This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by Hailinel (23891 posts) -

So a few threads have been discussing this topic today. But before I start, I'm not intending for this to become another Anita Sarkeesian thread or whatever, so let's just leave her at the door, all right?

Are we good? Good.

OK, so strong women as a video game concept. I understand that this is a somewhat absurd proposal because, hell, I wrote a lot of the existing article and have, on occasion, had to weed out the occasional bit of obvious subjectivity that worked its way in at one point or another. But here's the problem. "Strong Women" is a misnomer. Strength comes in a variety of forms. When some people think strong women, they think, say, Jade from Beyond Good & Evil; inquisitive, intelligent, fairly athletic, etc. Others think of muscular, ball-busting Amazons. Still others don't go to that extreme, but none the less, if the woman in question isn't a no-nonsense, entirely self-sustaining heroic ass-kicker and displays any emotional weakness whatsoever, then she isn't, by definition, "strong."

Here's the key point, and it's something that brought up earlier today. The concept of a "strong woman" (or a "strong man" for that matter) is a fallacy. There are well-written characters, men and women, with personalities and characterizations that extend beyond a basic two dimensions, but these characters aren't necessarily "strong." Kratos is a "strong" man, but he is a terribly written, two-dimensional, or even one-dimensional character. The same goes for the pre-reboot Lara Croft. Physically strong and an ass-kicker that can gun down dinosaurs, but her personality, despite some rather weak attempts at fleshing it out, was never particularly her strong point. Ironically, as Crystal Dynamics has been working on the reboot and redefining Lara's character, potentially giving her more depth and personality, people have cried foul because she's not "strong" anymore because she's not a dual-wielding, dino-murdering badass and is instead a college student who begins her adventure justifiably scared shitless.

I hope you all see where I'm going with this.

The problem is that the definition of a strong woman is rather flimsy. People flipped their shit when Samus was given a personality that made her something other than an emotionless destroyer of worlds. I, and others, did not, because while you say what you will about the quality of the writing and localization, a well-trained, experienced bounty hunter that agrees to follow a military officer's orders, needs help on occasion, and has emotional hang-ups based on past traumatic experiences, is not an inherently weak character, whether that person be male or female. I'd argue that a character such as Samus is "stronger" than others because, while she may have weaknesses, she's a more human character than a hardcore, emotionless murder machine. Whether you like the direction they took her character or not, they still gave her a level of depth that exceeds a lot of protagonists on both sides of the gender fence. Other M's writing is poor, but the intent behind the characterization is, in my estimation, a strongpoint.

So we have this concept on Giant Bomb, the Strong Women concept, which is either horribly named, or horribly named and in need of clarity of definition. Or, perhaps, in need of simply deleted outright, because why does there need to be a concept for multi-dimensional, complex characters, which are quite frankly a rarity among male video game characters, as well? Where is the line that defines who is versus who isn't? Do you include the female versions of gender-choice characters like Commander Shepard, or do you leave them out, based on the notion that they are more template and cypher than character?

Now, if it were up to me, I'd be in favor of either page deletion, as I don't see a happy medium truly possible here. If someone else can make a better argument for that, then I'd be willing to listen, but all the same, I'll formally suggest that this page might need to go.

#2 Posted by BeachThunder (11697 posts) -

Delete the shit out of this page.

This is one of those wiki pages that means absolutely fucking nothing; every character could be considered strong in some way. Also, it seems fairly arbitrary that this page even exists - I mean there's no 'weak men', or 'strong hermaphrodites' pages...

#3 Posted by Hailinel (23891 posts) -

@BeachThunder said:

This is one of those wiki pages that means absolutely fucking nothing; every character could be considered strong in some way. Also, it seems fairly arbitrary that this page even exists - I mean there's no 'weak men', or 'strong hermaphrodites' pages...

That's a good point.

#4 Edited by Mirado (990 posts) -

Wipe it out.

it's the Pluto principle. We can have one less page or open the flood gates to a hundred more, as said.

#5 Posted by The_Nubster (2047 posts) -

Delete it. It's way too vague, like you said. Applies to too many things that aren't entirely quantifiable and even those qualities vary between people.

#6 Posted by EuanDewar (4757 posts) -

STRONG HERMAPHRODITES

Online
#7 Posted by NekuSakuraba (7240 posts) -

If we keep this, can I make the ''Objectively strong but not that much of a really strong thing but maybe in terms of intelligence octopus.'' page?

I say we delete it.

#8 Posted by bobafettjm (1404 posts) -

Sounds like a good argument on deleting the page, I say go for it.

#9 Posted by Demoskinos (14562 posts) -

Off with its head.

#10 Posted by Bocam (3670 posts) -

@Hailinel: Why are you the top editor of a page you want to delete?

#11 Posted by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -

Could you make it "Literal" Like a women who is strong as in *as a example* Tsunade from Naruto. 

#12 Posted by Hailinel (23891 posts) -

@Bocam said:

@Hailinel: Why are you the top editor of a page you want to delete?

Because there was a time that I felt that maybe there was some worth to the page, but I've since changed my mind and feel that I was wrong. It happens.

#13 Posted by Hailinel (23891 posts) -

@The_Laughing_Man said:

Could you make it "Literal" Like a women who is strong as in *as a example* Tsunade from Naruto.

Well, how would you define physical strength then? If we're talking superhuman strength, that's it's own concept and is not divided by gender.

#14 Posted by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -
@Hailinel said:

@The_Laughing_Man said:

Could you make it "Literal" Like a women who is strong as in *as a example* Tsunade from Naruto.

Well, how would you define physical strength then? If we're talking superhuman strength, that's it's own concept and is not divided by gender.

O ya I forgot we had that page. Waste this page. 
#15 Posted by AlisterCat (5482 posts) -

@Bocam said:

@Hailinel: Why are you the top editor of a page you want to delete?

Sometimes Hailinel likes to create pages just so he can have them deleted. Some men aren't looking for anything logical, they just want to see the world burn.

#16 Posted by StarvingGamer (7998 posts) -

Big ups for bringing a page you've curated extensively up to the chopping block.

#17 Posted by Hailinel (23891 posts) -

@AlisterCat said:

@Bocam said:

@Hailinel: Why are you the top editor of a page you want to delete?

Sometimes Hailinel likes to create pages just so he can have them deleted. Some men aren't looking for anything logical, they just want to see the world burn.

I like watching things burn as much as the next psychopath, but I didn't actually create this page. :P

@StarvingGamer said:

Big ups for bringing a page you've curated extensively up to the chopping block.

Thanks!

And oh my goodness, as I re-read my post, I just realized how full of typos it is. I shall balance your compliment with the abject shame I feel at this very moment.

#18 Posted by Marino (4598 posts) -

@Hailinel: It's gone.

Staff