Doe Star Wars promote Racism and Sexism

I understand all the flack Star Wars and Lucas have gotten for Jar Jar Binks, but people who go off on how much of a black stereotype he is seem to completely ignore the actual black human people who are in the film.

Newsflash: No there isn't.

...There shouldn't be at least.

edited 18th Mar '13 3:29:38 PM by unnoun

It is true that there are separate markets for male-targeted and female-targeted stories - the most extreme examples are Japan's shonen, seinen, shoujo, and josei categories, but we see it in Western markets too with the marketing divide between, say, military thrillers and romance. Where Journeyman falls down is in assuming that these divides are inevitable and the result of innate biological differences.

There are more differences among genders than between genders. Yes, biology plays a role, but only in terms of experiences. Yeah, a dude writing about how much menstruation and childbirth suck falls a bit flat. Unless, of course, he has a good imagination or he does a lot of research. George Lucas was never a farmboy, a slave, or a Paladin either. And he never lost his hand. Seriously, what's with that? But he can imagine being those things, or look up experiences by people that were, or speak to acquaintances or friends. Or just make shit up. That normally works.

On the other hand, the societal differences present other problems. It's hard for a man to convincingly write about what it's like to be an oppressed woman in a third world country, forced to undergo genital mutilation, sold into "marriage" at the tender age of twelve, and kept behind doors where her only purpose is to serve, unseen and unheard. The thing is that it would fall flat for any woman in a first world country to write convincingly from that perspective as well.

So, lists of things George Lucas was not:

I could go on.

He's better at writing some of those things than others. It kinda sucks that his aliens are better written than his women, considering he's never met any of those aliens and he presumably met at least one woman.

edited 18th Mar '13 4:01:04 PM by unnoun

Very, very well said.

Yep. All that proves is that writers and publishers target different works towards different demographics. It doesn't say much about the differences between those demographics other than the taste preferences of the average member - at least, the preferences that are perceived by the creators.

edited 18th Mar '13 7:10:58 PM by resetlocksley

"Doe Star Wars"

Their making a Star Wars with deer in them now?

Yes. The part where Ani's mom gets shot by a Sand Hunter is a real tearjerker.

Guess I should have seen that coming. Freakin Disney.

What I want to know is how the deer could operate a lighsanber without opposable thumbs.

Also, if Episode 7 doesnt have a talking deer in it now, I will be very disappointed

edited 18th Mar '13 8:06:06 PM by dontcallmewave

I dunno, I think an argument can be made that he's one of these.

Lightsaber antlers.

Because that makes sense.

Makes perfect sense to me. Lightsaber moose... there would be an epic battle for the ages...

Some of them can even shoot evil lightning out of their antlers. Or have antlers made of evil lightning. UUUUNNNLIIIMAAHHTED POWWAAAAAARRRRR!!!'

edited 18th Mar '13 10:39:54 PM by Tuckerscreator

How do you know that Lucas never met an alien?

It would surprise me if he hadn't.

Mr. Plinkett believes George Lucas is an alien.

He works (well, worked, now, I guess) in Hollywood. I'm sure he's ran into at least a few space cases.

I may have been putting too much emphasis on biology. I guess that depends on how good a job you think hormone treatments do when someone needs their physical sex changed. If they succeed, then obviously the differences aren't so great after all.

Lucas is part of the reptilian conspiracy. Reducing aliens to hilarious and offensive cultural stereotypes is part of his plan to disarm us of the idea of hostile aliens and leave us unprepared for the eventual takeover.

... what does that have to do with media preferences?

Well, if hormone treatments work, then obviously...um...the genders aren't really that different, and therefore media preferences...uh...um...media preferences aren't based on biology...

At least, I think that's what Journeyman's saying.

I don't understand how that logic works.

The argument I was fighting was biology vs. culture. Everyone else who has spoken up has been beating down my argument and claiming it's mostly cultural. So, if it's possible to successfully, without lasting identity crises and life destroying issues, change from one sex to another then the cognitive differences between men and women (which would determine any sex-related differences in just about every preference, including media) really are mostly cultural, and could be overcome.

Personally, if being born in the wrong body to start with is such a horrific issue (which it is) I still hold to the idea that biology controls a lot of this stuff.

That would only be true if the hormones themselves, and the changes they induce, aren't the primary source of said biological components of gender, is the thing.

{up] Alright, I sort of understand a bit better.

The problem is, I don't think there are any purely sex-related differences when it comes to what kind of TV people like.

First off, the hormones rarely change a person entirely mentally. They were already the wrong gender before the hormones, and they were mentally aware of that, which is why they started taking the hormones. The hormones are the means to enact physical change. I.E. alter muscles, fat and breasts, affect sperm production and menstruation and ovulation, look more similar to the appropriate gender etc.

Second off, to an extent the identity issues are, in fact, cultural. Their mind is the wrong sort of mind that they believe is appropriate for their body's gender. Nothing wrong with that, but who they feel they are on the inside doesn't match who they see on the outside. So change of one or the other is necessary. To an extent, perhaps this issue would be less pressing in some although certainly not all cases if there was less societal pressure for members of certain genders to ascribe to certain traits and behaviors exclusive to those genders.

I mean, you do know that every hormone is present in both sexes, right? Men have Estrogen, Progesterone, Oxytocin, FSH and LH. Women have Testosterone. It's not the presence or absence of these hormones, it's concentration. Ovaries produce more Estrogens and Progesterone. Testes produce more Testosterone.

As a side-note, look up Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome. It's fascinating.

edited 20th Mar '13 5:47:08 PM by unnoun

In universe Star Wars I think does a good job in making men/women in equal positions (As Jedi, Bounty Hunters, Senators, etc) The only exception is the empire. Although im not sure if its canon or fanon, but they purposely omitted non-humans and women in the ranks to prove they were totalitarian/nazi-ish.

As for race, the minority chars are portrayed like everyone else - Mace Windu, Adi Gallia are the only examples I can think of. However a lot of the time the planet of the hats thing borders on unfortunate implication terrority. (Like a cherry blossom planet with decidedly Japanese stereotype being attacked, etc)

You never see an Imperial woman. Like, ever. So if it's Fanon, it's justified by the films.

I knew my argument was flawed. This isn't my subject, but it's one that interests me. Gender/sex issues I mean, not just Transexualism.