Several people, such as the last topic starter, think it is a problem because it's more of a problem for someone to tell women that they ''can't'' be warriors. They see this trope as excusing that idea, because they think that telling women it's ''okay not to'' be a warrior is the same as telling them they ''cannot'' be warriors.
to:
Several people, such as the last topic starter, think it is a problem because it\'s more of a problem for someone to tell women that they \'\'can\'t\'\' be warriors. They see this trope as excusing that idea, because they think that telling women it\'s \'\'okay not to\'\' be a warrior is the same as telling them they \'\'cannot\'\' be warriors.
Changed line(s) 9 from:
n
That is not true. It is also not true that warriors are superior to non-warriors. '''A person - male or female - can be strong in character and be a completely worthwhile person without ever picking up a weapon of committing an act of violence against another person. To say that they can't is more problematic than ''anything'' you can say about gender. '''
to:
That is not true. It is also not true that warriors are superior to non-warriors. \'\'\'A person - male or female - can be strong in character and be a completely worthwhile person without ever picking up a weapon or committing an act of violence against another person. To say that they can\'t is more problematic than \'\'anything\'\' you can say about gender. \'\'\'
Changed line(s) 12 from:
n
The trope is sexist if it treats womanhood as an
to:
The trope is sexist if it treats womanhood as an \"excuse\" for not being a warrior. In truth, no one needs an excuse to not be violent, and there is nothing wrong with NonActionGuy characters either. However, that doesn\'t seem to actually be the point of the trope.
The trope is necessarily female because, unfortunately, looking down on \"feminine\" men is still PeopleSitOnChairs, and no one really cares to fix that. [[note]] (Though, I can think of at least two examples of LadyOfWar characters looking down on a male character for wearing elaborate, elegant clothing and not fighting, where both are shown sympathetically and \'\'all\'\' of the warrior characters, male and female, are eventually shown as missing the forest for the trees, and that peace was a better option all along, but I think that speaks more to my personal tastes.) [[/note]]
Several people, such as the last topic starter, think it is a problem because it's more of a problem for someone to tell women that they ''can't'' be warriors. They see this trope as excusing that idea, because they think that telling women it's ''okay not to'' be a warrior is the same as telling them they ''cannot'' be warriors.
to:
Several people, such as the last topic starter, think it is a problem because it\'s more of a problem for someone to tell women that they \'\'can\'t\'\' be warriors. They see this trope as excusing that idea, because they think that telling women it\'s \'\'okay not to\'\' be a warrior is the same as telling them they \'\'cannot\'\' be warriors.
Changed line(s) 9 from:
n
That is not true. It is also not true that warriors are superior to non-warriors. '''A person - male or female - can be strong in character and be a completely worthwhile person without ever picking up a weapon of committing an act of violence against another person. To say that they can't is more problematic than ''anything'' you can say about gender. '''
to:
That is not true. It is also not true that warriors are superior to non-warriors. \'\'\'A person - male or female - can be strong in character and be a completely worthwhile person without ever picking up a weapon of committing an act of violence against another person. To say that they can\'t is more problematic than \'\'anything\'\' you can say about gender. \'\'\'
Changed line(s) 12 from:
n
The trope is sexist if it treats womanhood as an
to:
The trope is sexist if it treats womanhood as an \"excuse\" for not being a warrior. In truth, no one needs an excuse to not be violent, and there is nothing wrong with NonActionGuy characters either. However, that doesn\'t seem to actually be the point of the trope.
The trope is necessarily female because, unfortunately, looking down on \"feminine\" men is still PeopleSitOnChairs, and no one really cares to fix that. [[note]] (Though, I can think of at least two examples of LadyOfWar characters looking down on a male character for wearing elaborate, elegant clothing and not fighting, where both are shown sympathetically and \'\'all\'\' of the warrior characters, male and female, are eventually shown as missing the forest for the trees, and that peace was a better option all along, but I think that speaks more to my personal tastes.) [[/note]]
