Speaking about anti-male bias...yay or nay?

[DokiDokiTsuna]

Can you give examples of media that does this in your opinion?

It's difficult, because it's not all that widespread of an issue...like I said, I've only noticed it in a few shows. But RWBY is the most obvious one. All the characters are pathetically written at this point, but the male characters are consistently much more so. I don't wanna get into it; I could write whole essays...^^;

I'm personally struggling to think of examples of female villains who were better developed than male ones. Is this a very recent trend?

The thing is, they're actually NOT better developed...I mean, if you consider 'development' to be more than just piling on sad backstories to force an emotional response from the audience.

It's more about presentation...they are presented as victims, as people who just need to be saved, as people who can change their minds and motivations (often at the drop of a hat, but still). And their male counterparts just...aren't.

As some others have mentioned, I think this is probably a more common issue in anime, where misery porn for female antagonists AND scenery-equivalent roles for male characters (if you can't be sexualized and objectified, you're kinda just in the way) are far more prevalent.
Of course, a lot of anime with that level of pandering more or less eliminates males from the relevant cast entirely, so you end up with scarcity again. ^^;

I think what I'm trying to say that it's a niche issue...noticeable, but niche. You'll really only find it in shows where the writers DO want to pander to viewers who just want to look at cute girls, but delude themselves into thinking they don't, so they half-ass it. They make an effort to include male characters, and immediately after they stop trying with them.

[But_a_Jape]

If there's not a rundown of multiple concrete examples of this occurring, I find this to be a pretty difficult conversation to have. I can kind of see this as a thing, but I can also think of multiple instances to the contrary so unless a number of examples are given, it's hard to evaluate the prevalence of this.

But hypothetically, if this were an actual rising trend, I wouldn't necessarily see it as "anti-male" bias. If the Big Bad is male and ultimately not redeemed, but they have a female subordinate who is eventually redeemed, it could just be the standard trope of "Big Bad is unredeemable, but those they misled can still be redeemed." It can also full under the general trend of men being the top boss in most circumstances, so the irredeemable Big Bad is already more than likely going to be (villainous)[correction: should be "male"].

Anyway, the contrary examples that immediately came to mind for me would be (spoilers for every series below):

The Last Airbender(Though it's pretty old by now, as previously mentioned) - Zuko is redeemed but Azula's a villain to the end (barring the comics, which I haven't finished)

She-Ra and the Princesses of Power - Both Catra and Hordak get redemption arcs (personally, I don't think Hordak's was fully realized, but the intent was there)

Kipo and the Age of Wonderbeasts - Scarlemagne (male) gets a redemption arc while Dr. Amelia (female) is treated as irredeemable (I have my own issues with how Kipo handles these themes, but that's a different topic)

[antonioIII]

Well, you are probably speaking about ocidental media, right? Cause, yeah, i know that there are lots of series wanting to make Female characters look strong, but end up being gynocentric(By creating Mary Sues) and misandric(Usually, they put a male villain doing things that media acuses men to do/say or just put specific actions that matches some kind of critics). And okay, i sure am kinda tired of that as well.
I am more into Oriental stuff, and besides they being pretty Chauvinists(By Putting nude and lewdy jokes, for example) they look a lot more interested at just telling a story.(That said, they are overwhelmed with clichés as well)

I don't know if you are a anime/manga person, but... There's a lot of good creations like Inuyasha, FullMetal Alchemist(if you wanna see the anime, go straight for the Brotherhood) and Kimetsu no Yaiba.

But even those try to show both male and female villains side of the history. The fact that the Male Villain is Bad and female villain is not that bad can still be there, but not on a forced way. After all, there are still other male villains who also have redemption(like Greed from FMA) and there are female villains who die being still evil(Like lust, also from FMA and Tayuya and maybe Kaguya from Naruto).

The thing is: Yeah, those Misandry and Gynocentrism usually ruin series and movies(I have saw some videos on YT that talk about that, if you want) and it's probably because it is always easier to put a Male as villain, since we have ever done that. and redempt a Female Villain, since most of people don't like to see women dying or being ultimately humiliated.

[But_a_Jape]

Back to the villain thing, I feel like Wandavision is the latest show guilty of this. By the end she doesn't even get a slap on the wrist and the other characters somehow look at her as a broken hero. That felt very tone deaf to me.

I have a similar issue with WandaVision but I really don't see it as an issue regarding gender and more an issue with the Marvel Cinematic Universe as a whole not wanting to have their heroes become too morally grey. I understand that the studio is ultimately trying to market these heroes as heroes and don't want to sully their image by getting them involved in a story that's too morally complex and risking their audiences not wanting to buy their toys or dress up as them for Halloween anymore.

This is something I've had an issue with regarding how they handled Tony Stark - who is a perfect candidate for moral complexity but always has to be reined in by the end of the movie to be "actually, he's still the good guy." As a whole, I feel like the MCU has never actually held Tony Stark fully to account for the worst things he's done - now he's dead after sacrificing his life to save the universe so he's perpetually a saint in that universe. Steve Rogers too (to a lesser extent), whenever he's presented with genuine moral dilemmas, the narrative saves him so he still comes out indisputably good by the end. Oh, Steve's not actually going up against the entire US government, turns out they were under control by evil Nazis the whole time! Splitting up the Avengers to save his international war criminal best friend isn't wrong, because that best friend was mind controlled the whole time and also didn't murder T'challa's father. Tony Stark and Steve Rogers don't actually have irreconcilable differences due to incompatible philosophies, Steve lets Tony know he can still ask for help whenever he wants.

Sorry that kinda went into a Marvel tangent there - but I just wanted to emphasize that I believe Wandavision's issue had less to do with Wanda's being a woman and more to do with her being a Marvel/Disney property they still need to sell.

[djourner]

I do agree that latelly we have been getting writers very afraid of exploring evil females.
Particularly i believe is because the public (for reasons that don't sit well with me) tend to be okay with seeing a man tortured, beaten and killed, but if a woman is put on the same situation it becomes somehow vile... Which to me is horrible.
Anime is for sure pandering,
the amount of times we are introduced to a semingly badass and evil villain woman, only for when she finally interacts with the MC she becomes a cliche tsundere, or a yandere with an inexplicable liking for the protagonist is way too often for my liking. (pretty much every isekai vilainess fits here and that sucks!)
I wished we got more 'mastermind' vilainesses... Preferably ones that don't have a male 'superboss' pulling their strings and are instead badass in an off themselves.

I also agree with the male counterparts getting underexplored, getting reduced to 'power hungry maniac' or 'i did it for my dead wife' cliches.
I want to see more villains that have complex emotional backgrounds and don't come off as empathetic for the sake of getting a tear of the viewer when he dies... Have a message, a complete evil plan, a clear motivation that becomes obvious when you look at his moves in hindsight, and only when all those fail he finally grows mad and sadistic and has to be stopped at all costs... Or reedemed.
If a vilain dies and you just go... eh, good thing he is gone... Then the villain was not good enough.
When a villain dies you either need to feel miserable for the tragedy that he was, or cheer your lungs out because it's finally over. Not feel lukewarm about him.
Similarly, if a villain gets a redemption arc and is just the same person afterwards it's just that now he doesn't kill people, that's a failure too.

[Heartcompass]

A brilliant topic for Women's history month, make no mistake!

[rajillustration]

What?

I could be entirely missing what you're trying to say because I find it hard to parse where your thesis is, but if women are getting more screen time and character development than they have in the past (including female villains) this doesn't mean that men are just suddenly thrown away--it means that we're finally having something that is closer to equal (closer, not there yet.) It should have been more like this the whole time.

[HippieGhost]

I mean, compared to the decades of misogynistic and extremely male-leaning media we've got already, I'd say if anything the media is just balancing things out. Like most have said more screen time and women leads isn't really a bad thing. You mention this as a niche issue, but have you compared it to modern media as a whole?

Also, not really sure what you're getting at with RWBY. I mean, yeah some of the seasons tend to be a bit weak in terms of character development but that's more of an across the board issue that the current season seems to be doing a great job stepping away from. I mean...

RWBY Spoilers

Salem is the big bad, and is shown to be irredeemable DESPITE her tragic backstory.

Ozpin/Oscar has unique challenges from living so many lives, and having to confront the fact that he'll be just another one of Ozma's identities. He makes huge mistakes, but he does his best to rectify them, and learns from the consequences of his actions.

Hazel has a great motive for being a villain, and while yeah he gets killed in the recent episodes he does so in an act of redemption that I thought was done very well.

Jaune starts out as a dorky, useless character who goes through a ton of development over the course of the series. He's braver. He's selfless, and he's arguably one of the best characters.

The conflict between Qrow and Clover, the betrayal, the reasonings for their split, and the guilt Qrow feels were all important to his character, and it was an important lesson in how even the best of intentions can lead to tragedy. (not to mention the manipulation from a certain little scorion).

That's just naming a few characters, but I would definitely argue that RWBY is in no way anti-male. It's target audience is mostly women at this point, because that's who makes up the majority of the fandom, and the big 4 are all girls, but they treat the male characters fine.

[domisotto]

Dunno, in videogames, it's male villians who often get a sob story and a redemption arc & everyone goes gaga over it. cough Solas cough

[indagold]

Every male villain gets a redemption arc these days, every villain just gets a redemption arc. Writers know readers and viewers prefer villains anyway. Idk what media you're reading unless its steven universe lol which that I can agree on.

[DokiDokiTsuna]

this doesn't mean that men are just suddenly thrown away--it means that we're finally having something that is closer to equal (closer, not there yet.) It should have been more like this the whole time.

I'm not speaking about male characters simply getting less screentime, I'm speaking about them being underutilized compared to their female counterparts, and used simply to prop them up, rather than just...idk, writing decent male characters along with female characters that don't need to be lazily 'propped up'. =/ In a nutshell.

I mean, compared to the decades of misogynistic and extremely male-leaning media we've got already, I'd say if anything the media is just balancing things out. Like most have said more screen time and women leads isn't really a bad thing. You mention this as a niche issue, but have you compared it to modern media as a whole?

This is kinda what I was actually talking about in the OP...no one pays attention to the subtle issues within the observation, all they see is "girl power!" and react accordingly. Misogynists whine about female characters getting "too much" spotlight; others just see it as "fair" compared to male-dominated media of the past.

Two points:

A) I really hate to think of things 'balancing out' in that way...bad writing is bad writing; doesn't matter how many barriers are being "broken down". Just because I want to see more female characters doesn't mean I ALSO want to see male characters being treated like dirt. Hot take, but gender isn't the first thing I think about when I fall in love with a character and become invested in their story.
The fact that a character of an overrepresented demographic is written like a garbage can doesn't make me feel like justice is being done...and the sad part is that oftentimes it happens because writers feel like that alone constitutes "justice". T_T Nice try, but no. It takes a little more effort than that.

B) The fact that, as I said, the whole issue is subtly misogynistic, is what makes it niche and unique in the modern media landscape. It's a very specific species of "girl power!" writing that actually just drags down the whole cast: female characters get the bare minimum of creative effort, and male characters get none, in order to make the female characters look better. No one wins.

I really can't get into a debate about RWBY here (no matter how much I might like to...); it would take way too much time and go way off topic. ^^; Let it be said though that I've thought extensively about all the points you've brought up, and I've seen other people do the same for years...without realizing that they're just looking at the surface.

A lot of the male side characters pull their weight, definitely, but look at how the narrative treats them for it. Are their successes emphasized, or simply brushed aside? When they go through rough patches, are they supported or berated? Do their character arcs actually reach conclusions, or just fall apart somewhere along the way? Are their opinions valued? Are their skills and insights utilized to their full potential, or anywhere close...?

Also, about Salem: her story isn't anywhere near over (especially considering how little they've used her since she actually encountered the cast...); and she's been shown to be evil, yes, but not explicitly irredeemable. Honestly, the fact that her curse hinges on her literally learning a lesson suggests the opposite. =/

[aqua03]

This is kinda what I was actually talking about in the OP...no one pays attention to the subtle issues within the observation, all they see is "girl power!" and react accordingly. Misogynists whine about female characters getting "too much" spotlight; others just see it as "fair" compared to male-dominated media of the past.

Two points:

A) I really hate to think of things 'balancing out' in that way...bad writing is bad writing; doesn't matter how many barriers are being "broken down". Just because I want to see more female characters doesn't mean I ALSO want to see male characters being treated like dirt. Hot take, but gender isn't the first thing I think about when I fall in love with a character and become invested in their story. The fact that a character of an overrepresented demographic is written like a garbage can doesn't make me feel like justice is being done...and the sad part is that oftentimes it happens because writers feel like that alone constitutes "justice". T_T Nice try, but no. It takes a little more effort than that.

B) The fact that, as I said, the whole issue is subtly misogynistic, is what makes it niche and unique in the modern media landscape. It's a very specific species of "girl power!" writing that actually just drags down the whole cast: female characters get the bare minimum of creative effort, and male characters get none, in order to make the female characters look better. No one wins.

Yeah, I completely agree. "Two wrongs don't make a right" as the old saying goes.

(Also, RWBY was actually the first thing that came to mind when I read this whole thread amusingly enough. Big F to my boi Ironwood....)

[NellieVP318]

(Also, RWBY was actually the first thing that came to mind when I read this whole thread amusingly enough. Big F to my boi Ironwood....)

When I first saw this thread, I thought about RWBY. I also watch this show too and yeah, Big F for Ironwood.

I will say in one occasion that I have seen a female villain not get redeemed is the book series, Lunar Chronicles series. Yes, the main villain did get a sad backstory but all her actions that she did thought out the story isn't excused. She also get her desserts in the end.

Just saying, there may be some female villains that do get their desserts. For another topic, I think it is possible to give your character a sad backstory and not have them get redeemed in the end.

[darthmongoose]

The thing is, they're actually NOT better developed...I mean, if you consider 'development' to be more than just piling on sad backstories to force an emotional response from the audience.

It's more about presentation...they are presented as victims, as people who just need to be saved, as people who can change their minds and motivations (often at the drop of a hat, but still). And their male counterparts just...aren't.

I don't understand how women being treated as if they have no agency in being antagonists and that they're inherently just misguided and need correcting while male characters are allowed to have conviction in their motivation is "anti-male"... that sounds pretty insulting to female characters too.

You still haven't listed any examples of this trope that you're claiming is a thing other than.... RWBY? Like... I'm sorry but while it's a pretty popular web series, it's not exactly The Mandalorian in terms of visibility in pop culture discourse and one series does not a trend make. If you're asserting that something is a trend in media, you need to give examples of multiple recent high profile series. What other recent pieces of high profile media featured a female villain who got a redemption arc contrasting recent high profile media where a male villain didn't? If I was an English Lit Lecturer I'd be furiously scribbling "CITATION NEEDED!" all over your essay in red pen right now.

[Lady_T_Musings]

This makes me think about how gender and looks play a role in how villains are treated in ffxiv. In ffxiv online, it's way more common to have male villains (that aren't just raid bosses with a few word blurbs in a side bio for the story) be just evil, irredeemable, and even disposable over females that are supposed to fill the same role. Another thing that I've noticed is that the more feminine and petite-looking a woman is, the better chance at being redeemed by story framing she gets to be.

The specific context is how Yotsusu is a viceroy to the lands the heroes are trying to free from the Garlean Empire. She is spiteful, cruel, manipulative, and cunning. The lady is mean, but that was fine in my book. Through playing the game you also see more of how her power has always been an illusion and she is just a pawn in the king's game lashing out at everyone and anything, even folks loyal to her or showing her (kindness isn't the best word, but familiarity in a helping hand bc he also knows the struggle). Then she gets an amnesia arc and becomes everyone's pure and simple favorite baby and when she gets her memories back after being shown how cruel her parents and family members were to her and how hard her life was in the empire we are made to watch her tragic backstory play out during the boss fight against her and you can't skip her anguish. She's so tragic and sad bc she had a sad upbringing and is lashing out and being an abuser bc she was abused. Let's be real, most everyone that isn't Garlean in the story had the s name hardships and range on the scale of jerkitude, as they should, but I'm specifically y to feel bad for you when I watched you be horrible.

The most recent female bad comes from the relic quest and her name is Misija. She starts off being shown as kind and sweet even when folks are being low down to her, but once she reveals the true motives she is depicted as being way more low down and is framed as an ungrateful traitor who kicked the small lizard woman who believed in her. This scene is done so dramatically as they pan into the action of Misija kicking the other woman and also show various scenes of Misja laying hands on the smaller woman.

It doesn't seem like it should have been an issue, but when you look at how they decided Misija as the villainous traitor from the largest race in the game of muscular people and add extra emphasis to her laying hands on such a petite character and no flashbacks to how she too was mistreated and dealt with prejudice growing up in the same empire that Yotsuyu did, Misija immediately is shown to be the more irredeemable one, even though she too exhibits much of the same experiences and hardships of Yotsuyu did. Misija just ain't petite and about seduction techniques so I guess she doesn't get to be seen in that light? When all is said and done Misija is captured and has no regrets about the horrible things she did as she believes she is just trying to get the power of her ancestor that was martyred and making the ancestors of the folks who were in charge at the time pay for it. I don't have a problem with this at all, just the game framing of small and petite sad need redeem vs big and muscular girl means no redeem. mean,

Though in FFXIV something similar can be applied to men as the more charismatic and "handsome" they are the better chance at being painted sympathetically, but not always as men are way more fleshed out in extremes in the game as they can be the lowest of the low or can't do no wrong and once their stance is shown in the game, they get ramped up in that light and that's that.

Imma stop here bc this is getting long, but I think a lot of the problem stems from lady characters having to have a soft side and they couldn't possibly be truly evil, but if you can get rid of the softness by making her look hardened and angular, she can now be a true villain and it's like why she gotta look hard to go hard. She can look soft and still be terrible :V.

[DokiDokiTsuna]

I don't understand how women being treated as if they have no agency in being antagonists and that they're inherently just misguided and need correcting while male characters are allowed to have conviction in their motivation is "anti-male"... that sounds pretty insulting to female characters too.

I've been trying to illustrate how this specific style of writing is actually harmful to characters of both genders...mostly since people have been saying things along the lines of "isn't this better for girls tho". So no, that is not an example of "anti-male" bias, just a precipitating factor.

You still haven't listed any examples of this trope that you're claiming is a thing other than.... RWBY? Like... I'm sorry but while it's a pretty popular web series, it's not exactly The Mandalorian in terms of visibility in pop culture discourse and one series does not a trend make. If you're asserting that something is a trend in media, you need to give examples of multiple recent high profile series.

That's actually...not true? I think you're conflating the idea of a literal trend with that of a popular trend.

Like, to give a scientific example: how many people in the world have schizophrenia? Maybe 2-ish percent: not a popular trend. But if your grandfather has it, and your father has it, you are also likely to have it, which is in itself a trend. A trend within a small sample group, but still a trend (which is probably what led to people figuring out that it was hereditary).

But if you really want another example (that you've probably never heard of, but just to show that I'm not pulling this stuff outta my ass) Symphogear was also a big inspiration for this topic.

I love the show, really I do, but its fanservicey nature does get out of hand occasionally. I think every female villain in the show was AT LEAST shown in a sympathetic light (half the cast is made up of redeemed villain girls, even ^^; ) but the one time they had a male villain as the season's 'final boss', they just put him down like a rabid dog without even so much as ONE flashback from his perspective. I mean, Adam was a freak, but his backstory would probably have been way more plot-relevant than the fluff we got from his female-presenting henchies...

To give another example, the dichotomy between Dr. Nastassja and Dr. Ver.: both were evil scientists, both caused a lot of harm to the world and to the main cast, but only one was presented as a loving mother who was just doing what was best for (read: abusing) her daughters, rather than a delusional psycho.

Not that I would've wanted Ver to be redeemed (I reeeeeally don't like him)...what I would have wanted was for Nastassja to be handled with the same emotional distance...like yeah, she can be useful, she can even have good intentions, but her misdeeds shouldn't be brushed under the rug and justified just because she happens to be female.

[IndigoShirtProd]

Like, to give a scientific example: how many people in the world have schizophrenia? Maybe 2-ish percent: not a popular trend. But if your grandfather has it, and your father has it, you are also likely to have it, which is in itself a trend. A trend within a small sample group, but still a trend (which is probably what led to people figuring out that it was hereditary).

I don't know if the prevalence rates of a mental illness is conducive to the prevalence rates of anti-male bias in modern media. Can you even call it a trend in it of itself if you, the original poster, only had one example? I asked for examples because in my media diet, I hadn't seen any. It's not as though I don't think it's possible for actual anti-male bias to show up more and more in future shows and movies, but it's not really a clear trend at the moment.

But if you really want another example

Why didn't you just say this earlier? And two pieces of media does not make a trend, popular or not.

And at least for the Symphogear example, it sounds less "anti-male" and more "patronizing the female villain," at least to me. There's still this air in media where women are infantilized to the point where they're not allowed to be fully evil or perceived as fully evil, because that would go against the idea that women are mothers and nurturers, with only good intentions but they're just being led astray.

[migxmeg]

I didn't see the word "trend" in Doki's original post - it was just an observation about a few shows right?

Though I'll say I disagree about RWBY, that could be a whole debate . Personally I don't mind at all when individual works are unbalanced in one direction or the other as long as it isn't part of a trend.

[DokiDokiTsuna]

I don't know if the prevalence rates of a mental illness is conducive to the prevalence rates of anti-male bias in modern media.

... Obviously they're not related ideas, I was just trying to illustrate the concept. =/ I could have said a similar thing with, like, fruit fly genetics, but of the two fields where I have knowledge people generally understand my psychology analogies better.

Why didn't you just say this earlier? And two pieces of media does not make a trend, popular or not.

Those aren't the only two examples I have ever seen, and I'm not going to try to recall the character dynamics of every poorly-written show I've ever watched just to satisfy your curiosity.

Like @migxmeg said, I was never trying to make a sweeping generalization about all of media, I was just pointing out something that I noticed happening in, and I quote, "a FEW of the shows I watch".
The fact that you can't relate doesn't mean my observations are invalid, or that I have to prove them to you. And honestly, the fact that at least a few other people in this thread CAN relate speaks for itself.

[But_a_Jape]

That's actually...not true? I think you're conflating the idea of a literal trend with that of a popular trend.

Like, to give a scientific example: how many people in the world have schizophrenia? Maybe 2-ish percent: not a popular trend. But if your grandfather has it, and your father has it, you are also likely to have it, which is in itself a trend. A trend within a small sample group, but still a trend (which is probably what led to people figuring out that it was hereditary).

To add onto the semantic debate of the word "trend" - if you're trying to identify a trend in a specific subgroup, that subgroup needs to be identified itself. For your schizophrenia example, the subgroup is identified as a specific family - you can look into that family's history and isolate why they have a higher prevalence of a certain quality than the general population. With your two examples given (RWBY and Symphogear) I'm not clear on what subgroup they have in common is. The best I can think of is "anime-style action series," but again, these are two relatively low-key properties within that group, so I would hardly consider them strong examples of a prevalent trend.

Those aren't the only two examples I have ever seen, and I'm not going to try to recall the character dynamics of every poorly-written show I've ever watched just to satisfy your curiosity.

Of course, you don't need to list these examples, but it would be useful to contribute to actual discussion. Speaking for myself, I actually do find this subject interesting and if more examples can be provided for my personal evaluation, I would find that useful for exploring the topic with further discourse. But there's only so much to discuss if one party says "I actually am not clear on how large an issue this is, can you provide some examples?" and the other party responds, "I don't need to do that."

The fact that you can't relate doesn't mean my observations are invalid, or that I have to prove them to you. And honestly, the fact that at least a few other people in this thread CAN relate speaks for itself.

I ask this fully with good faith, but what sort of discussion were you looking for when you created this topic? I don't see anyone suggesting your observations are invalid or based on nothing, they're just asking for further elaboration on your part. And honestly, "other people agree with me" is not, in itself, supporting evidence for your claim, especially when those others haven't provided substantial examples either. There was one other example I saw given (WandaVision) but again, it was only one data point and I have already given my thoughts on how it actually pertained to this topic.