Jump to content
Bright Eyes

Should the Sonic the Hedgehog franchise have more rounded female characters?

Recommended Posts

So essetially it's a bad thing that she looks sexy? Nothing about her character that's demaning to women, just her looks? That's just being petty.

Really, I don't think we should be applying feminism to the Sonic series because that's just going to open up a debate we would be better off avoiding. If she were treated like the girls in Dead or Alive, I'd be more in agreement with you.

Well I said in the OP that Amy was a bigger deal to me than Rouge. Ok, maybe I didn't make it particularly clear so I will state it more clearly here.

But she looks sexy in a really dumb way. It would be like if a man walked around an unbuttoned shirt. It might be sexy to some women but it's pretty dumb. She could have a much better design if they are going for a sexy look.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most writers are male, even worse, Most writers are Japanese males in the case of this series.

Yeah most of the females have terrible stereotypes associated with them, but so do the male cast so I don't see why it's such a problem for the girls, and not the boys.

And I really don't like the implications that a female isn't allowed to be feminine in any way otherwise she's "weak" and "dependent" and with that, I know where this topic is headed, better get my hard hat on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not about nudity. It's about how a character is designed so her chest is the one element about them most

people remember when they first see them. Don't you think that's kind of demeaning?

Also, a woman's opinion on this kind of thing isn't somehow more important than a man's.

I think it's subjective. I don't think all women should be designed in such a fashion, obviously. Something like that is just blatant titilation but if it adds to the character in the end, it's passable. They have fanservice on Dudes too afterall, just not really in Sanic.

...but yes, Rouges boobies do kind of stick out like a sore thumb in-universe.

Edited by Andrew Albacia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I said in the OP that Amy was a bigger deal to me than Rouge. Ok, maybe I didn't make it particularly clear so I will state it more clearly here.

But she looks sexy in a really dumb way. It would be like if a man walked around an unbuttoned shirt. It might be sexy to some women but it's pretty dumb. She could have a much better design if they are going for a sexy look.

So you want her to be more tasteful in her design. I can agree with that.

The problem? No matter how tasteful you do sexy, it's still sexy. So people will still remember the sexy features of her design regardless. Only way to avoid that is to not make her sexy, but in doing so you run the risk of subverting the seductress archtype she was going for and end up putting her in one that isn't "unique" so to speak. She'd no longer be seen as a seductress archtype.

I mean, a number of characters I had listed on the other page like Carmelita aren't designed as...blatant as Rouge, and yet she still comes off as Ms. Fanservice in the Sly Cooper series.

Edited by ChaosSupremeSonic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You criticise Amy and Cream for being girly and praise Tikal and Blaze for not being girly. You realise that line of logic is basically saying "the only way to have a good girl character is to make them not be a girl". I agree greatly with Honem in that regard.

I've studied this in-depth in much detail and I understand your line of thought here.

Some feminists are criticised for wanting women to have 'masculine qualities' so therefore are percieved as wanting women to become 'pseudo men' or as philosopher Julia Annas puts it (the best I have heard of this argument): 'women who are almost as good as men',

Clearly the argument has some power. But to make this argument you have to define masculinity and femininity.

Is Amy girly? Is being dependent and clingy a feminine trait? REALLY?

And is Tikal not girly? As in, is being strong and independent purely a masculine trait? Again, REALLY?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't see what's so disturbing about cartoon characters that are made to look sexy. Hell, Warner Bros. had Bugs Bunny cross-dress in several cartoons, and I don't think too many kids watching Saturday morning cartoons lost sleep over that. The sexualization itself isn't the point. It's the comedic effect that comes from those characters' interaction with other characters. Ever notice how Knuckles reacts anytime Rouge says something seductive to him? That's what they're going for, not the "hey let's give furries some more spank bank material" angle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you want her to be more tasteful in her design. I can agree with that.

The problem? No matter how tasteful you do sexy, it's still sexy. So people will still remember the sexy features of her design regardless. Only way to avoid that is to not make her sexy, but in doing so you run the risk of subverting the seductress archtype she was going for and end up putting her in one that isn't "unique" so to speak.

I mean, a number of characters I had listed on the other page like Carmelita aren't designed as...blatant as Rouge, and yet she still comes off as Ms. Fanservice in the Sly Cooper series.

Hey, I don't mind if men find women sexy. It's not like they can be deprived of that or that I would want that either. I don't mind if a character was sexy if it was tastefully done and not demeaning to women as in: look she's sexy because she has big noticeable boobs.

So yeah, if they redesigned Rouge I wouldn't have a problem. I think I put this in the OP actually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "seductress" character is a fairly normal thing in cartoons and games, specifically ones aimed towards wider audiences of both children and teens/adults. So honestly, who cares if they come off that way? I'd honestly be more concerned that they make the character seem a bit more like a person and less like an object, which (outside of the fanbase at times, *shudder*) has been done fairly well. She's flip-floppity in morals and does things her way, can hold her own and has her own hobbies, personality, professions, love interests, etcetera.

Its not always portrayed the best since Sega's writing and story comprehension skills are usually naff, but she's not really a character that's treated like a chunk of meat for the more sexually repressed fans.. or at least, once again, not like some of the fanbase does. tongue.png

But yeah, as much as you want to pull the feminist card, take note you can have a good female character with feminine traits. They're not exclusive to each other. This is like saying you can't have a muscly and masculine character that is actually really weak, shy, and likes long walks on the beach. Let's take our minds out of the stereotypes and judge characters for what they're worth rather than complaining about how they juxtapose themselves.

Also, this character was made in Japan. What do you expect? :v

EDIT: Tasteful, you say? Meh, that could work. Only problem is that none of the outfits since her SA2 one have looked fitting or workable with her design; especially the Heroes getup.

Edited by Azukara

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've studied this in-depth in much detail and I understand your line of thought here.

Some feminists are criticised for wanting women to have 'masculine qualities' so therefore are percieved as wanting women to become 'pseudo men' or as philosopher Julia Annas puts it (the best I have heard of this argument): 'women who are almost as good as men',

Clearly the argument has some power. But to make this argument you have to define masculinity and femininity.

Considering that feminism had a whole Sex War in the 1970-80s, I'd say it's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.

Saying that Rouge needs to cover up is saying to sex-positive feminism that she should be ashamed of showing off her body; saying that it's okay to show off her body is essentially appealing to men in a way...why the fuck are we bringing feminism up again?

I'd rather avoid bringing that in this topic guys.

Hey, I don't mind if men find women sexy. It's not like they can be deprived of that or that I would want that either. I don't mind if a character was sexy if it was tastefully done and not demeaning to women as in: look she's sexy because she has big noticeable boobs.

So yeah, if they redesigned Rouge I wouldn't have a problem. I think I put this in the OP actually.

Well, they're no longer along the lines of "gag boobs" like they were in her SA2 3D model. And even then, Rouge is rather tame for her sex appeal.

Seriously. Compare Rouge to Candy Kong or Krystal from Starfox Adventures, and you'd see less of a problem with her than you would with them when it comes to sexualization.

But really, there's nothing wrong with appearing sexy. It's a matter of whether her actions are still appropriate for a series like Sonic.

Edited by ChaosSupremeSonic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is Amy girly? Is being dependent and clingy a feminine trait? REALLY?

And is Tikal not girly? As in, is being strong and independent purely a masculine trait? Again, REALLY?

Neither of those are "feminine" or "masculine". They are simply character traits, weak and strong. Which is why it doesn't make sense to say "Amy is fitting a stereotype" and "Tikal is avoiding a stereotype".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neither of those are "feminine" or "masculine". They are simply character traits, weak and strong. Which is why it doesn't make sense to say "Amy is fitting a stereotype" and "Tikal is avoiding a stereotype".

See this guy? He's getting it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering that feminism had a whole Sex War in the 1970-80s, I'd say it's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.

Saying that Rouge needs to cover up is saying to sex-positive feminism that she should be ashamed of showing off her body; saying that it's okay to show off her body is essentially appealing to men in a way...why the fuck are we bringing feminism up again?

I'd rather avoid bringing that in this topic guys.

I agree with the second wave sex-positive feminism. I agree that a woman should be able to show off her body if she wants to.

But Rouge isn't real. She's designed and marketed, probably by men, for a male audience, That is why I find it offensive. It's not a woman making her own choices but a patriarchal company who are designing what is the cliche in a medium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering that feminism had a whole Sex War in the 1970-80s, I'd say it's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.

Saying that Rouge needs to cover up is saying to sex-positive feminism that she should be ashamed of showing off her body; saying that it's okay to show off her body is essentially appealing to men in a way...why the fuck are we bringing feminism up again?

I'd rather avoid bringing that in this topic guys.

Well, they're no longer along the lines of "gag boobs" like they were in her SA2 3D model. And even then, Rouge is rather tame for her sex appeal.

This.

While some Women find it sexist some will still choose to cosplay and stuff as these "inherently sexist" designs. It's all subjective.

I agree with the second wave sex-positive feminism. I agree that a woman should be able to show off her body if she wants to.

But Rouge isn't real. She's designed and marketed, probably by men, for a male audience, That is why I find it offensive. It's not a woman making her own choices but a patriarchal company who are designing what is the cliche in a medium.

I can agree here too. I try to keep the women I design somewhere in-between.

Edited by Andrew Albacia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neither of those are "feminine" or "masculine". They are simply character traits, weak and strong. Which is why it doesn't make sense to say "Amy is fitting a stereotype" and "Tikal is avoiding a stereotype".

I just said they weren't masculine and feminine! That was the whole point of my post!

But you can't pretend that Amy isn't fitting into a stereotype. She is fitting into the stereotype of the clingy and dependable woman (the clingy girlfriend for example).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rouge is supposed to be a femme-fatale like character. A primary, defining feature of the femme fatale is that she uses her sexuality as a weapon. So, I don't think this is demeaning to women at all - but I do think it's kind of out of place. Never cared for her too much as a character.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the second wave sex-positive feminism. I agree that a woman should be able to show off her body if she wants to.

But Rouge isn't real. She's designed and marketed, probably by men, for a male audience, That is why I find it offensive. It's not a woman making her own choices but a patriarchal company who are designing what is the cliche in a medium.

Then stop looking at it in that perspective and how she's some sex object created by perverted piglet-people and actually judge the character upon her own merits? Rouge isn't even my favorite character by a long shot but I still feel this needs to be said. You want her to be more than just eye candy whenever she already is.

I mean granted like said, this is Japan so what do you expect regarding the designers, but then again look at how many feminine (and revealing) characters have been in media that also stand out as individualistic. In fact I don't even know why this is a focus, female characters are females and if they flaunt their boobs then whatever, its like men who flaunt their muscles or masculinity. They're proud of their body and want to show it, whether in serious or comedic context. Same diff.

Edited by Azukara

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But Rouge isn't real. She's designed and marketed, probably by men, for a male audience, That is why I find it offensive. It's not a woman making her own choices but a patriarchal company who are designing what is the cliche in a medium.

It'd be offensive if the character was just there to be looked at, but notice how nobody in-universe hardly comments on her appearance, and the focus is more towards her being a thief, and agent and never on her appearance, so I hardly find that offensive at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It'd be offensive if the character was just there to be looked at, but notice how nobody in-universe hardly comments on her appearance, and the focus is more towards her being a thief, and agent and never on her appearance, so I hardly find that offensive at all.

She so clearly is there, partly, to shock and titillate on her design. You'd be in denial if you said she wasn't.

I never criticised her character in my post and merely her design.

All Sonic Team need to do is make her sexy in a way that isnt totally cliched and dumb. It's not asking for much.

Edited by Bright Eyes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a character displaying overt sexuality isn't necessarily demeaning or whatever. Take a look at this chick:

PantyA.png

I DARE you to find a character that's MORE sexualized than she is. Yet, at the same time, she's an extremely well developed and put together character.

I do agree that the Sonic chicks are incredibly shallow one note characters though. They all need some patching up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She so clearly is there, partly, to shock and titillate on her design. You'd be in denial if you said she wasn't.

I never criticised her character in my post and merely her design.

All Sonic Team need to do is make her sexy in a way that isnt totally cliched and dumb. It's not asking for much.

It's her freaking character archetype, that's the point; she is supposed look like that and just because she does, doesn't mean it;s automatically offensive or putting down woman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a character displaying overt sexuality isn't necessarily demeaning or whatever. Take a look at this chick:

PantyA.png

I DARE you to find a character that's MORE sexualized than she is. Yet, at the same time, she's an extremely well developed and put together character.

I do agree that the Sonic chicks are incredibly shallow one note characters though. They all need some patching up.

Well she's got sexuality there that's quite a bit more tasteful than Rouge. She has a skimpy dress sure but that's hardly anything to cry about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But Rouge isn't real.

Whether Rouge is real or not isn't the bloody point. Point is, she's meant to be sexy. It's all in the archetype, it's all in the design and character.

She's designed and marketed, probably by men, for a male audience, That is why I find it offensive. It's not a woman making her own choices but a patriarchal company who are designing what is the cliche in a medium.

You're argument here boils down to "I don't like men wanting to see sexy female characters". It's that kind of attitude that ended up being a part of the feminist Sex Wars in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's her freaking character archetype, that's the point; she is supposed look like that and just because she does, doesn't mean it;s automatically offensive or putting down woman.

It is automatically offensive when she's designed to shock and titillate because she is the first (and only major?) Sonic character who has her boobs emphasised. It's the main part of her character design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.