked Danielle what she considered sexy on a guy - the "most sexualised" a guy could be for her - and she said showing chest and/or abs (but with a shirt or jacket of some kind) and with some jeans or something on. Bikini top? Hot pants? "No." xD The problem is that the clothes guys are considered to be at their sexiest in tend to be normal clothes. Suits. T-shirt and jeans. Stuff like that. Girls, on the other hand, are seen as sexy in these things, but also seen as sexy in a bikini, or seen as sexy in a low cut top, or seen as sexy in a skirt, thigh high boots, turtlenecks even. A nice dress. Effectively girls tend to be seen as sexy - appearance-wise, obviously - in a much wider variety of clothing, and in some cases it is considered extremely sexy, while guys don't get that kind of thing. That's possibly unfair, but it's just the way people are in a large number of cultures, certainly the ones we live in, in the current world.
Breastfeeding.Why? Like, I'm not judging you on a moral standpoint, I just... what is the context of this? "Hey Mickey, I've got a surprise for you!"?
Or we're socialized against oogling and hooting. We like crotch bulges, but we are supposed to be the pretty, submissive, sexualized group, not men....and I still think it's not very high on most girl's lists (either that or they simply don't want to admit it).
And, yes, I realize that sounds like I'm being an "omg feminist," but I really need you to consider here just how little you, as you said yourself, know about socialization of the genders. I'm not going to pull the "I read books" card here because it would be rude of me to expect you to just take my word for it... I also don't want to cite entire books as my sources. I have a plan! Every time I come across a relevant article, I will forward it to you. Win-win.
You've already been told you're being unreasonable here, but I'll just reiterate: I can like something without liking everything about it. If I were to tell you my husband frequently puts dirty dishes back in the cupboard would you say "SO DIVORCE HIM FOR CHRIST'S SAKE"?
Except that they do make Final Fantasy characters over 22, just not females.
And, just for posterity, here's some linkspam that supports my stance:
http://www.apa.org/education/ce/sexu...tification.pdf
http://link.springer.com/article/10....199-006-9147-3
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_5708921.html
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.230...21105504405683
http://pwq.sagepub.com/content/38/3/398.abstract
https://news.wsu.edu/2014/05/27/stud...s/#.VJoFM_8B_d
http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/07/...fied-by-women/
http://www.alternet.org/story/146396...ou_might_think
For those who think that men and women are equally sexualized, or that the gap between the genders and sexualization isn't all that wide, or that it's not a big deal, or that Cidney should get a pass because... whatever reason: [citation needed]
