(Hated)changing somenthing to be more "progressive" ends up being a bad thing

[u/Morr4Seiya]

Now to be clear,i am not one of these "anti-woke" losers that complain some people exist,and i am also not the type to complain about changing somenthing in a new version or adaptation,however there are cases where it did ended up being a bad idea.

-In the anime of Cowboy Bebop there is the character Gren,despite being short lived the character is very memorable specially thanks to his tragic story.Basically his story was that he was a soldier from the titan war who was a great friend with Vicious(the main bad guy)after the war he was emprisioned thanks to Vicious who testified against him and he was forced to take a experimental drug that caused him hormonal problems,giving him a feminine appearence and even breasts.

In the Netflix live action,for some reasons they decided Gren was going to be non-binary,which wouldn't be a problem(some people believe he was gay in the anime)if it wasn't for the fact that they also removed all the nuances and complexities that made the character memorable and interesting,instead of a tragic war veteran that was betrayed and had his body changed against his will,Gren is just kinda there.

-The original Rugrats cartoon had the couple Betty and Howard,Betty was a big and masculine woman while Howard was a smaller and nervous man,it was a genuine interesting relationship that stood out from the other couples who were the standard straight couple.

In the new series however they replaced Howard with a woman named Trish,two things,first off why?What was the problem with having a woman being the stronger in a straight relationship?Second why does Hollywood seem to think that every tomboy or masculine woman is a lesbian?

Overall not the worst thing but it is jarring that they had a gender reverse roled that was progressive and decided that wasn't enough.

-Oh man,this one pisses me off the most so i am gonna have to break it down

So back in the late 80s and 90s there was this anime called Saint Seiya also knows as Knights of the zodiac,it tells the story of knights who fight for the Goddess Athena to protect earth,being divided in the golden,silver and bronze knights,the anime was a huge hit in latin america and Europe and while it floped in the US it still has a loyal fanbase.

Being a fan myself i can't recommend it enough,now granted the story does have a fair share of flaws,and that's because the author was honestly just making stuff up as he went along(also a lot of side characters are poorly used or even forgotten about)still it is a great story you should check out

But then a couple of years back Netflix got the rights and decided to a 3D reboot,in this reboot they decided to make the story more "american" to try to bring more american viewers,now i could go on and on a big rant about how that was a bad idea and the execution was so terrible that it made me want to strangle someone but this post is about one specific change.

So Saint Seiya has five main characters,those are Pegasus Seiya,Dragon Shiryu,Cygnus Hyoga,Phoenix Ikki and finally Andromeda Shun.

While the other four characters were the standard masculine and brute male characters who were always ready to throw punches,Shun was smaller,more sensitive and even feminine looking,a pacifist who didn't liked fighting,but don't mistake that for weakness because Shun was loyal to his friends and was extremely powerful.

Then Netflix decided to change Shun into a girl named Shaun.

So wait,you have a male character who goes against every male stereotype and you turn him into just another generic female character?

When asked about it,the showrunner Eugene Son said he made that change because there was no girl in the group and having a all boys group wouldn't be acceptable nowadays

First off that's not true because Athena was also part of the main cast,yeah she wasn't the fighting type but she still helped quite a lot in the story even saving the knights on several occasions,second if you wanted to add a girl to the main group why not use Marin or Shaina?Hell,if you were going to change the story anyway why not turn Seiya sister into a knight?

Thankfully this monstrosity was cancelled(so much for trying to bring more fans)

[u/Kilukpuk]

'Tomboy/strong female character is a lesbian' really pisses me off. Heaven forbid a non-conforming woman is allowed to be interested in men. Remember girls, if you're not feminine boys won't like you.

[u/AnonymousConfessor23 → u/Kilukpuk]

How about the fact that they erased a non-masculine, not-assertive, non-conforming man and replaced them with a woman?

A positive relationship between the two as well.

[u/Ae3qe27u → u/AnonymousConfessor23]

This. A male character who is weak or timid doesn't need to be made into a woman to be acceptable.

[u/JustAMinah → u/Ae3qe27u]

yeah, I don't like that shit. if anything, I wanna see more of that representation because what folks don't get, is the impression it does to nonmen/women especially as kids. seeing dudes being all arrogant, macho, take no shit honestly screams intimidating and someone I don't wanna be around. a timid, shy man is someone i would be more comfortable around because they're just as shy as me. (now make him not perform toxic masculinity and respects all people, and i think he would be a winner)

I also hate that cishet male friendships of affection ain't common to see on screen, neither. it's why I appreciated the friendships I saw on lucifer. Dan thought it was weird to get a hug from amenadiel to now, that's how they greet each other

[u/Omega-10 → u/JustAMinah]

You could open a whole new discussion on that.

Tropes where perfectly valid friendships between two heterosexual men are intentionally misinterpreted or "rightfully re-interpreted" as being gay.

Especially in a lot of war stories, you see two very close friends and some people are like "LoL they're so gay (derogatory)!" and you've got other people like "we're going to reboot this story except keeping the author's true intentions of making characters x and y gay (progressive)" But they're not gay!! It's literally okay for two straight men to be close friends!

[u/AnonymousConfessor23 → u/JustAMinah]

It's weird because even the guys who would push the stereotypical, macho guy stuff... generally want more of those male-male friendships on screen too. They embraced the whole "bromance" and "buddy-cop" shit. Frankly, I do too.

I don't understand why the people in charge of the majority of this cultural-creative stuff refuse to have positive male-male friendships. On that note - I also hate when the progressive left see those types of male-male friendships and immediately try to gayship them or polyship them with whatever female love interest in the story.

[u/OrdinaryIntroduction → u/AnonymousConfessor23]

As an aromantic I get this to some degree, though I wouldn't call the shippers the progressive left so much as extremists that justify there toxic behavior through progressive slogans. People like that rarely want to engage with deeper nuances.

[u/AnonymousConfessor23 → u/OrdinaryIntroduction]

I won't disagree that they're extremists and just performative progressives, but they are still "aligned" with the movement and never openly/widely criticized for it.

[u/OrdinaryIntroduction → u/AnonymousConfessor23]

The paradox of tolerance, its not just tolerating bigots, its also the ethical question of do we tolerate people who believe in good stuff, even if they do so for the wrong reasons.

[u/Omega-10 → u/AnonymousConfessor23]

I really appreciate OPs post here because it's very easy to misconstrue this position as either bigoted or very 'woke' by either camp, and yet, I think anybody with a thinking brain can realize the world is more nuanced than the shouting media would have you believe.

It's OKAY to be a non-masculine, non-assertive man who is STRAIGHT! Growing up like this, the Right tells me: "LOL that means ur gay!" Today the Left answers "No she's actually a woman!"

[u/Just_Roll_Already → u/Omega-10]

Straight white guy here. When I was younger watching Rugrats in the 90s, I always really liked Howard and Betty. Betty seemed so comforting, like a big protective momma bear and I always associated Howard with a male seahorse. I just really found that comforting.

The momma bear is loving, protective, and aggressively idealistic. The father sea horse is nurturing, thoughtful, and supportive.

Not saying that this was written in stone for those characters since the series was surprisingly nuanced and had a lot of character depth, but god damn was it refreshing to see a father portrayed that way in a sea of "Everybody Loves Raymond" and "Home Improvement" copycats.

[u/Cactopus47 → u/Just_Roll_Already]

Honestly, most of the dads on Rugrats were pretty non-stereotypical. Drew's the more active parent in Angelica's life since Charlotte has such a high-powered corporate job. Stu is a bit of an absentminded mess, but is still shown to be quite loving and caring to his family. Grandpa Lou is the kids' main babysitter. And then Chaz is quite in tune with his emotions and is raising Chuckie as a single parent until the later seasons.

The moms as well--Betty's into stereotypically masculine things, Charlotte's the career woman, and Didi works outside of the home while Stu works from home--and then in one episode she wins an intelligence-based game show. (I don't remember enough about Kira.) And then Mrs. Carmichael was a doctor, in contrast to her husband the artist, which is a reversal of stereotypical interests.

[u/AnonymousConfessor23 → u/Omega-10]

It's why I hate both sides. The right is blatantly racist and sexist, the left is performatively progressive but still racist and sexist, largely.

[u/Loki_Agent_of_Asgard → u/AnonymousConfessor23]

Bellcurve theory.

The further right or left you get the more they arrive at essentially the same conclusions but for different reasons.

[u/JustAMinah → u/Loki_Agent_of_Asgard]

the only difference is, one wants to pretend to look like a "good" person while the other wants to be bold with their hate.

[u/AnonymousConfessor23 → u/JustAMinah]

Which is worse? Probably the bold one but it's a tough competition.

[u/JustAMinah → u/AnonymousConfessor23]

I don't like neither but the covert is worse because well, they're secretive. they're narc-like, so the moment the mask slips a lil, that's time to conclude they're not safe and treat them like the overts and actively stay away (overts announce who they are, so its easier to avoid) and navigating misogynoir (so, both racism and sexism) I'm very aware of this. even queer communities are unsafe if they're racist (and many that aren't diverse, usually are)

[u/AnonymousConfessor23 → u/JustAMinah]

I'll steel-argue in reverse - the bold are happy to be actively destructive while the covert have a slim chance to be put back on the noble path. Like, the bold are basically doomer black pills and the covert are useful idiots, in a meme-analogy way. Granted, nothing is more dangerous than an evil person who sees themselves as the Greatest Good performing noble deeds.

[u/Omega-10 → u/JustAMinah]

I'm not a "both sides" kind of guy these days. I vote blue in a red state. It's a pretty depressing existence honestly!

You should understand that generally the entire population behaves in a way they believe is good while also masking their mistakes. There is a values dissonance in America. I take it you've never been ostracized by a church group before or people who claim to "follow Jesus". Christianity preaches the most progressive, accepting, socialist-thinking beliefs and yet the Right is pretty much anything but. I've also been banned from online spaces for not posturing myself as the most queer-positive LGBTQ ally every day all the time always forever and always by some supposedly "accepting" communities. The difference is, I'd rather get banned from Tumblr than get my family rounded up by ICE and shot, so...

[u/MilkMaiden_22 → u/Omega-10]

You had me until you said "the Left answers." This isnt the left. The left are the ones who have been pushing for an understanding of nuance in gender. These changes are made either by liberals, or by committees taking their best guess at how to make a movie have mass appeal to the lowest common denominator "modern audience"

[u/Omega-10 → u/MilkMaiden_22]

Liberals are not "the left"? How do you draw the distinction there and between conservatives or "the right"?

[u/MilkMaiden_22 → u/Omega-10]

Liberals are basically the center. You can have conservative liberals and progressive liberals, who sure, are right and left of center respectively, but are not the same thing as leftists or fascists or "far-right" or "far-left"

Edit: that is NOT to say that liberal means center, just that the center of politics in the western world right now is liberalism, which is why it's kinda taken for granted and able to just be plastered onto the broader left even though it's not what the term means

[u/makyura212 → u/Omega-10]

In American contexts...

Liberals are commonly, socially moderate to liberal and economically center-right.

Leftists are commonly, socially liberal to progressive, to economically (center-)left.

To distinguish the social stances, while there is many common traits with being socially liberal and socially progressive, one of the more common contrasts is the former's commitment to maintain a sort of status quo and/or reluctance shift from it so suddenly. In addition, a slower adoption of platforms or embracing of certain movements in the more assertive way progressives would. While the meaning does shift over time as we understand certain things better, a particular example would be the 1960s civil rights movement and the divide between black leaders and many of their white allies.

[u/MonsieurKrabes → u/Omega-10]

Liberalism is a capitalist ideology, so right wing (pre Trump republicans) to center-left (European-style social democracy). Liberals in America play into these stupid culture war talking points to avoid having to seriously address the material conditions of the working class (leftist stuff). Hillary Clinton said "If we broke up the big banks tomorrow, would that end racism? Would that end sexism?" Ridiculous, and perfectly illustrative of my point that the center hides behind ostensibly progressive social beliefs while bending us over and fucking us, good and hard. Both parties in America are right of center and don't care about you or me. In fact, they HATE us. A true left party would run a candidate that DID want to break up the big banks.

[u/AnonymousConfessor23 → u/MilkMaiden_22]

No True Scotsman. You can't disavow liberals from the left just because it's convenient here. Progressives do a lot of gender erasure themselves, anyway.

[u/MilkMaiden_22 → u/AnonymousConfessor23]

Its not a matter of convenience man its the definitions of words. Leftist/the left =/= liberal. Liberals, in the "western" world, are more or less representative of the center, be they conservative liberals or progressive liberals

[u/AnonymousConfessor23 → u/MilkMaiden_22]

The "definition of words" is constantly changing, always to suit whatever benefits the person the most. Calling for the exact, true definition of a word is meaningless and ingenuine.

[u/Visible-Variation385 → u/Omega-10]

At this point I just accept there is no place for men. And the world would be better if we died off. Is it true? Maybe not. But the situation is hopeless and die off is better then what we got now.

[u/AceOBlade → u/AnonymousConfessor23]

They are always targeted to be replaced by a LGBTQ characters in rewrites and live actions.

[u/carpincho_carajo → u/AceOBlade]

Which only reinforces the wrong and old af idea that a straight man always has to be very masculine, that they can't be sensitive, shy or gentle.