There's a definite elephant in the room here, and it's kind of disturbing he doesn't make it the actual topic: All the negative examples are women. Mulan is amazing in combat because women can't be portrayed with flaws, especially not if those flaws make them inferior to men in any way. Wonder woman rapes a guy and is portrayed as a heroic victim because she's a woman and women raping men is literally impossible as far as the left and most of the right is concerned. The authority figure the pilot guy got punished for mistrusting- even though she was a complete idiot- should have been blindly trusted because she was a woman and he's just a stupid dudebro. Fat asian girl crashing into affirmative action hire and thereby dooming the galaxy is portrayed as heroic because women thinking with emotions instead of reason is just great. Actually, this is the only one that might be played a similar way if the genders were reversed, but it's still probably not an accident it was a woman making the emotional "heroic" decision. Scarlet witch gets to do whatever she wants because she's sad, because our sympathy for women suffering is set at about 10x what it is for men.
Literally every example he gives of a character being spoiled, or overly perfect, or selfish, is a woman. Does he seriously not make the connection that maybe that's not an accident, and that a lot of the planet considers it sexist to imagine a woman with flaws? Or is he afraid of coming off as too right-wing or getting banned from youtube if he actually names the problem or something?
They have to use female characters, because the "instantly good at everything just because of who they are" would probably be considered a no-sell ... and they're writing from a totally different direction than what the Hero's Journey comes from ... it's the difference between "humans are flawed but can improve if they work hard and learn self-control and other things like that" and "the hero is entitled to be special because of who or what they were born as." They're into the Chosen One thing big-time, but try to hide it. They aren't too good at it.
A dangerous side effect (or primary intent) of narrative deconstruction is that the first target is inevitably the hero's journey of self-improvement and self-knowledge. Without that, there can be no positive lessons to teach, no heights to aspire to. Even the cautionary tales are corrupted.
This review was weird when I watched it last; he's great in the first half then starts saying opposite stuff in the second half that doesn't make any sense.
There's a definite elephant in the room here, and it's kind of disturbing he doesn't make it the actual topic: All the negative examples are women. Mulan is amazing in combat because women can't be portrayed with flaws, especially not if those flaws make them inferior to men in any way. Wonder woman rapes a guy and is portrayed as a heroic victim because she's a woman and women raping men is literally impossible as far as the left and most of the right is concerned. The authority figure the pilot guy got punished for mistrusting- even though she was a complete idiot- should have been blindly trusted because she was a woman and he's just a stupid dudebro. Fat asian girl crashing into affirmative action hire and thereby dooming the galaxy is portrayed as heroic because women thinking with emotions instead of reason is just great. Actually, this is the only one that might be played a similar way if the genders were reversed, but it's still probably not an accident it was a woman making the emotional "heroic" decision. Scarlet witch gets to do whatever she wants because she's sad, because our sympathy for women suffering is set at about 10x what it is for men.
Literally every example he gives of a character being spoiled, or overly perfect, or selfish, is a woman. Does he seriously not make the connection that maybe that's not an accident, and that a lot of the planet considers it sexist to imagine a woman with flaws? Or is he afraid of coming off as too right-wing or getting banned from youtube if he actually names the problem or something?
In his defence, he is the critical drinker, not thinker
They have to use female characters, because the "instantly good at everything just because of who they are" would probably be considered a no-sell ... and they're writing from a totally different direction than what the Hero's Journey comes from ... it's the difference between "humans are flawed but can improve if they work hard and learn self-control and other things like that" and "the hero is entitled to be special because of who or what they were born as." They're into the Chosen One thing big-time, but try to hide it. They aren't too good at it.
A dangerous side effect (or primary intent) of narrative deconstruction is that the first target is inevitably the hero's journey of self-improvement and self-knowledge. Without that, there can be no positive lessons to teach, no heights to aspire to. Even the cautionary tales are corrupted.
This review was weird when I watched it last; he's great in the first half then starts saying opposite stuff in the second half that doesn't make any sense.