Book 3 - Page 143

Because he likes beer. And trees

Book 3 - Page 143
Comic - Book 3 - Page 143
Recent posts... (See full thread)
No one was trolling. Trilo was just bringing up the question of to what degree a character's gender influences our opinion of them. And Trilo I think that was brave topic to bring up, and I commend you for it.

And I say for myself admit that there are gender bias's. A male character who is aggression I have a predisposition to view as a need to be dominant over others. Female aggression I would view as emotions that are much deeper and letting out some inner frustration. So a male character or female character doing the same thing I would view differently. Whether that is right or wrong those are my honest bias'. And I believe everyone has bias' like these, and just has a hard time admitting it.

And I felt Trilo was the one not being listned to. The question being asked was whether negative traits in female characters are judgded more harshly then the same negative trait in a male character. Are females placed up to higher standards? And the answer is, it is complicated. People liking Lilith doesn't apply much to this discussion, as she doesn't have any strong negative traits. It is not a counter argument that gender bias doesn't exist.
The major issue was that Trilo didn't just "bring up the question". They brought up their opinion of the answer, and then asked the question as an afterthought.

It's one thing to raise a complex question for consideration; it's quite another to preach one answer despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Fact of the matter is (if we're talking about the forum community in total) Trilo is plain wrong. Plenty of female characters get positive attention, and plenty of male ones get overly harsh criticism. Even the prime example, Jillian, has far more lovers on her side than haters against her. This is a fact, so the fabricated narrative of Erfworld's female characters getting unfair criticism is just that; a fabrication. For brief periods, loud minorities of posters were indeed hating on Jillian in a sexist fashion. But lo-and-behold, they're not around anymore because the realized they were mostly alone in their opinion and the majority of us made that obvious to them.

No, Trilo isn't trolling, that claim was a bandwagon that got started by my poor choice of words, and I apologize for that error. When I said "tumblr-trolling" what I mean was the sort of extreme "feminism" one would see on tumblr that makes a living off of inventing things to be offended by. I don't even believe Trilo is malicious, I think they are just so deeply invested in their ideals that they cannot even consider being wrong. I use the Foe function very rarely, but for my own sanity, I had to do that about a page back.
In my case I don't like too much Jillian nor Wanda (Jillian Looks rather reckless and mary sue, for some reason other units love her) I suppose because she was supposed to be a "Perfect warlord" or similar so it has good date-a-mancy. But I would have had the same grippe if it was Ansom the one that played that way.

Wanda looks like a drama queen and in general I'm not fond of "this character is destined to be great" which is how she was presented. Still I know that there exist people that enjoy those type of characters. so I'm glad that these characters do exists and I'm able to enjoy the comic alongside the people that like those characters.

I do love Jojo, even thought we don't know much about his inner thoughts, and I loved Silvia even thought we all know that she only wanted to kill and kill until his fiery demise.

There's a quite good amount of characters with interesting personalities to choose favs from. Borobean looks awesome even thought he hasn't talked too much. Olive was nice, Artemis is very Traditional (and maybe not as flexible as an archon) but I didn't dislike the character, even thought I expected her to dust in order for parson to "act". I enjoyed greatly her rivalry with Silvia during the battle. :)

and ofc I like Lilith and Caesar. and I'm sure that there will be a lot of interesting characters on transilvito once we get to see them in more detail (hope for a skank rival for Lilith!)

finally, even if someone don't like a character "as it has been presented" he/she may like it later once the character had gotten more spotlight or "character growth". Some people didn't liked bonnie too much when she was presented, but some started to like the character once they had access to her way of thinking. ^^
The major issue was that Trilo didn't just "bring up the question". They brought up their opinion of the answer, and then asked the question as an afterthought.

I would suggest that people do this quite a lot with topics in erfworld and that there's not anything inherently wrong in presenting a belief so long as it's done in a respectful way, with the exception of beliefs that are actively hateful. And for the record I can consider that I'm wrong, I just came to the conclusion that I mostly wasn't wrong in this case (probably, I've in fact been wrong about not being wrong before). Kind of like you did presumably.

I do appreciate you clarifying the tumblr trolling thing though, thanks. I've really got no desire for people to be upset or stressed out on my account.

also @crisco the reason I'm not debating sailor moon underwear is because that sounds like a pretty boring topic. I put on women's underwear daily and the time it takes for me to put it on is about how long it maintains my interest. in season 1 of sailor moon, the only one I saw as an adult, the the underwear tended to only be visible when they were doing ridiculous leaps through the air and the like. the focus came across on the ridiculous jumps to me and magic powers rather than something meant as espicially titillating (as opposed to the wanda/jillian torture scene, which I enjoyed by the way and was more interesting to me than the fact that women wear underwear).

if anyone responds to this paragraph to give a counterpoint I'm not going to respond, not because I'm refusing to consider it, but because it wasn't relevant to the point I was trying to make that underwear shots aren't innately upsetting to me. and also because I have limited energy, underwear in sailor moon is pretty off topic, and as I've just said my interest in women's underwear is already maxed out after I decide which to wear for the day.

if there's other things like this I didn't respond to, it's probably reasons similar to some or all of what I just said about sailor moon underwear and not because I'm not thinking about, not going back and rereading what people said, not paying attention to it, etc. I'm doing all those things and will continue to think about it after the topic dies down.
Sir Dr D wrote:
Really good reply Mrtyuh. Interesting analysis on the decrypted. And the character in erfworld that has the most free will is Jillian. She is closest to what stupid world people are like, in that she is more influenced by what she wants, then duty. The fact that Tremenis admires her could be an indication that he secretly wishes he could be free of duty, and to just be able to do what one wants to do. That could be the purpose of her character. The first truly free willed unit, and the one of the keys to bringing free will to all.

That is certainly an interesting idea, but I'm not sure I buy it. We know that Jillian is, or at least was at one point, an instrument of Fate, and Fate has a habit of manipulating its agents. We also know that Charlie made extensive revisions to her mind. Some of her actions are perhaps caused by his lingering influence. I'm not trying to dismiss your observation. As I said, it is interesting and something which I had not considered, but, concerning Jillian, there are still too many unknown variables to draw a definitive conclusion.

Sir Dr D wrote:
Jillian being rash is less forgivable the Ansom, Stanley or Ceasear doing it.

Just out of curiosity, what would you consider instances of those characters being rash. With Ansom, I think would say his only truly rash action was attempting to clear the walls single handedly, and my response to that was something along the lines of, "I hope you win a Darwin award." I suppose one could add the Dwagon donut and the tunnel assault, but those struck me more as arrogance than rashness, and arrogance was one of Ansom's defining character traits. Most of Stanley's rashness involved antagonizing all his neighbors and getting into an untenable situation, which was caused by his simplistic belief in the Titan's plans for him. I would argue the same for him going by himself to recruit the elves. With the battle in the pass, he really had no reason to expect an ambush, and his reaction to the tactical situation was exactly what it should have been. As for the attack on Jillian, he came with enough force to win. If not for Charlie's intervention, he would have won. Stanley is more dim and simplistic, in my opinion. As for Caesar, the only action I would consider rash would be contacting Vinny for a plan to conquer Faq, and he was drunk. He arrived at the battle in the pass with enough force to win. His only fault was faulty intelligence about Stanley's resources. He would have had more forces if Charlie hadn't cut a deal with Parson. As for his battles against Carpool, he's doing what he's been ordered to do with the resources available. As for Jillian, yeah, she's done a few reckless and rash things, but that's part of her personality.

Once again, I don't feel like I'm making too much sense, so I'll try to start over and simplify. Personally, I don't think rashness is necessarily a horrible trait. One historian I once read said that Julius Caesar was probably the luckiest general in history because his recklessness, but also added that to great extent Julius Caesar created his own luck by seizing and maintaining the initiative. So rashness isn't necessarily bad. Jillian is perhaps the most rash character in the story. It isn't necessarily sexist to acknowledge that fact. If rashness is a cardinal sin for a reader, it makes sense that Jillian would receive a significant amount of ire from that reader. For me, though, arrogance is much more of a cardinal sin. While my original dislike for Jillian was caused by her survival, which I considered an asspull, most of my current dislike is caused by what I perceive to be her arrogance, which I consider to be small but developing. It is also a matter of first impressions; they're very important. Jillian made a very bad impression on me early and has had to overcome that.

Now, let's compare her to another character. Don made a very good first impression on me because he cared more for merit than title. It took a while, but he has now squandered that original good will. He has become a very arrogant character in my mind. I dislike him more than Jillian. Now, I think Jillian is more reckless than him. I believe that is a fact. Now, if I judged Jillian more harshly for her arrogance, which isn't nearly as bed as Don's yet, that would be unfair.

I'm still not sure if I'm making sense. It may also depend on what motivation one ascribes to a character. What I see as arrogance you may see as rashness. What you see as recklessness I may see as the most appropriate response given the circumstances.

Sir Dr D wrote:
But then now that I think about it, Sandy is another character that could be rash and take risks. And her being rash, wouldn't only have us be understanding of it, we would probably be cheering her on. So it might not be because Jillian is female, but because she is not the best written character. She is hard to interpret in a comic medium and we just can't relate to her and understand her actions. She comes off as being a bit unbelievable as a character. Sandy though we could understand almost right away.

So short answer is I am confused and don't know what I think. :P Yes I think sexism does exist here, but it is complicated.

My initial impression of Sandy is that she's a bit of a showboat. Still, she racked up more kills than anyone else, so she is perhaps justified. I'm don't necessarily think her showboating is a good thing or a bad one, it's just the impression I have of her.

Another factor could be what side a character is on. The natural tendency is to root for the protagonist and against anyone that stands in their way. It's possible that actions by Jillian that are viewed negatively because they have a negative impact on Gobwin Knob might be viewed positively if they benefited the side.

trilo wrote:
it says you have more feelings about the women characters right now in general, good and bad, and therefore aren't doing the thing I was describing even if you dislike jillian. congratulations, you win nothing. :lol: optional challenge for a reason. cookie for me. But I like cookies. :p

Still, correlation isn't necessarily cause. There are a lot of female characters I have strong feelings about, but those strong feelings aren't necessarily due to them being female characters. They simply may be good or interesting characters. I'm not trying to be obstinate. I acknowledge that the possibility exists, but I'm not exactly sure why I feel what I feel about various characters myself. There are many components intertwined. If I don't know why I think something, it's unlikely someone else does. On the other hand, sometimes an outside observer can see something which we miss. It often does help to have a second set of eyes.

trilo wrote:
I never thought every individual person was doing that though. the optional challenge just sneakily has the double effect that we end up talking about the women characters' motivations at the same rate as the men (or more, because I am the real sexist after all with my reverse sexism :roll:). I've been enjoying the discussion in this thread a lot and I have been able to learn things from people's insights that I had missed, like jillian being captured by the tri-link. that's not the kind of thing people talk about if we're just rehashing the same anti-jillian arguments.

I can't fault you for trying to steer the conversation you find more interesting. Lord knows I jump on some of the silliest tangents and drive them into the ground: see my post on the yield discussion.

trilo wrote:
since various people mentioned lilith and again, I do want to say I think lilith is a pretty subservient character. she doesn't really get attitude or go off and do her own thing unless she required to by circumstance, so she's more like jack and much less of a wildcard compared to stanley, caesar, or jillian. so we get this super capable, but relatively subservient character, (nothing wrong with these traits) and people almost immediately start saying she'd make a good girlfriend for parson.

that still sounds like gender stereotypes are having an influence to me, just different ones than I was choosing to focus on earlier.

personally I want to give parson shippers parson/maggie (insert joke about love triangle involving maggie->parson->lilith->wanda) and have lilith stay on parson's platonic and first post-bogroll lackey. her ability to act when needed would be a really good counter weight for parson's tendency to get stuck in his head or depressed and her ability to quickly prioritize would help get him being more active too. parson is also going to feel like he owes her after what he put her through and I imagine that guilt is the only thing that'll let him override his bogroll guilt.

she'll most likely respect parson a lot too once she gets to know him better, because he's probably the leader most like charlie yet he cares about those under him far more than charlie ever did.

I think you're being a bit too harsh towards Lilith. Now, the first time we really met Lilith she was already a prisoner. Given the fact that she was both figuratively and literally shackled, her options were limited. She couldn't really do anything other than react to her circumstances. She tried to seduce Pierce to escape. She managed to give her side a nice boost to its treasury at Jetstone. When she escaped, she tried to croak as many Charlescomm units as possible until she learned of the damage she was doing to her side, then she tried to fix it. Even after she made it to the Magic Kingdom, she still felt like she owed them two more bodies. Basically, what I see with Lilith is a unit with an extremely high sense of Duty and the ingenuity to try and often succeed to fulfill that Duty even in difficult circumstances. Also, I find it very interesting that her Duty seems more towards her side than the Arkenpliers.

Still, we don't know how she'll act with more leeway if she ever manages to not be a prisoner for a while. I'm looking forward to finding out. As for the suggestion that she becomes Parson's lackey, I actually like that idea quite a bit. If that happens, I think I'll enjoy that turn of events, but I would probably enjoy watching her leading a triad in the field as well.

As for shipping, I'm pretty neutral. Romantic relationships can add a lot to a story, but they can just as easily detract from it. I'm guarded about the Parson/Maggie ship because I can't see much good coming from it, other than giving Bunny and Maggie something to bond over, but I'm hoping I'll be pleasantly surprised by whatever develops. I do have a bet in the Predictamancy thread about Parson hooking up with Ashna, but that comes from a feeling that the only one Parson really could have an equal relationship with would be someone from his own world. I did have a bet about Parson hooking up with Silvia, but that was a direct response to someone betting he would get with Wanda, which I really don't see happening. While I didn't spell it out, my thinking was that a relationship with Silvia was more likely than a relationship with Wanda and spoke more to my thoughts on the unlikelihood of the latter pairing than a desire for the former. About the only ship I really like right now is Caesar and Bunny. Still, I not against them, but it isn't a focal point of my interest at the moment. As for Lilith, I would find it more interesting if she's more loyal to Parson as Chief Warlord of her side than if she were loyal to Parson the person. I wouldn't hate the latter, but I think the former is a more interesting dynamic.

Also, going back to your other post, I did think of a couple of female rulers from the backers' stories. Now, I can't speak for anyone else, but the impression I had on the forums was that Queen Post was very well respected generally. I don't recall what the general impression of Queen Eliteabit was. Since I interpreted her as an equivalent to Queen Elizabeth I, I respected her since I respect the real world monarch, but she didn't really do enough for me to form an impression of the character herself.

Mirage GSM wrote:
Sailor Moon does panty shots because of realism? :lol::lol::lol:


Let me introduce you to the concept of Fan Service...

Sadly, I think the first time I ever heard that term was in the director's commentary to Pitch Black, the scene where the pilot crawls into the tunnel. In a case of "once you see something you can't unsee it," I now realize how ubiquitous it is in entertainment.

Mirage GSM wrote:
In the Forums however I've never seen a character attacked beause of their gender - in fact the reason I like these forums so much is because most posters take great care to explain and justify their opinions, and I've yet to see someone use the justification "She's a dumb bitch" :-)

[joking]I'm pretty sure on the Internet someone not using that rationalization is the sign of the Apocalypse. I might just have to use it in my next post to prevent the END TIMES.[/joking]
diplogm wrote:
I think people generally do exaggerate how incompetent Stanley is. He seems like a good example of someone getting promoted to one level above the job he's good at. From what we can tell he is a good warlord and usually does well in tactical-level engagements, using his signature blitzkrieg with huge, fast-moving flying muscle. But the higher-level thinking required to run a side, like effective diplomacy, strategic positioning and personnel management, are not what he's good at. He's like Michael Scott from The Office, who the show informs us was a phenomenal salesman is his day but is a clueless branch manager. It's interesting that he and Jillian are not so different in this way, both are successful warlords and tough fighters who are uninterested in the more political and strategic elements of being a ruler.

The fundamental logic of Erfworld probably produces guys like Stanley all the time - their side becomes scary because they are good at conquering cities, at which point everyone teams up on them and takes them out. The difference in this case is he's had help from a chief warlord who thinks in terms of complex multiplayer games and an OP artifact that lets you succeed even if everyone is trying to team up on you.

The fundamental logic of Stupidworld produces guys like that all the time too, unfortunately. More unfortunately, demotion or removal would tarnish the reputations of those who promoted them, so it can take a loooong time for their former backers to put enough distance between them and their former promotee so that the mistake can be rectified. (5 years in a recent case of which I have personal knowledge. God knows how much damage that idiot did the company, but I can testify to the amount of damage he did to my career plans.)

Edit: well crap how'd I get on a month-old thread? sorry.
Edit: well crap how'd I get on a month-old thread? sorry.
Edit: well crap how'd I get on a month-old thread? sorry.
Edit: well crap how'd I get on a month-old thread? sorry.
Edit: well crap how'd I get on a month-old thread? sorry.