it’s out of control like a runaway train

I’m kinda scared

the shortpacked people even reblogged it I sort of bounced up and down in my bed and squealed a little bit

a little

but how am I going to act on my urge to debate everyone who contradicts me with all this there’s too many notes

I think I’ll just c/p the two posts I just made w/ every reblog b/c they sort of cover most of the stuff people are getting on me about.

Tumblr you will have to bear with me for a while this may break me

My point wasn’t that there’s no such thing, but that it only bothers people when they’re female and the term started because it bothers people when they’re female and VERY QUICKLY came to mean “any female character”. 

I pointed to Bella Swan as an example. The point is, if a genuine “Sue” does exist, there’s generally waaaay more problematic things going on than a female character being powerful. You’ll have lookism and stereotypes up the wazoo. Focus on that shit. It’s more difficult than crying “Sue!” but ultimately more worthwhile.

I do think characters need to earn their happy ending, need to run the gauntlet absolutely. But guys are allowed to have skills right off the bat that girls will be “sued” for.

My example: Winry Rockbell vs. Edward Elric- since that’s what started this whole thing.

Winry is called a Sue for being a skilled mechanic. What did she do to earn her genius level abilities, huh?

Edward Elric is NOT a sue for the same genius level skill in alchemy right off the bat.

Winry is a Sue for being helpful to the plot and “not earning” Ed’s love. No one cares about Ed being helpful to the plot and he does not need to earn Winry’s love.

That’s how the Mary Sue double standard works. 

Hahahaha I knew people would be pissed at the Batman thing. Yep, there’s no single Batman either. But the overall concept is a thing, and it’s complete wish fulfillment- and it’s why Batman can be insufferable and problematic in some versions.

Looks like this essay was needed, so I went ahead and did it. Not sure I said everything I wanted to say, but I tried.

So, there’s this girl. She’s tragically orphaned and richer than anyone on the planet. Every guy she meets falls in love with her, but in between torrid romances she rejects them all because she dedicated to what is Pure and Good. She has genius level intellect, Olympic-athelete level athletic ability and incredible good looks. She is consumed by terrible angst, but this only makes guys want her more. She has no superhuman abilities, yet she is more competent than her superhuman friends and defeats superhumans with ease. She has unshakably loyal friends and allies, despite the fact she treats them pretty badly.  They fear and respect her, and defer to her orders. Everyone is obsessed with her, even her enemies are attracted to her. She can plan ahead for anything and she’s generally right with any conclusion she makes. People who defy her are inevitably wrong.

 God, what a Mary Sue.

I just described Batman.

  Wish fulfillment characters have been around since the beginning of time. The good guys tend to win, get the girl and have everything fall into place for them. It’s only when women started doing it that it became a problem.

TV Tropes on the origin of Mary Sue:

The prototypical Mary Sue is an original female character in a fanfic who obviously serves as an idealized version of the author mainly for the purpose of Wish Fulfillment.

Notice the strange emphasis on female here. TV Tropes goes on to say that is took a long time for the male counterpart “Marty Stu” to be used. “Most fanfic writers are girls” is given as the reason. So when women dominate a genre, that means people are on close watch, ready to scorn any wish fulfillment they may engage in. This term could only originate if the default was female.

 In fact, one of the CONTROVERSIES listed on the TV Tropes page is if a male sue is even possible. That’s right, it’s impossible to have an idealizied male character. Men are already the ideal.

 In our culture, male tends to be the default. Women take on the distaff parts. “Him” and “mankind” are what humanity are, “her” and “womankind” are secondary. Yet this isn’t true for Mary Sue as a term. That name was created first. It was a Star Trek fic that coined it and the female desigination was likely a big reason it caught on. This female is name the default to use when describing idealized characters. Marty Stu and Gary Stu are only to be used if you’re discussing men specifically.  Heck, there isn’t even an agreed upon term for them. So the only time female can be default is when discussing a badly written character, someone who is more powerful or important or liked than they should be allowed to be, someone the plot focuses on more than you would like, someone you don’t want to read about. Hmmm.

 What’s really wrong with a thirteen year old girl having a power fantasy, even if it’s badly written?  Who is it hurting? Men have baldly admitted to writing power fantasies and self inserts since the beginning of time. How many nerdy, schlubby guys suddenly become badasses and have hot girls chasing after them in fiction? See: Spiderman- blatant everyman who happens to  stumble across amazing powers and catch the eye of a supermodel.  Mary Sue is considered the worst insult to throw at a character as it renders them worthless. But since when are idealized characters automatically worthless? Aren’t all heroes idealized in some way? Don’t all heroes represent the author in some way? Aren’t these characters supposed to be people we look up to, people who represent human potential, the goodness that we strive for? Fantasy by nature is idealized, even the tragic ones.

 If you look at the TV Tropes page for Mary Sue, it’s ridiculous. You can be a sue for having too many flaws, or not enough, for fixing things or messing things up, for being a hero or a villain. And of course, this is specifically pointed out as a trope related to the Princess and Magical Girl genres- genres aimed towards women are naturally full of Mary Sues.  Magical girls are powerful and heroic and actually flaunt femininity as a good thing. They are a power fantasy designed for girls. So of course, a girl using traditionally feminine traits to dominate and triumph means she’s a sickeningly pure Mary Sue who makes everything go their way. Feminine traits are disdained and look down on, so when the positive feminine traits are prominent, the reader has an aversive reaction. How can a character be so feminine and triumph? She must be unrealistic, she must be badly written, because everyone knows it is impossible to be feminine and powerful.

 Let’s look at what kinds of Mary Sues people will point to. People will claim a female character is a Mary Sue if she is a love interest. Put a female character within a foot of a male character, and people will scream “Mary Sue!” Why does someone falling in love with her make her a Mary Sue? Well, she hasn’t “earned” this awesome dude character’s love. What has she done to show she’s worthy of him? Fans miss the irony that this line of logic makes the male character seem more like the Sue in Question, as he’s apparently so perfect one has work for his coveted love and praise.

  The idea that woman has to “earn” any power, praise, love, or plot prominence is central to Mary Sue.  Men do not have to do this, they are naturally assumed to be powerful, central and loveable. That’s why it’s the first thing thrown at a female character- what has she done to be given the same consideration as a male character? Why is she suddenly usurping a male role? “Mary Sue” is the easiest way to dismiss a character. It sounds bad to say “I don’t like this female character. I don’t like that this woman is powerful. I don’t like it when the plot focuses on her. I don’t like that a character I like has affections for her.”  But “Mary Sue” is a way to say these things without really saying them. It gives you legitimacy.

 If a character is badly written, there’s generally something much more problematic than idealization going on. The plot will be dull and the character will perpetuate harmful stereotypes while other characters act oddly.  For instance, Bella Swan is one of the only characters I’d even begin to classify as a Mary Sue, yet it’s not really her supposed Mary Sue traits that bother me. I don’t mind that she gets what she wants and everyone loves her, that she’s Meyer’s power fantasy. What I actually mind is that Stephenie Meyer has her perpetuate harmful anti-woman stereotypes- women need to be protected, women are shallow, women’s worth rests in desirability. That’s what’s actually harmful about her and worth discussing. I would criticize that rather than even get to the fact Bella got to be “too perfect and powerful”- that’s just a tiny, insignificant thing not worth mentioning in a huge pile of problems.

 And that’s why I don’t call characters Mary Sue anymore. There’s really nothing bad about a power fantasy or wish fulfillment. It’s what’s fiction’s about.  If one of my characters is called a Sue, I’ll proudly say “yep”, because that must mean that she broke out of that box a female character is supposed to be in.  So I’ll go and say it: I love me some Mary Sues.

Because looking at the page there shows you how ridiculous it gotten…

The related tropes are magical girl and princesses.

Because everyone knows genres aimed toward women= mary sue

oic

this essay is def getting written now.

jmstarchild:

adventuresofcomicbookgirl:

The movement’s already been tarnished by close minded peeps enough, time to do some housecleaning

If you’re not even going to pretend to not be a misogynist, you’re just embarrassing yourself. out with you. Don’t you dare try to use that label as a sheild, it won’t work here.

I may not know what you’re talking about, but I just hate the Mary Sue stigma in general.

It’s fine when you use it on those who deserve it, but people have been using it to describe every single female character even if they’re the most logically thought out person.

It makes people like me self conscious to write anything because this whole Mary Sue shit is insane. I had over 10 years to think out characters and I would still be told they’re mary sues.

If this whole Mary Sue was correct every woman in every fictional creation doesn’t deserve to exist in that creation.

Emma is a Mary Sue.

Elizabeth Bennett is a Mary Sue.

Jane Austen is a horrible writer (not really but you know what I mean).

It does need to stop.

Mary Sue is an unquestionably sexist and overused term by now.

Think about it. The designation is specifically female and it’s always flung at lady characters who do ANYTHING. Usually disrupt a ship or dare to have a role in a story.

I question whether it was ever needed in the first place at this point. It was created because some thirteen year old girl fanfiction writers have blatant wish-fulfillment characters. The idea of their being male equivalent wasn’t even bought up until later in the game.

Guys have had wish fulfillment characters forever. But the second young girls do the same? They get eaten alive. And now the term is expanded to mean “any female character” because goshdarnit women are UNREALISTIC if the story doesn’t totally trash them. Maybe that’s what it was rooted in in the first place.

I’m going to write a essay on this shit, and link it every time some asshole says Mary Sue. The more you think about it, the more frustrating it is.

silvermoon424:

Yeah, I don’t see it.

Mary Sue really means nothing more than “usually female character I have problems with” these days. It’s applied recklessly to everyone. The term has become meaningless. I’m thinking of stopping the use of it all together.

The majority of heroes triumph and get the best of everything and are the Good, if it’s a happy story. The majority of heroes are the BEST AROUND. That’s just fiction. But it’s only in the girly shows people call Mary Sue, even if the hero is purposefully ridic flawed.