There's something that bugged me off a bit: why most female characters in the series got either but in backseat or completely forgotten?
When you look at Amy (or Rosy if you prefer) she basically started off as a damsel in distress (in Sonic CD) then she became more or a "stalker girlfriend" toward Sonic in the modern era (especially since Heroes), sure I can accept it as a small running gag at the end of the game like in Adventure but it became creepy after several games and media. At least her Boom appearance was written better.
For other characters like Blaze they are being completely ignored despite what she has done in the past (at least she wasn't the worst part of Sonic 2006 and she got an interesting story in the Rush dualogy).
Is there a reason why Sega has decided not to include Amy in Mania and Wave (and the other two babylon rogues) in Team Sonic Racing?
Amy hasn't been a stalker since Sonic Unleashed. Her only appearance in Black Knight was her and Sonic going on a date together, and since then she's dropped the whole stalker shtick and become a lot more mellow in that regard.
Blaze appears from time to time, as does Rouge, etc. In regards to them, it's less that they are being neglected for being female, it's more that all of Sonic's friends are being neglected since 06 with the exception of Tails, Knuckles, and Amy, with everyone else being mostly relegated to big reunions such as Generations and Forces.
The Babylon Rouges might not even be canon. It depends on if the riders games are canon, which is a tricky one to figure since they haven't really been referenced in any other games since. Jet was playable in Black Knight's multiplayer and I think they had trophies in Generations, that's all l'm aware of.
I don't think the series' women are particularly more sidelined than the men. Amy not getting to be playable in Mania is probably the best argument, but it's pretty minor in the grand scheme of things. Blaze probably gets more exposure than Silver who I consider in sort of the same category, and while Shadow gets more than Rouge, it's probably because he's more marketable than anything else (which I mean, that is still sexist, but just in the usual way all of capitalism is rather than anything specific).
In general, everyone except Sonic, Tails and Eggman seemingly has nothing to do in the current era, so I wouldn't single any of them out specifically. The comics are definitely doing better with balancing a more egalitarian gender ratio for the cast.
while Shadow gets more than Rouge, it's probably because he's more marketable than anything else (which I mean, that is still sexist, but just in the usual way all of capitalism is rather than anything specific).
I wouldn't say Shadow's marketability is at all sexist. He's marketable because he's popular, and he's popular depending on who you ask either because of his character arc in SA2 or because he's been an edgelord since. It has nothing to do with his gender, as similar characters that are female in other franchise also tend to be likewise marketable and popular, such as Velvet from Tales of Berseria.
As a general rule, it tends to be best not to assume something as sexist or racist or etc. as the first gut instinct, as things tend to be much more complicated than that, and it also easily gets taken as an accusation which causes needless arguments. Using your statement as an example, though I doubt it's what you meant it could easily get taken to mean that Shadow is only marketable because he's male, and therefore people only like him because of their own sexist tendencies, ergo if you like Shadow then you must be sexist. Obviously, there are many reasons why people might like Shadow, therefore someone who takes that interpretation would reasonably feel offended.
Blaze and Silver are actually an interesting situation in this regard. Their comparative popularity and marketability to each other is close to the same, with people liking either character for a number of reasons. Their least popular appearances were probably in Sonic 06, but other than that both characters have generally been received quite favorably and generated their own sub-fanbases within the Sonic community to the point it's quite feasible that if a new game featuring either character in the boxart was released, it would likely sell quite well.
Well no, that's why I added the part that says "that is still sexist, but just in the usual way all of capitalism is rather than anything specific". I wasn't calling Shadow in particular an example of this other than in the ways capitalism and big corporate-owned franchises inherently neglect women.
Well no, that's why I added the part that says "that is still sexist, but just in the usual way all of capitalism is rather than anything specific". I wasn't calling Shadow in particular an example of this other than in the ways capitalism and big corporate-owned franchises inherently neglect women.
Rouge is also a character following the "Femme Fatale" trope and has no character in the games aside from loving jewels and being a spy.
Sonic as a franchise is mostly marketed toward boys and men (which is how videogames were marketed for a long time before we finally got games for everyone and that "games for girls" that were mediocre at best stopped being made solely to get easy money from a certain part of the playerbase).
Also Amy was a stalker since Heroes, not Unleashed.
Also Black Knight and the other storybook shouldn't really be canon (and their book counterparts aren't even their real one)
Riders being canon or not is another debate (that I won't continue there).
Maybe it's just that Sega's mindset toward female characters is different (or at least not like the current modern one in the game industry) and I hope they'd evolve in a good way.
The female characters in the Sonic franchise are far more underdeveloped, underused, and neglected than their male counterparts. You'd have to be a bit blind to not see that. While all the Sonic cast are basically just tropes, the handling of the female characters is worse insofar the way their tropes box them in is very reductivist and denies them of some of the same flexibility their male counterparts have. There's a reason why many Sonic fans consider the Archie and SATAM females to be the best written, most engaging female characters this series has ever had even though I have problems with them myself (for reasons I'll wont go into so I wont derail this thread).
I assume because SEGA thinks that Sonic's primary demographic is young boys they only have female characters they think boys will better relate to: the simp who's madly in love with the hero (self insert) that ignores her, the sexy jewel thief with the big boobs, female Knuckles/Shadow but princess (who doesnt get screentime), the sweet little girl, ect... I'd venture off to say SEGA is extremely out of touch with who the fans actually are and what they actually "like". Unfortunately, a lot of video game fandoms thinks criticism of badly written female characters means you want them to be stoic Mary Sue power feminist fantasy types which has a lot to do with the lack of imagination and experience to better written series on their part.
I wouldn't say Shadow's marketability is at all sexist. He's marketable because he's popular, and he's popular depending on who you ask either because of his character arc in SA2 or because he's been an edgelord since. It has nothing to do with his gender, as similar characters that are female in other franchise also tend to be likewise marketable and popular, such as Velvet from Tales of Berseria.
As a general rule, it tends to be best not to assume something as sexist or racist or etc. as the first gut instinct, as things tend to be much more complicated than that, and it also easily gets taken as an accusation which causes needless arguments. Using your statement as an example, though I doubt it's what you meant it could easily get taken to mean that Shadow is only marketable because he's male, and therefore people only like him because of their own sexist tendencies, ergo if you like Shadow then you must be sexist. Obviously, there are many reasons why people might like Shadow, therefore someone who takes that interpretation would reasonably feel offended.
Blaze and Silver are actually an interesting situation in this regard. Their comparative popularity and marketability to each other is close to the same, with people liking either character for a number of reasons. Their least popular appearances were probably in Sonic 06, but other than that both characters have generally been received quite favorably and generated their own sub-fanbases within the Sonic community to the point it's quite feasible that if a new game featuring either character in the boxart was released, it would likely sell quite well.
This is ignoring some factors that gives popularity of (most) fictional female characters to begin with. For a lot of people, especially fans of Japanese animated media, the sex appeal of a female character has a lot to do with how much they like them. Saying this fact is not being a hyper reactive SJW or causing identity wars when companies in charge of these franchises themselves admit as such in their marketing. Velvet doesnt have the same marketability as Shadow the Hedgehog when there are different factors that make their target demographics interested in them. Its not a right comparison.
I don't believe that sexism and racism is non-complicated when people, including companies because this is made up of people, come with their implicit biases that may or may not be highlighted depending on which subject is used. These implicit biases can include things such as sexism and racism (which I dont know what has to do with the current topic at hand, bc racism and sexism are two different things). Now, whether you want to make a big fuss about it to the point of making callouts and starting cancel culture boycotts this is something totally different.
In my opinion, a lot of female characters are written crappy across the board because male writers generally dont seem to be able to relate to a woman's experience. They usually make them either some type of waifubait or orbiters around the male character. if they don't go that route then they become crappy female empowerment types that basically act like guys with boobs (imo). Very few female characters in their canon portayals hit their mark with me and im saying that as a woman myself. I never had a problem with how the girls were written in Sailor Moon (mostly), PowerPuff Girls, Jem and The Holograms, and Daria. Female Sonic the Hedgehog characters have potential but never really activated it. Female Mario characters have honestly been better written than female Sonic characters.
I tend to try to stray away from political discussions, as they tend to get rather heated and can easily become toxic. Especially in today's environment where everyone who has the "wrong opinion" ends up with false labels stamped on them that can ruin their careers and livelihoods. However, I will explain my perspective on the issue nonetheless, though I do so with it in mind that I have absolutely no intention of making this into an argument, so I'm probably done with this topic after leaving my thoughts here. Feel free to reply to them with your own perspectives, I believe in freedom of speech over all else, but after this post I'm done here.
-People tend to spend money on products featuring female characters because of sex appeal.
Yes, they do. They also do this for male characters. I don't view this as sexism, or even objectification. It's just human nature. We are all lying to ourselves if we try to say we've never felt attraction to someone of the other gender, or maybe even the same gender. If someone is attractive, they are liked. Try to tell me with a straight face that women and gay men don't buy products with Dante from Devil May Cry in them because they think he's hot. They do, and there's nothing wrong when they do it either.
As an additional note, while people do in fact do this kind of thing, there are many other reasons why people can like a character beyond mere sex appeal. Even when they do, the whole "shame on you" mentality I see fly around the internet is something I would very much like to see go away. It's effectively telling people "Shame on you for feeling your natural human instinct to be attracted to other people. How dare you be so terrible".
-Sonic is a franchise targeted towards boys and men.
Even if this were true, who cares? There are many franchises targeted towards girls and women. It's not like Sonic is an exclusive boys only club. There are many female fans, my own sister even grew up owning some of the games, which was a big part of how I got exposed to them to begin with. Does something being intended for a target demographic somehow make it problematic now? Are boys and men just meant to not have franchises made specifically for them now, because such things are now being labeled as inherently sexist while franchises tailored to girls and women are not?
-Females in Sonic are designed to appeal to boys.
No, they're not. Rouge, I might be able to see your point. Within the main franchise, that's literally it. Amy was kidnapped in CD and Adventure 1, but has tended to be strictly strong, independent, and heroic since then. Especially in regards to her role in Adventure 2. The speech she gives to Shadow about humanity in the Final Story is a very inspiring quote, even if I don't entirely agree with everything she says in it myself. Blaze is even moreso this, being the epitome of "Strong independent woman" within the Rush series, and with her character arc in mind is actually a powerful female role model. Cream the Rabbit is especially the epitome of a character designed specifically to appeal to girls rather than boys. The entire perspective that the females in this series are designed to make boys simp comes off as very laughable to me.
I mean, they definitely do. If you want to make a legitimate argument about how the things enforcing wealth hierarchy are somehow damaging to the racial and gender ones, despite most modern forms of the latter being essentially reinforced and bolstered to protect the former, I'd love to hear it. Otherwise, I don't think there's much explanation for why propaganda like Prager U gets funding from giant oil companies to argue that confederate generals were good people, much less a simple reinforcement of a sexist status-quo, like what's going on with Sonic.
I tend to try to stray away from political discussions, as they tend to get rather heated and can easily become toxic. Especially in today's environment where everyone who has the "wrong opinion" ends up with false labels stamped on them that can ruin their careers and livelihoods. However, I will explain my perspective on the issue nonetheless, though I do so with it in mind that I have absolutely no intention of making this into an argument, so I'm probably done with this topic after leaving my thoughts here. Feel free to reply to them with your own perspectives, I believe in freedom of speech over all else, but after this post I'm done here.
-People tend to spend money on products featuring female characters because of sex appeal.
Yes, they do. They also do this for male characters. I don't view this as sexism, or even objectification. It's just human nature. We are all lying to ourselves if we try to say we've never felt attraction to someone of the other gender, or maybe even the same gender. If someone is attractive, they are liked. Try to tell me with a straight face that women and gay men don't buy products with Dante from Devil May Cry in them because they think he's hot. They do, and there's nothing wrong when they do it either.
This completely disregards how objectifying marketing is handled with women versus men, and to the degree at which it happens. If you don't understand the difference between a story about a buff man that you're supposed to want to be and one that you're supposed to want to fuck, then you're far from having much in the way of nuanced things to say about when those situations apply for women. The amount of complaining done by neoreactionary chucklefucks when, in fact, it is the woman who is buff (see: The Last of Us 2 tantrums) is proof that this comparison just isn't equal in any way.
As an additional note, while people do in fact do this kind of thing, there are many other reasons why people can like a character beyond mere sex appeal. Even when they do, the whole "shame on you" mentality I see fly around the internet is something I would very much like to see go away. It's effectively telling people "Shame on you for feeling your natural human instinct to be attracted to other people. How dare you be so terrible".
And similarly, mischaracterizing "playing into a predatory industry that does not respect women and taking any questioning of said industry as a personal attack on your character" does not paint your intentions in good faith. Do you not know how horny the progressive side of the aisle actually is?
-Sonic is a franchise targeted towards boys and men.
Even if this were true, who cares? There are many franchises targeted towards girls and women. It's not like Sonic is an exclusive boys only club. There are many female fans, my own sister even grew up owning some of the games, which was a big part of how I got exposed to them to begin with. Does something being intended for a target demographic somehow make it problematic now? Are boys and men just meant to not have franchises made specifically for them now, because such things are now being labeled as inherently sexist while franchises tailored to girls and women are not?
You're not looking at the bigger picture. A franchise targeted towards any demographic does not need to cater to uncharitable depictions of people outside that demographic. Boys don't actually complain about women in their media being strong unless they are taught to. Similarly, there is nothing wrong with asking a series, regardless of demographic, to better portray the groups it includes. It's actually doing a disservice to men on your part by claiming that sexism is what we want to see. It certainly isn't what I want.
-Females in Sonic are designed to appeal to boys.
No, they're not. Rouge, I might be able to see your point. Within the main franchise, that's literally it. Amy was kidnapped in CD and Adventure 1, but has tended to be strictly strong, independent, and heroic since then. Especially in regards to her role in Adventure 2. The speech she gives to Shadow about humanity in the Final Story is a very inspiring quote, even if I don't entirely agree with everything she says in it myself. Blaze is even moreso this, being the epitome of "Strong independent woman" within the Rush series, and with her character arc in mind is actually a powerful female role model. Cream the Rabbit is especially the epitome of a character designed specifically to appeal to girls rather than boys. The entire perspective that the females in this series are designed to make boys simp comes off as very laughable to me.
I personally think this is probably more subjective, but it's pretty disingenuous to claim that the series is actually full of perfect female representation in a thread very specifically documenting how neglected every character you mentioned is. Amy's less of a stalker now, but that's after about a decade of characterization culminating in that extremely-dumb 06 moment where she claims to be willing to sacrifice the entire rest of the planet just for the guy she's interested in, who very clearly isn't looking for a relationship. Blaze is probably the best character in the entire series for me, but she's still relegated to existing in an alternate universe and didn't even get to be in the big Sonic game of 2017 where everyone was supposed to have something to do. Cream got replaced with three chao in a car for the last racing game. If you honestly think this is 100% egalitarian treatment even after about a full decade of none of these characters even being playable in a main game (Mania and Forces included) I can't say you seem to be going about this honestly.
Lo diré rápido y simplemente las mujeres en Sonic así como Amy en Unleashed han dejado de acosar a Sonic y se han concentrado en ayudar a Blaze por otro lado es un personaje poco recurrente en la franquicia pero es un muy buen personaje. rouge, etc.son algo así como personajes de relleno, pero son muy importantes, en otras palabras, ninguna mujer es discriminada en la franquicia, sino que son todas importantes
I didn't expect my thread to get long messages (that I planned to read anyway).
But telling us that wanting better written female characters is political is just nonsense, it shouldn't even be political (like how wanting to solve world hunger or stopping prejudice in general are neither).
I think that the fact Amy Rose wasn't in Mania was when I've noticed how Sega cared less and less about her.
And I could tell that even if Tails and Knuckles got flanderized the female characters are straight up being ignored.
I wouldn't say that Sega are sexist (especially since they were the first to include a female protagonist in 1987's Phantasy Star on the Master System/Sega Mark III or Blaze Fielding brawling against foes in the streets in 1991's Streets of Rage) but I guess that they have a different mindset than other companies.
Maybe I should just conclude this thread with a wish to see Blaze in a main game (and eventually even as a playable character) in the near future.
Just because a character isn't playable doesn't mean they're looked down upon. Nintendo doesn't hate Luigi because he wasn't playable in 64, Sunshine, or Odyssey, so why would Sega hate Amy if she wasn't playable in Mania?
Lo diré rápido y simplemente las mujeres en Sonic así como Amy en Unleashed han dejado de acosar a Sonic y se han concentrado en ayudar a Blaze por otro lado es un personaje poco recurrente en la franquicia pero es un muy buen personaje. rouge, etc.son algo así como personajes de relleno, pero son muy importantes, en otras palabras, ninguna mujer es discriminada en la franquicia, sino que son todas importantes
Just because a character isn't playable doesn't mean they're looked down upon. Nintendo doesn't hate Luigi because he wasn't playable in 64, Sunshine, or Odyssey, so why would Sega hate Amy if she wasn't playable in Mania?
I tend to try to stray away from political discussions, as they tend to get rather heated and can easily become toxic. Especially in today's environment where everyone who has the "wrong opinion" ends up with false labels stamped on them that can ruin their careers and livelihoods. However, I will explain my perspective on the issue nonetheless, though I do so with it in mind that I have absolutely no intention of making this into an argument, so I'm probably done with this topic after leaving my thoughts here. Feel free to reply to them with your own perspectives, I believe in freedom of speech over all else, but after this post I'm done here.
-People tend to spend money on products featuring female characters because of sex appeal.
Yes, they do. They also do this for male characters. I don't view this as sexism, or even objectification. It's just human nature. We are all lying to ourselves if we try to say we've never felt attraction to someone of the other gender, or maybe even the same gender. If someone is attractive, they are liked. Try to tell me with a straight face that women and gay men don't buy products with Dante from Devil May Cry in them because they think he's hot. They do, and there's nothing wrong when they do it either.
While it's true girls have husbandos like guys have waifus, female characters tend to be far more likely to have their whole purpose based on sex appeal than male characters. Its so common that its pretty much a trope for female characters to have under developed or shitty personalities because their main purpose in a story is to be the sex appeal or the love interest. Personality matters more for girls looking to husbando since there is usually a deeper psychological/emotional aspect so I wouldnt compare this to how male sexuality works at all, lmao. Hell, male characters who are actually "sexy" and have a legion of fangirls arent even as common as it used to be 10, 20 years ago.
Secondly, I think its dumb to compare natural sexual attraction to other humans to lines on a paper. They're not a "someone", theyre a cartoon. One has biological consquences with a multitude of social factors and the other is a person sitting alone in their room with a hyperactive imagination.
As an additional note, while people do in fact do this kind of thing, there are many other reasons why people can like a character beyond mere sex appeal. Even when they do, the whole "shame on you" mentality I see fly around the internet is something I would very much like to see go away. It's effectively telling people "Shame on you for feeling your natural human instinct to be attracted to other people. How dare you be so terrible".
Its a natural human instinct to be attracted to humans, not big titty bat girls with big cartoon eyes. Yes, if youre so childish in your sexuality that the sex appeal of goofily drawn cartoon animals is that important to maintain your interest in a fictional medium im going to clown your ass. Not everyone GAFs to indulge people on their masturbation fantasies they swear are "natural" and not just fetishes they got from browsing the internet as a kid.
-Sonic is a franchise targeted towards boys and men.
Even if this were true, who cares? There are many franchises targeted towards girls and women. It's not like Sonic is an exclusive boys only club. There are many female fans, my own sister even grew up owning some of the games, which was a big part of how I got exposed to them to begin with. Does something being intended for a target demographic somehow make it problematic now? Are boys and men just meant to not have franchises made specifically for them now, because such things are now being labeled as inherently sexist while franchises tailored to girls and women are not?
I never said that, but its obvious you have a victim complex by many of the things you wrote. Youre not oppressed as a straight man who gets turned on to cartoon characters when the internet is full of people like you.
-Females in Sonic are designed to appeal to boys.
No, they're not. Rouge, I might be able to see your point. Within the main franchise, that's literally it. Amy was kidnapped in CD and Adventure 1, but has tended to be strictly strong, independent, and heroic since then.
Uhhh no, whats independent and strong about centering your life's interest over chasing a boy that doesnt want anything to do with you? I have never in my life heard anyone describe Amy (before Boom) as independent and strong because that fits Sally character way more than Amy's.
Especially in regards to her role in Adventure 2. The speech she gives to Shadow about humanity in the Final Story is a very inspiring quote, even if I don't entirely agree with everything she says in it myself.
If you have no life experience and your consumption of media is mostly fictional media targeted at younger audiences, then sure. It's cute but "very inspiring"? Lol.
Blaze is even moreso this, being the epitome of "Strong independent woman" within the Rush series, and with her character arc in mind is actually a powerful female role model.
Its clear you dont know most of the internal discussion that goes on between female Sonic fans for you to come to the conclusion that female Sonic characters are well marketed for their target audience. Bro, the only girl youve got reference is your sister but you think you know better than me on this topic. Most people like you who refuse to believe for some reason that women and men have different tastes barely have any interaction with the opposite sex and barely even know women outside of passing, much less women into the same interests as you.
Just accept the fact that most female Sonic characters are written like crap and most female Sonic fans dont even care for them outside of like 3 characters (if you ever bothered to check the discussion around it on prominent social media sites its there). All this because of "my sister said this" is embarassing.
Just because a character isn't playable doesn't mean they're looked down upon. Nintendo doesn't hate Luigi because he wasn't playable in 64, Sunshine, or Odyssey, so why would Sega hate Amy if she wasn't playable in Mania?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
