- Joined
- Sep 16, 2018
Your opinion is unpopular because its extremely easy to debunk, and we've seen it paroted by unscrouplus actors over and over again to the point where one has to wonder what is in the mind of the person making it.
Yes, I'm sure all the fiction from africa and asia views white men as the default. White men are the default in western fiction because the west is white. Black men are the default in african fiction because africa is black. Asian men are the default in asian fiction because surprise, asia is asian.
For some reason its only whites that have to share, weird isn't it? Nobody ever went to asian or black stories and said "YOU NEED TO INCLUDE MORE WHITES!"
Really gets the noggin joggin how only white people in fiction are a problem but nobody else appears to be. Asian fiction for asians, african fiction for blacks, western fiction for everyone!
As for the "men" part, its because 99.9% of explorers, adventurers, daredevils and risktakers throughout history have been and are men. Fantasy is usually adventure, which usually fits male characters more.
Romance novels (including romance fantasy) and stories mostly star women, but again, nobody ever went to romance writers and tried to tell them that its a big problem that women being the default is a problem there.
Again, really gets the noggin jogging, don't it? White men are the problem, but nobody else is. I wonder what the motivation behind that is.
This comment is hillarious.
Your answer to "Why have writers stopped giving a shit?" is "Who gives a shit?" amazing, great job bro, you solved it!
No. It absolutely needs to be justified. Everything in a story ideally needs to be justified. You can have a good story without justifying everything, but the more glaring contradictions you fail to reasonably explain the worse the story gets, and no story was ever made worse by adding more internal consistency to it instead of taking it away.
"No matter what your protagonist looks like", this is also retarded and gives away that you have no idea what makes a good or a bad story.
Your protagonist is part of the world they live in. If your protagonist is interchangable, then they're badly writen because that means they aren't informed by the world and they don't inform the world around them, inherently making the story shittier.
Lord of the rings is still studied nearly a century after it was writen because its one of the most coherent and consistent worlds ever put to pen and paper. Everything in it has an explenation and if you find an element intresting, there's several tomes worth of lore for you to delve into. The material rewards you for engaging with it instead of punishing you.
When the elements in a story work toogether, the story is stronger for it. When the elements are like pieces from a completely different puzzle, the story suffers.
At the end of the day, the default state of humanity is homogeneity (And no, trade ports did not look like downtown new york, 99.9% of people died near where they lived, the concept of mass migration is a very recent phenomenon and if you think people are racist today I got a big surprise for you) and the default risk takers are men by nature.
These are facts of life, not things the KKK came up with, if your story breaks away from them, you need to have an actual reason or explenation for it, or your story is objectively worse because then there's a gaping hole in your world.
You know why the women in alien and terminator work whereas most modern fantasy fails?
Because alien's themes are a perversion of motherhood and pregnancy which is more pertinent to a female protagonist as a direct opposite to the alien, and because terminator is about protecting your offspring, and "mother bear" is an expression for a reason.
When you offer an actual reason as to why things are the way they are the stories become solid and reward you for thinking about them instead of punishing you for doing so.
"Men with tits" aren't good protagonists. The protagonists in these movies aren't women because someone rolled a die, they're women because its thematically coherent and works with the narrative and you could not have replaced them with a man. Having half your police force, or half your military or half your fighters be women requires an ironclad explenation if you aspire for your story to be anything other than comedy or a popcorn flick because the consequences of that descision have knockon effects for your world.
Having a turbo warmongering militaristic expansionist empire where 50% of the warriors in the frontlines are women would make one wonder how they haven't died out from lack of farmers and soldiers.
But Nah, bro white people and especially men are evil, just put more women and darkies in it, trust me, it'll work this time, the next lord of the rings is right around the corner.
90% of settings who shoehorn women and nonwhites do it in medieval european fantasy settings. Nobody has done a medieval zulu fantasy where 50% of the poputation is whites.
