Doe Star Wars promote Racism and Sexism

There are female Imperial agents in Expanded Universe works. The love interest in the Force Unleashed games is one.

I meant in the movies. While Lucas cherrypicked from the EU, it isn't canon when he hasn't picked it.

Lucas usually cherrypicks the mediocre parts of the EU. I mean, Garm Bel Iblis and Thrawn haven't shown up yet.

It isn't canon, but he is more than happy to make a profit on it.

Oh Loocas.

The EU tends to be better than most canon. I know I complain about the excessive cynicism of the recent EU, but I'd take it over the PT or TCW.

And that excessive cynicism isn't even entirely unrealistic. Certain parts of the world had a bright spot a long time ago and then spent the last century or two going through one Hell after another. Sometimes even volunteering for it. It's just that us modern "civilized" nations don't move forward on cynicism, we tend to look down on it as a childish excuse to act like shitheads.

I know nothing about the EU at all so I dont know about cynicism of it. But I did hear that the Jedi establish an empire or a new empire gets put into power, etc. I am a little dissapoint with that bc I'd like to think things can be fixed and lessons can be learned, etc so I dont want a lot of Aesop Amnesia in the series. Then again, i get that star wars world always needs to have some kind of conflcit.

Ah but this time the empire is benevolent and the republic sucks balls because totalitarianism is rad yo!

Most Science Fiction Authors Are Totalitarians

Why isn't this a trope? It's true.

Having watched The original SW trilogy several times, I have never gotten a racist, sexist overtone. I have wondered why there was only one woman (Leia) portrayed until ROTJ. And I'm assuming that the Rebellion did have women members, they just weren't in the movies.

And honestly, when I go to the movies, I'm there because I want to be ENTERTAINED! It's why it's called ENTERTAINMENT! Why cant we just like a piece of media for it's entertainment value? why does it always have to "symbolize" something? It's complete crap if you ask me.

I also think its a case of not liking the work so the person writing the opinion has to have a reason why they didn't like it (it being "racist" or "sexist").

I wonder of George Lucas will issue an "apology" to the poor woman who was "offended".

^^ It isn't a trope because it isn't true.

Writing about something doesn't mean the writer endorses it, unless you think (f'rex) Tom Clancy is in favor of using weaponized Ebola for biological warfare and nuking the Super Bowl...

[edit]
You have no idea how much that annoys me... This isn't the thread for that (nor do I think it would really fly anywhere on these forums, as it would more or less start out as a complaining thread), however.

edited 27th Mar '13 11:48:23 AM by Nohbody

@Nohbody: That was entirely my point. But to some people that is absolutely what it means. Don't have enough minorities or women in your movie? Obviously racist/sexist!

You also have to remember that the original movies were made a long, long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away...

''Vijeno,

And now, a word of advice for you.

If you don’t like my style of writing, then just walk away. Hit the back button; close the tab; or type in a new address.

Don’t bother with snark, or “leaving advice” that was neither asked for, nor wanted.

Second, don’t EVER assume that any post writer is automatically looking for popularity. That is narcissism of the first order, and projected narcissism at that.

Third, you may call it tedium, but apparently it bothered you enough to write such an uninformed and arrogant response to the post. Since you never bother to ask what the point of the post is, nor why the post is written. Your comment offers nothing to the table, but I guess that is to be expected.

Have a nice day.''

-Heavy Armor (the author) on criticism

edited 11th May '13 8:05:04 PM by Saieras

Most science fiction authors aren't totalitarians, but they have weird ideas about politics, and sci-fi in general has had a fascist undercurrent since at least Heinlein. Count how many works of science fiction have some sort of oligarchy, empire, or totalitarian police state versus a republic. Now, for all those works featuring a republic, look at how many do not portray it as a People's Republic of Tyranny. You'll probably end up with Prequel in the Lost Age Star Wars and some early Star Trek.

edited 11th May '13 5:52:04 PM by CrimsonZephyr

Yay!

Where does Foundation fit in ^?

Sci-fi work with an empire.

Yes.

Female Deer wars in stars do promote Racism and sexism.

♪Doe, a deer, a racist deer. Ray, 1/4th of "racist deer"...♪

edited 24th May '13 8:54:55 PM by Tuckerscreator

Yeah, I recall a professor of mine pointing out once that a lot of SF seems to think people will return a monarchy or something like it in the future; he was referring to Dune specifically, but you do seem to see it a lot. I don't think it necessarily speaks to a desire of the authors to live that way, or to advocate that as a form of government, only that they seem to find the situation and interesting one to write in.

As for Heinlein, I don't think he was necessarily fascist so much as just deeply conservative (Stranger in a Strange Land not withstanding). I think he thought the world was moving towards one central, international government and, while he didn't like that idea, felt that it was probably coming anyhow. He actually wrote a book on being politcally active, too.

See, I would agree, if monarchy and dictatorship were depicted with as critical a portrayal as democracy. Authoritarian government is given a warmer portrayal in the narrative. Yes, there are bad kings or bad dictators, but the proposed solution is always to replace them, never to democratize the system or spread power more diffusely. A democracy is always tyrannical or corrupt, never functional. This is likely because sci-fi authors (and authors in general) deeply despise most people at heart, and strive to construct a world where they can depict flawlessly intelligent dictators and kings thumbing their noses at the unwashed masses.

Or it could be because most authors live under democracies, not monarchies or dictatorships, and are thus more familiar with and critical of their flaws.

The flaws of monarchies and dictatorships have entire bodies of political science and literature devoted to why they're bad. That's not an excuse.

Never said it was an excuse. Just that it might be a reason.

"Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity" and all that.

edited 25th May '13 10:16:01 AM by CorrTerek

Though to be honest, SW usually portrays democracy as a good thing. The Republic is only flawed [not, bad, flawed] in the Prequel Era, and it's still portrayed as being vastly superior to The Empire.