Why the hate on female lead in the new star wars: Rogue One?

[Uzumaki Macho]

Conservatives are even more sensitive than SJWs if they get upset over a female lead in a movie.

 

[Claymantan]

Conservatives are even more sensitive than SJWs

Ah now you see the truth

 

[Bad Touch Yakushi]

"Girls cant play with my Star Wars toys, they're boy toys." - a 40 year old man

 

[Uzumaki Macho]

Ah now you see the truth

I've always known this.

 

[Wabbit]

Black guy gets a lead, woman as an MC... what has the world come to...

Next is gay and then a pedo. Rapture is coming.

 

[System001]

[video=youtube;Wji-BZ0oCwg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wji-BZ0oCwg[/video]

I love strong female roles(Do not bring up Sakura. I do not know what that is!).

I don't get why people be feeling like some of these strong female roles in movies are "forced".​

Because it reeks of a leftist agenda and people are tired of having that stuff shoved down their throats by the media.
Whether it actually has a leftist agenda is up in the air, but it's pretty obvious why people think it does.

 

[Claymantan]

Because it reeks of a leftist agenda and people are tired of having that stuff shoved down their throats by the media.
Whether it actually has a leftist agenda is up in the air, but it's pretty obvious why people think it does.

Maybe everyone else is tired of having a conservative agenda shoved down their throats for nearly 250 years XD (in America)

 

[shelke]

Why does it matter who gets the lead in movies? In fact, why do people even care about representation in ... fictional universes of all the things? Genuine question.

 

[Claymantan]

Why does it matter who gets the lead in movies? In fact, why do people even care about representation in ... fictional universes of all the things? Genuine question.

Fictional universes

Real representation

 

[Alice in Noodleland]

Simply because of the male dominance that they built around the whole franchise for almost 4 decades. Now changes are coming and of course people seems not yet ready for these changes.

People were skeptical of Daisy Ridley but look at her now, she's earning lots of praises for her acting.

Hope that Felicity Jones will get the same response.

 

[shelke]

Fictional universes

Real representation

Which is my point. Why does it matter? It's a creative domain that should never pander to anyone. Whatever the creative team chooses should be enough.

 

[CrimsonReaper]

why do they have artificially alter the cast without being biased or anything oh..my god!!! no sexism no female/male majority just pick who you like.

 

[paratise]

Why does it matter who gets the lead in movies? In fact, why do people even care about representation in ... fictional universes of all the things? Genuine question.

For seeing that them and their stories are valid and worthy enough to be told. Displaying people is a sort of approval. Representation (positive ones) are tend to be in favor of dominant groups of general demographics.

 

[Claymantan]

Which is my point. Why does it matter? It's a creative domain that should never pander to anyone. Whatever the creative team chooses should be enough.

I said this in the thread about Ghost in the Shell, but the problem is that writers do pander, generally to specific groups most often while forsaking others. In an ideal world, writers would be less hack-y and actually write good stories that explore different identities or that mix identities in a way that creates interesting new stories. While the way mainstream pop culture writers/directors are going with putting better representation into media is hamfisted at best, it's at least a change from the general trend. That said, I understand the backlash. But I mean, it's better than no change at all.

 

[shelke]

For seeing that them and their stories are valid and worthy enough to be told. Displaying people is a sort of approval. Representation (positive ones) are tend to be in favor of dominant groups of general demographics.

Which is pandering, and precisely my point.

I said this in the thread about Ghost in the Shell, but the problem is that writers do pander, generally to specific groups most often while forsaking others. In an ideal world, writers would be less hack-y and actually write good stories that explore different identities or that mix identities in a way that creates interesting new stories. While the way mainstream pop culture writers/directors are going with putting better representation into media is hamfisted at best, it's at least a change from the general trend. That said, I understand the backlash. But I mean, it's better than no change at all.

I am not suggesting that there shouldn't be any change, given that this media thrives on fan service. But, this much political correctness in a creative domain? Man, it doesn't seem right to me. The reason we get cookie-cutter characters is that the audience should find them acceptable. Any character that actually explores emotional depth is shunned to appeal to the majority. Writers are forced to go for some kind of quota system to appeal to everyone: 2 females? Check. White dude? Check. Black Dude? Check. Now the other groups are going to protest that THEY didn't get a representation.

It's immature and makes no sense to me.

 

[Claymantan]

I am not suggesting that there shouldn't be any change, given that this media thrives on fan service. But, this much political correctness in a creative domain? Man, it doesn't seem right to me. The reason we get cookie-cutter characters is that the audience should find them acceptable. Any character that actually explores emotional depth is shunned to appeal to the majority. Writers are forced to go for some kind of quota system to appeal to everyone: 2 females? Check. White dude? Check. Black Dude? Check. Now the other groups are going to protest that THEY didn't get a representation.

It's immature and makes no sense to me.

Right, but I'm saying that first it was "Screw those guys, they don't deserve representation and if there are stories brought to "us" (Hollywood, publishers, editors, whatever) that represent them, we won't give them any play." Now, with time, as those marginalized groups have protested their lack of inclusion or access to mass media, those exclusionary groups have progressed from that mindset to "Well all we have to do is have the faces on the screens and in the words, right?" Which is still subpar and shallow and bad, I agree.

They were supposed to just make an equal playing field and allow access, but for some reason that's too hard for them. XD So we have the crappy situation to which you allude.

Besides, like I said, even if they ignore the other identities, they're still just pandering. Look at things like Godzilla or whatever, we have plenty of tropes that didn't worry about race but were based on pandering. XD (White ex-military dude, alcoholic Westerner, etc.)

So people are sensitive to this kind of thing because there was never any moment of "true creativity" in mass media. It's always been pandering and shallow. You have your spurts of creative genius, but it's mostly not like that.

 

[shelke]

Right, but I'm saying that first it was "Screw those guys, they don't deserve representation and if there are stories brought to "us" (Hollywood, publishers, editors, whatever) that represent them, we won't give them any play." Now, with time, as those marginalized groups have protested their lack of inclusion or access to mass media, those exclusionary groups have progressed from that mindset to "Well all we have to do is have the faces on the screens and in the words, right?" Which is still subpar and shallow and bad, I agree.

They were supposed to just make an equal playing field and allow access, but for some reason that's too hard for them. XD So we have the crappy situation to which you allude.

Besides, like I said, even if they ignore the other identities, they're still just pandering. Look at things like Godzilla or whatever, we have plenty of tropes that didn't worry about race but were based on pandering. XD (White ex-military dude, alcoholic Westerner, etc.)

So people are sensitive to this kind of thing because there was never any moment of "true creativity" in mass media. It's always been pandering and shallow. You have your spurts of creative genius, but it's mostly not like that.

I completely get your mindset. If someone has included a female lead for creative purposes, then the emotional and immature audience should just get over themselves.

But that is the problem, isn't it? Pandering. Creativity is certainly being affected in these situations to a great degree. And the people are to blame for this, as media works on demand and supply.

 

[Claymantan]

But that is the problem, isn't it? Pandering. Creativity is certainly being affected in these situations to a great degree. And the people are to blame for this, as media works on demand and supply.

I mean maybe. There are dudes like George Orson Welles who repudiated executive meddling specifically to reject anything like this from messing with their creative goals. But I also think most directors and writers that make it to Hollywood aren't that noble. Those tropes like "Magical Negro" and "Black Guy Dies First" didn't just emerge because people were exercising their creative freedoms or being meddled with - that was the writers having biases that need to be called out. The choice of what stories should be represented and who is most fit to represent them (i.e. the unjustified rejection up until recently of portraying any persons of color in fantasy works in the mainstream) is as much a vector of implicit and unjust bias as it is a business or creative decision.

Can't just blame the people. Most people don't actually have control over what they're shown or what they see as available to them. It's equally true that if they had been exposed to more inclusive or diverse media from the start, there wouldn't be nearly as much of an outcry against something as simple as a female lead in a Star Wars film.

 

[shelke]

I mean maybe. There are dudes like George Orson Welles who repudiated executive meddling specifically to reject anything like this from messing with their creative goals. But I also think most directors and writers that make it to Hollywood aren't that noble. Those tropes like "Magical Negro" and "Black Guy Dies First" didn't just emerge because people were exercising their creative freedoms or being meddled with - that was the writers having biases that need to be called out. The choice of what stories should be represented and who is most fit to represent them (i.e. the unjustified rejection up until recently of portraying any persons of color in fantasy works in the mainstream) is as much a vector of implicit and unjust bias as it is a business or creative decision.

Can't just blame the people. Most people don't actually have control over what they're shown or what they see as available to them. It's equally true that if they had been exposed to more inclusive or diverse media from the start, there wouldn't be nearly as much of an outcry against something as simple as a female lead in a Star Wars film.

Which is a vicious cycle of pandering, more demand and more supply. I think people do have the power to change things by simply making less demands. That's what I believe in.

 

[Claymantan]

Which is a vicious cycle of pandering, more demand and more supply. I think people do have the power to change things by simply making less demands. That's what I believe in.

Well nothing would have changed without more demands, is what I'm saying XD

Business and art just don't mix well