Ieldra2 wrote...
primoULTIMO wrote...
Ieldra2 wrote...
I see some attempt to create a slightly different Miranda based on the player's way through the romance in ME2. I like that, but it can't go too far, or the character becomes disintegrated or appears too much under Shepard's influence. I can see emphasizing the detached or the more open Miranda, the one who embraces what she is and the one who reluctantly accepts it, but in no way should any of her core personality traits be completely lost. We've seen the results of that at the Collector base.
This! Couldn't have said it better, my thoughts are exactly like Ieldra2's. Can't understand where all this hate came from though...<_<
You mean the strong reaction to your other post?
That has something to do with my very intense dislike of stereotyping women as "the emotional sex". IIRC this is rooted in early classic romanticism, where being openly and highly emotional was painted as some kind of virtue for a woman. This has seeped into common western culture and one of the results is a reflex, whenever an emotionally reserved woman is encountered, to put that off as psychic armor hiding her true self, which is, of course, as emotional as, well, the stereotype.
I, on the other hand, do not count being open as a virtue, even less openly emotional. I think being reserved is desirable for almost all situations where no people you care about are involved, and sometimes even then. I love that trait in Miranda and I don't like it when someone tries to put if off as a surface trait, as "just a defense hiding her true self". We all see how much Miranda cares about her sister, and how she comes to trust Shepard, but that doesn't mean her reserve in other situations is false.
Western Culture?.... dude realy? Its a global culture issue that existed since the Renaissance i think... Think of the criticism Queen Elizabeth got... Japaneese Geishas.... Middle-Eastern Cutlure.... and it is something I have discussed with people in depth over a long period of time.
It is not a Stereotype AT ITS CORE.... it is perceived as a stereotype by the majority... but it in fact in the psychological ROOT of the issue it is a cultural coincidence. Miranda is actually quite the liberated woman I must say... after reading the SB logs about her I was pleasantly shocked.
Women in general are far more responsible about sexual activity than men are... the invention of the Glory Hole is prime exhibit for mans sexual irresponsability. Men tend to be ready to get down and dirty whenever and wherever for the most part. Women end up with the luxury of being able to choose if and when it happens because they are humanitys gatekeepers of sex. It is as much of a luxury as it is a burden though because so many rules come with the responsability. Will they be treated well after the fact... will they be respected... is it going to be spread around ruining her reputation... we are in the 21st century now and women are far more liberated about sex than ever before... it still does not take the burden / luxury off of their shoulders about being the gatekeepers of sex.
It is attitude... because men are so casual about sex they do not have the burden / luxury about it. However men have their own stereotypes about it.... We are dogs.... We cant be raped.... We are unfaithfull.... stereotypes exist about every demographic out there.
To support your case though I believe religion is primarily responsible for the inherent stereotypes because the people in power at the time were men. It is something that filtered down the ages... but you cant accredit stereotypes to being merely stereotypes when clearly geneticists have proven that men are sexual "hunters" at the gentic level and women are the "quarry" that has the power to decide if they "get caught or not" at the genetic level.
Bottom line I am just happy humanity shares no chromosones with Spiders or Praying Mantises.... getting killed and eatten starting with the head is not exactly the price I want to pay for getting laid. Then again I heard about Bridezillas.... hmmmm....