“What would be considered”. Sorry
I help out with the youth group at church and one of the students is in the 10th grade and he is pretty retro (loves movies and tv shows from the 80s and 90s). He used to be a big Star Wars fan and lost interest due to "disney making it a princess product" as he puts it. He was asking me the other day how did all this happen or when did it start, and I couldn't pinpoint an exact person who started this but had some ideas.
What did start it all? I know Ghostbusters 2016 seems to be the first movie to actively be made to piss off fans (when the original director was trying to do Ghostbusters 3 and they screwed him over). With Star Wars, if they wanted to appeal to actual women who were fans they could've used Jaina Solo or Mara Jade.
Was it in gaming? I remember when gaming magazines seemed to have constant articles about women in gaming or about the "abuse" they received online as if they have never heard the language you hear where guys get together and hang out.
Comic books? I mean they literally made comics of women sitting around the table discussing feelings and as Eric July said "modern comics are made for 14 year old girls on tumblr who don't read comics"
So honestly who is patient zero or who is to blame?
refresh and stop in quick succession still gets you past 50% of paywalls
https://gamerant.com/die-hard-john-mcclane-fresh-action-hero/
It's everywhere. Another recent one and one from 10 years back. Search for 'john MacClare emotional' or something brings a tonne up. Gunna have to sort through to find in amongst all the articles about bruce willis's emotions regarding his PPA, but this is at least a widely discussed idea.
https://www.vulture.com/2013/02/die-hards-john-mcclane-everyman-to-superman.html
Is it revisionist? I don't think so. There's something to it and they're pointing to something that is different between die hard and other movies of the same or earlier eras. Is it just a different style? Is it a reflection of an existing trend rather than the catalyst? Perhaps so. But I do agree that there is a difference. It's just hard to see from here in 2023 in a sea of marvel slop.
pop culture magazines are unlikely to use that terminology or criticise it for being that way. They're going to praise it for being relatable and an everyman because of how he was less stoic and showed more emotions.
Which is fundamentally feminine to some degree. Not the ideal masculine.