About the female characters in the Sonic series

ΩmegaZer0

I AM THE MESSIAH!
If this is all you have to contribute as a response to a post with actual information in it, then you had nothing to say worthy of making a response in the first place.
What does it have to do with that Social Network? What do you want to say with that meme?
this:
I dont think anyone cares enough to cancel you over a post you made in a relatively niche forum.


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.



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.


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.


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.

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 the only one you've got a card for.


Shes a character who replaces Amy's role as the sweet, ingenue little girl. So, what else does this character do?







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.
Post automatically merged:


As a Mario fan im gonna stop you right there, comparing Luigi with Amy is a cop out move. Do you REALLY think Amy and Luigi get the same treatment??
why is so long
 

Chezi

Member
@Velvet Don't bother with @Chezi because he doesn't know the real implication of what is happening.
Don't tell me that I don't know the real implication when I obviously do. Saying Amy wasn't playable in Mania and that Sega doesn't care about her while ignoring that countless other times that she was playable alongside other female characters is just plain ignorance.
As a Mario fan im gonna stop you right there, comparing Luigi with Amy is a cop out move. Do you REALLY think Amy and Luigi get the same treatment??
Also as a Mario fan, I'm gonna tell you that they get similar treatment. Luigi isn't playable in most mainline Mario games and is playable in almost all spinoff games. Amy isn't playable in most mainline Sonic games and is playable in almost all spinoff games. The only difference between those two characters is that Luigi is the sidekick character that has a couple of his games while Amy doesn't
 

Icarus

Phantasy Savior
Every post disagreeing with the OP is some brainlet level shit. This is all y'all got?
I was just asking a very simple question but I don't get why some people aren't agreeing with being a decent person and be considerate towards other groups.

Also comparing Luigi to not being playable with Amy (and other female Sonic characters) being underrepresented is just a false equivalency.
 

Velvet

Why hello there ~♥
Don't tell me that I don't know the real implication when I obviously do. Saying Amy wasn't playable in Mania and that Sega doesn't care about her while ignoring that countless other times that she was playable alongside other female characters is just plain ignorance.

Also as a Mario fan, I'm gonna tell you that they get similar treatment. Luigi isn't playable in most mainline Mario games and is playable in almost all spinoff games. Amy isn't playable in most mainline Sonic games and is playable in almost all spinoff games. The only difference between those two characters is that Luigi is the sidekick character that has a couple of his games while Amy doesn't
No, they dont. Luigi is purposely treated as the underdog for jokes and the fans love him for it. Amys the underdog because of shitty writing and Sonic fans dont really like her in general. The treatment is "similar" if you analysis is surface level understanding of things based on their vague patterns
 

time gear

Eternity in an hour
I was hoping it wouldn't come to this, but deep down I knew it would. I wanted to leave my thoughts on the issue and leave that one post to speak for itself, but I now find myself in the unenviable position of having to defend myself. This is exactly what I was hoping to avoid, but my previous post is no longer sufficient and so I must clarify and elaborate, whilst also dispelling some unfortunate rumors now being spread about me on this thread. I will start with that before I start actually getting to the substance of the arguments.

Firstly, I do not associate with any particular political movement. Politics in general are something I generally try to stay out of because of the often toxic nature of such discussion these days. As such, I don't really much appreciate being labeled as a "Conservative" and then having the treatment towards me henceforth being under the assumption that this label is accurate. I feel as though both sides of the political debate often make good points, and I also feel as though both sides often say things that are stupid. In this regard, I'd probably consider myself somewhere in more of the middle.

Secondly, I would like to address this in particular:
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.


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.
I have never once endorsed being sexually attracted to Sonic characters here, and I don't much appreciate being labeled as such. My points in regards what is natural were in regards to gender. I am not a furry, have never been a furry, and have no intention of ever becoming one. I simply find it unfair to complain about how it's "sexist" for men to be attracted to fictional characters and to buy products featuring said characters when this is how everyone behaves regardless, both for sexual reasons and for other reasons. Characters can resonate with people for any number of reasons, and yet all I see these days are people being shamed for which characters they enjoy and why they might enjoy them.

Additionally, you don't know me, yet here you are assuming that I'm straight whilst framing this narrative in a way as if to imply that if I were, it would mean that stereotypes about such people must be true about me.

Thirdly, I would like to elaborate on my positions:
I honestly think SEGA barely even takes gender into consideration when they decide who will and won't be playable. I heavily doubt there was some sort of private conference where they decided Amy shouldn't be playable in Mania because she's female. More likely, they probably greenlit Mighty and Ray because of the heavy demand for them to return, and then decided that 5 playable characters was enough.

Amy in particular has been more heroic and independent since Adventure. I stand by that, but I don't mean that in such a way as if to imply that she's been a perfect or even consistent character. Yes, her stalkerish behavior comes off as a fair bit creepy, but try focusing on the other aspects to her character for a moment and what do you see? She knows what she believes in, and she will stand up for it. If need be, with violence. If not, with words. She's kindhearted and cares about her friends, and wouldn't hesitate to protect them if they needed protecting. She spends the majority of her role in Adventure defending a flicky, is single handly the reason why Shadow realizes his revenge quest is stupid in Adventure 2, and is even willing to cooperate with Big and Cream in Heroes to help them find their missing friends instead of being selfish and going off on her own to prioritize her own desire to find Sonic.

Let's talk about Cream next. What does she do in the series? Much the same as Amy to be honest. She's incredibly brave for her age, and is willing to go to great lengths to protect her friends and family. Pretty much every time she's been playable, it's been for the express purpose of protecting others. Even when she's not playable, you get instances such as Rush where she's instrumental in Blaze's character development of learning to open up to others and work together instead of trying to bear the full burden of responsibility of what was going on. Honestly, I don't really view her as a replacement for Amy in any way, and I don't see her sharing a similar role to Amy as being a bad thing either.

Sure, Rouge's design is a little... Inappropriate. The seductive tone of speech they gave her in Generations doesn't really help things much. However, even she has value aside from these points. Let's take her character development in SA2, her debut game as an example. She first appears as a self-centered gem thief who is willing to go to whatever means necessary to get what she wants. She actively lies to the entirety of the rest of the main cast when given a chance, though also gives occasional glimpses of being more intelligent than she looks. She alone was willing to call out Shadow in regards to his true identity, having done her research before confronting him. She ended up being both kinda right and kinda wrong about him. As the story progresses, Shadow transitions from being someone she is spying on to being someone she considers a friend as she becomes more aware of how multi-layered his personality really is.

The real big shift in her character development in that game however is when she finally decides to give Knuckles the emerald shards she had collected so far. Although the tensions between her and Knuckles aren't resolved completely in this moment, the significance of her giving up the one thing she cared about most in a reluctant show of thanks is the revelation that she is indeed every bit as multi-layered as Shadow is, and is capable of being selfless too. Perhaps this moment in a way even acts as foreshadowing of Shadow's eventual character development, as just as Rouge was able to change and act against her original intentions, so too did Shadow later on.

The point I'm getting at here is that the female characters in Sonic aren't just written as females. They are characters with human aspects to them. They have ideals and/or beliefs that they strive for just as they have flaws that hold them back from these things that they must overcome, just as the male characters do.

I don't see the females in this series as specially neglected for their gender. I see pretty much everyone who isn't Sonic or Eggman being neglected equally or nearly equally. Tails gets to tag along as the sidekick, but is rarely playable anymore. Knuckles, even moreso. Amy was the only other character they even put in Lost World among the main cast, and between her and Knuckles she was the one portrayed more positively.
 
Last edited:

Chezi

Member
Luigi has a whole trilogy of high quality games where he is the sole protagonist.
I recognized that. I know they have their obvious differences, but saying that a character isn't playable doesn't mean they're being misrepresented.
every post disagreeing with the OP is some brainlet level shit. This is all yall got?
The disagreement comes from us saying that female characters are not being misrepresented. You're making it sound like we want them to be mispresented.

The simplicity of it is that the major female characters (Amy, Rouge, Cream, etc.) display a variety of female archetypes (fangirl, attractive, cute). This is by far not a misrepresentation at all. Just because they're all sidelined doesn't mean Sega hates them. It just means that they aren't needed to tell that game's story
 

Tatsuru

2.3 will have menus
Moderator
Sonic Team Junior
Judge
I recognized that. I know they have their obvious differences, but saying that a character isn't playable doesn't mean they're being misrepresented.

The disagreement comes from us saying that female characters are not being misrepresented. You're making it sound like we want them to be mispresented.

The simplicity of it is that the major female characters (Amy, Rouge, Cream, etc.) display a variety of female archetypes (fangirl, attractive, cute). This is by far not a misrepresentation at all. Just because they're all sidelined doesn't mean Sega hates them. It just means that they aren't needed to tell that game's story
You seem to be having trouble keeping up with the discussion so let me give you a push: it's about female characters being underrepresented (less appreciated, less highlighted, not given enough depth), not misrepresented (whatever you mean with that. I don't think that word applies to what we're talking about at all).
 

Velvet

Why hello there ~♥
I was hoping it wouldn't come to this, but deep down I knew it would. I wanted to leave my thoughts on the issue and leave that one post to speak for itself, but I now find myself in the unenviable position of having to defend myself. This is exactly what I was hoping to avoid, but my previous post is no longer sufficient and so I must clarify and elaborate, whilst also dispelling some unfortunate rumors now being spread about me on this thread. I will start with that before I start actually getting to the substance of the arguments.

You can't leave weak arguments against an OP on a public forum and expect people not to reply to you.


I have never once endorsed being sexually attracted to Sonic characters here, and I don't much appreciate being labeled as such. My points in regards what is natural were in regards to gender. I am not a furry, have never been a furry, and have no intention of ever becoming one. I simply find it unfair to complain about how it's "sexist" for men to be attracted to fictional characters and to buy products featuring said characters when this is how everyone behaves regardless, both for sexual reasons and for other reasons. Characters can resonate with people for any number of reasons, and yet all I see these days are people being shamed for which characters they enjoy and why they might enjoy them.
Nobody called you a furry, but it's clear with how hard you're going with defending people's sexual interest in fictional characters to the point it drains their pockets and shortens their attention span for anything else in a series, you probably see yourself in them to some extent. All I'm saying is, the internet is full of men sexually attracted to fictional characters and its visible in every social media or forum online. Nobody really tries to bother these guys either unless to make fun of them. Secondly, someone who only puts value on a female character only if they look attractive and appeal to them sexually are fucked no matter how much you spin it. Admittely, these people who are doing this in children's franchise or series' where sexuality isnt the focus are the worst to me. Not only it bogs down fandom discussion with their incessant cooming but it makes it hard to connect about female characters outside of canon material. You say female fans do this with male characters but I dont notice this nearly as much, and I was online when fujoshis were more common on the net and I know a lot of female fans like me. A lot of female fans take the psychological and emotional into aspect more if they want to husbando a character or just in general. Men and women arent driven by sexuality in the same way, why does this bother you so much?

Additionally, you don't know me, yet here you are assuming that I'm straight whilst framing this narrative in a way as if to imply that if I were, it would mean that stereotypes about such people must be true about me.
So you have no experience with the opposite sex romantically, sexually, or anything beyond an acquintanceship level but you want to speak for women and what they like?
You're not a conservative to me, that much is obvious, especially with your focus on shame and your obsession with "let people do whatever they waaaaant". At the very least I assumed you were left wing, but not neo liberal like the crowd on social media is.

I honestly think SEGA barely even takes gender into consideration when they decide who will and won't be playable. I heavily doubt there was some sort of private conference where they decided Amy shouldn't be playable in Mania because she's female. More likely, they probably greenlit Mighty and Ray because of the heavy demand for them to return, and then decided that 5 playable characters was enough.

You dont have to be looming over a dark room with a black cloak rubbing your hands together to decide to take actions that are probably a result of your own prejudices. Thats an insanely childish and unnuanced way of thinking. Amy is more popular than Mighty and Ray is and throughout all of SEGA decisions they have never showed they respected Amy as the first flagship female character of the series. Princess Peach has never been sidelined in the way Amy consistently is, though her role in the mainline games is arguably less significant than all of Amy's game appearances. Hell, compare the treatment of Sally Acorn by SoA vs the treatment of Amy Rose by SoJ. Who do you really think is their priority and who they respect as Sonic's female companion?

Amy in particular has been more heroic and independent since Adventure. I stand by that, but I don't mean that in such a way as if to imply that she's been a perfect or even consistent character. Yes, her stalkerish behavior comes off as a fair bit creepy, but try focusing on the other aspects to her character for a moment and what do you see? She knows what she believes in, and she will stand up for it. If need be, with violence. If not, with words. She's kindhearted and cares about her friends, and wouldn't hesitate to protect them if they needed protecting. She spends the majority of her role in Adventure defending a flicky, is single handly the reason why Shadow realizes his revenge quest is stupid in Adventure 2, and is even willing to cooperate with Big and Cream in Heroes to help them find their missing friends instead of being selfish and going off on her own to prioritize her own desire to find Sonic.
All of these character developments that went nowhere after Adventure 2 because Cream stole her role as the ingenue, sweet young girl so they had to find another spot to fit for Amy (the unhinged stalker). Amy was arguably the best in SA1 and SA2 (canon wise) until they decided to do fuckall with that.

Let's talk about Cream next. What does she do in the series? Much the same as Amy to be honest. She's incredibly brave for her age, and is willing to go to great lengths to protect her friends and family. Pretty much every time she's been playable, it's been for the express purpose of protecting others. Even when she's not playable, you get instances such as Rush where she's instrumental in Blaze's character development of learning to open up to others and work together instead of trying to bear the full burden of responsibility of what was going on. Honestly, I don't really view her as a replacement for Amy in any way, and I don't see her sharing a similar role to Amy as being a bad thing either..

I dont give a shit about Cream and Cream's character was never something interesting to me because everything Cream did Classic Amy in all of her appearances, canon or not canon, did and was. All of your focus is on the protecting and compassionate sides of these characters like i'm supposed to automatically love them based on how they feel to other characters. Even Mario characters have a better draw to their personalities and more relatablity.


Sure, Rouge's design is a little... Inappropriate. The seductive tone of speech they gave her in Generations doesn't really help things much. However, even she has value aside from these points. Let's take her character development in SA2, her debut game as an example. She first appears as a self-centered gem thief who is willing to go to whatever means necessary to get what she wants. She actively lies to the entirety of the rest of the main cast when given a chance, though also gives occasional glimpses of being more intelligent than she looks. She alone was willing to call out Shadow in regards to his true identity, having done her research before confronting him. She ended up being both kinda right and kinda wrong about him. As the story progresses, Shadow transitions from being someone she is spying on to being someone she considers a friend as she becomes more aware of how multi-layered his personality really is.

The real big shift in her character development in that game however is when she finally decides to give Knuckles the emerald shards she had collected so far. Although the tensions between her and Knuckles aren't resolved completely in this moment, the significance of her giving up the one thing she cared about most in a reluctant show of thanks is the revelation that she is indeed every bit as multi-layered as Shadow is, and is capable of being selfless too. Perhaps this moment in a way even acts as foreshadowing of Shadow's eventual character development, as just as Rouge was able to change and act against her original intentions, so too did Shadow later on.
Rouge was written well in Adventure 2 and 06, I agree, I also conclude that her design distracts from her personality since shes turned into a fetish or just the eyecandy character by both SEGA and the fans way too much often, but it does fit into her role. However, she hasnt really done anything outside of that and has been barely developed.

The point I'm getting at here is that the female characters in Sonic aren't just written as females. They are characters with human aspects to them. They have ideals and/or beliefs that they strive for just as they have flaws that hold them back from these things that they must overcome, just as the male characters do.
They barely have human aspects to them because they're one dimensional and basic af, lmao. That goes for all of the Sonic game cast though. I question anyone impressed by Sonic game writing of all things. You need to read books and watch other media to realize the mediocre shit it is.



I don't see the females in this series as specially neglected for their gender. I see pretty much everyone who isn't Sonic or Eggman being neglected equally or nearly equally. Tails gets to tag along as the sidekick, but is rarely playable anymore. Knuckles, even moreso. Amy was the only other character they even put in Lost World among the main cast, and between her and Knuckles she was the one portrayed more positively.
The fact that they get restricted to stereotypes that are associated with their gender more than the guys do, should tell you thats enough. But you dont get it because you dont want to.
If I, a woman, feels that way, and so do many female fans of the Sonic series, why do you think you know better?
Do you think youre accurately represented or feel characters are relatable from bishonen, or fujoshi series for example?
Post automatically merged:

I recognized that. I know they have their obvious differences, but saying that a character isn't playable doesn't mean they're being misrepresented.

The disagreement comes from us saying that female characters are not being misrepresented. You're making it sound like we want them to be mispresented.

The simplicity of it is that the major female characters (Amy, Rouge, Cream, etc.) display a variety of female archetypes (fangirl, attractive, cute). This is by far not a misrepresentation at all. Just because they're all sidelined doesn't mean Sega hates them. It just means that they aren't needed to tell that game's story
Would you like it if Sonic, Tails, and Knuckles were nothing but fanboy, attractive, and cute? Btw this simplification just makes your argument look worse
 

Icarus

Phantasy Savior
I'm terribly sorry for starting that argument just because of my simple analysis and question....

But I feel like I'm outing some problematic people on that forum because of what I said.
 

time gear

Eternity in an hour
You can't leave weak arguments against an OP on a public forum and expect people not to reply to you.
That's not what it was about. I was expecting replies. I had to reply again because people were spreading rumors about me that weren't true. My intention was to drop my political beliefs in one post and let it speak for itself from then on, because I have no interest in getting involved in a political argument. While I was at it, I might as well elaborate on my stance a little bit.

Nobody called you a furry

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.
How else exactly am I to take this blatant mischaracterization of what I said? My point was about how it's natural for people to be attracted to attractive people, the context being that I was defending my stance that capitalism and big business don't inherently participate in sexist practices such as the neglect women. Despite that, here you are making it out as if I'm defending people getting horny for "big titty bat girls with big cartoon eyes".

but it's clear with how hard you're going with defending people's sexual interest in fictional characters to the point it drains their pockets and shortens their attention span for anything else in a series, you probably see yourself in them to some extent. All I'm saying is, the internet is full of men sexually attracted to fictional characters and its visible in every social media or forum online. Nobody really tries to bother these guys either unless to make fun of them.
The internet isn't just full of men who do this. Everyone does it. I've made that point many times now. Yes, there are many men who invest lots of money into products that feature attractive women. There are also many gay men who invest lots of money into products that feature attractive men, women who invest lots of money into products that feature attractive men, and lesbians who invest lots of money into products that feature attractive women. People spend money on what they like, and do so because they have the opportunity to. As such, I fail to see how the system is inherently sexist, considering there's nothing stopping anyone regardless of their gender or sexual preference from buying products containing what they like.

It's not that I see myself in them, my spending tendencies don't really care about the gender of the characters, I just like to collect games because playing games is my hobby. It's more that I see a harsh characterization of people being made under the bias of a limited perspective on the issue, and so I'm offering up an additional perspective in the hopes that this thread isn't going to turn into a big giant hate wagon towards one group of people in the interest of another.

In regards to "big business" being inherently sexist and neglectful of women, I'd like to mention that Borderlands is a product of the same "big business" this thread is so willing to throw under the bus. Borderlands features a diverse cast of characters including many female characters, gay characters, and combinations of the two, and takes care to represent these characters realistically. If sexism is inherent to the entire industry, then how is it that products like this are even able to release?
Secondly, someone who only puts value on a female character only if they look attractive and appeal to them sexually are fucked no matter how much you spin it. Admittely, these people who are doing this in children's franchise or series' where sexuality isnt the focus are the worst to me. Not only it bogs down fandom discussion with their incessant cooming but it makes it hard to connect about female characters outside of canon material. You say female fans do this with male characters but I dont notice this nearly as much, and I was online when fujoshis were more common on the net and I know a lot of female fans like me. A lot of female fans take the psychological and emotional into aspect more if they want to husbando a character or just in general. Men and women arent driven by sexuality in the same way, why does this bother you so much?
This is an extreme stance. You're giving me a hypothetical scenario of someone who only puts value in a character by their looks, but realistically this doesn't tend to be the case. In reality, characters that have nothing but their looks going for them tend to be less popular, because there's nothing else about the character gripping enough for someone to resonate with. In fact, such characters can even easily become hated if they have the right combination of character traits, and are often intentionally made to be hated. These are your snotty rich girl characters or handsome but egotistical male CEO characters. Typically, fan appeal towards these characters tends to rise in the event they redeem themselves, not before.

Male or female, most fans of a character are fans of the character because the character resonates with them in some way, not just because they have an attractive figure.

So you have no experience with the opposite sex romantically, sexually, or anything beyond an acquintanceship level but you want to speak for women and what they like?
I'm simply just being realistic. All different types of people who like all different types of things exist. Additionally, it's not like I've never known girls and women. I've been friends with them all my life, I grew up with an older sister, I've met them at social gatherings, etc. It's not like I've never experienced what women like before.

You're not a conservative to me, that much is obvious, especially with your focus on shame and your obsession with "let people do whatever they waaaaant". At the very least I assumed you were left wing, but not neo liberal like the crowd on social media is.
It wasn't you who implied I was.

You dont have to be looming over a dark room with a black cloak rubbing your hands together to decide to take actions that are probably a result of your own prejudices. Thats an insanely childish and unnuanced way of thinking. Amy is more popular than Mighty and Ray is and throughout all of SEGA decisions they have never showed they respected Amy as the first flagship female character of the series. Princess Peach has never been sidelined in the way Amy consistently is, though her role in the mainline games is arguably less significant than all of Amy's game appearances. Hell, compare the treatment of Sally Acorn by SoA vs the treatment of Amy Rose by SoJ. Who do you really think is their priority and who they respect as Sonic's female companion?
I don't really see this to be honest. Amy was upgraded massively from existing just to be a damsel in distress in Adventure, also making her first proper playable appearance. Peach has typically existed exclusively for this purpose in mainline Mario, with only the occasional rare exception. Probably the biggest one being her rejection of both Mario and Bowser in Odyssey. Amy is playable in all 3 Advance games and in Battle (She was a special unlock in Advance 2 though), etc. Between Amy and Peach, I'd say Amy has been given a lot more respect. As for Sally, I don't even think she's been relevant since like, the 90's. She's never been in any of the games, she's never been brought back for any of the TV shows, they didn't even bring her back for Boom, instead opting to have chemistry between Sonic and Amy again. I don't really invest much into alternative merch so I don't know if there's some big Sally representation there, but as far as mainline Sonic is concerned Sally doesn't really seem to exist, let alone pose any threat to Amy.

All of these character developments that went nowhere after Adventure 2 because Cream stole her role as the ingenue, sweet young girl so they had to find another spot to fit for Amy (the unhinged stalker). Amy was arguably the best in SA1 and SA2 (canon wise) until they decided to do fuckall with that.
I'd argue they've done far less with Cream since her introduction than they've done with Amy since then. In fact, aside from Advance 2, Advance 3, Heroes, and the first Rush, Cream barely even exists, generally being relegated to cameo status. Recent examples of Amy being more important than Cream are Sonic Unleashed in which she has a minor supporting role, Sonic Lost World in which she has another minor supporting role, and Sonic Forces with her also having a minor supporting role. Cream never replaced Amy.

I dont give a shit about Cream and Cream's character was never something interesting to me because everything Cream did Classic Amy in all of her appearances, canon or not canon, did and was. All of your focus is on the protecting and compassionate sides of these characters like i'm supposed to automatically love them based on how they feel to other characters. Even Mario characters have a better draw to their personalities and more relatablity.
My point wasn't that you should love Cream, my point was that she has value as a character. Sure, she serves a similar role as Amy, but that's not inherently a bad thing. Tails serves a similar role as Sonic with both of them being the front lines against Eggman, Rouge serves a similar role as Knuckles with both of them being treasure hunters, Blaze serves another similar role as Sonic as being effectively his equivalent in her own dimension in her fight against evil there. Knuckles and Shadow are both rival characters to Sonic, etc. etc. I could go on. If anything, the only character that was ever outright replaced was Gamma, who was replaced by Omega. Other than that, characters sharing similar roles tend to co-exist in Sonic.

As for relatability, that's territory where Cream and Amy are actually vastly different. Amy was introduced as more of a tomboy character racing into danger to pursue her own self-interests and facing consequences for them. Cream is a well mannered little girl who just wants to keep her friends and family safe. If characters are made to appeal to target demographics, the girls Cream is intended to relate to are different from the girls Amy is intended to relate to. This could even be why you don't resonate with her much, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Rouge was written well in Adventure 2 and 06, I agree, I also conclude that her design distracts from her personality since shes turned into a fetish or just the eyecandy character by both SEGA and the fans way too much often, but it does fit into her role. However, she hasnt really done anything outside of that and has been barely developed.
I get the impression as though the intention behind her looks in Adventure 2 was for her to act as a symbol of "Don't judge a book by it's cover". The first impression most people are going to get looking at her is that she's just that, a fetish character. A prostitute, a bimbo. But then what you actually get is a smart and capable woman who is capable of acting either with groups or as an independent. She's hardly the only character SEGA hasn't known what to do with since though. I'd actually argue the number of male characters that fit into the pit of despair in this regard is a longer list. Bark, Bean, Fang, Mighty, and Ray got the worst of it for ages, and that's not to ignore Espio, Vector, Charmy, Big, Jet, Storm, etc.

They barely have human aspects to them because they're one dimensional and basic af, lmao. That goes for all of the Sonic game cast though. I question anyone impressed by Sonic game writing of all things. You need to read books and watch other media to realize the mediocre shit it is.
This is mostly true for characters that aren't Sonic after Adventure 2 (Or even 06 I suppose, though the writing there is kinda a dumpster fire regardless). It's generally the thing about Sonic that infuriates me the most. They had this nice thing going on where the lore was starting to get really good, and then they blew it and turned the lore into a painfully mediocre mess lacking consistency or much in the way of real substance. The best it gets after SA2 is the Storybook series, and those don't even take place within Sonic's world. They hyped up Forces as if it was going to go back to these old narrative driven glory days, only for that game to be... A big disappointment, to put it lightly.

The fact that they get restricted to stereotypes that are associated with their gender more than the guys do, should tell you thats enough. But you dont get it because you dont want to.
If I, a woman, feels that way, and so do many female fans of the Sonic series, why do you think you know better?
Do you think youre accurately represented or feel characters are relatable from bishonen, or fujoshi series for example?
You mean to say that Sonic, Knuckles, and Shadow aren't stereotypically male? And yet, there's far more to their characters than just them being male. We've just spent multiple posts talking about how exactly that fact is true for the female characters as well. The problem isn't that the female characters are neglected. It's that everyone is neglected after Sonic 06 other than Sonic himself and a limited cast of supporting characters. I desperately want SEGA to do better in this regard. They have all of these characters sitting around effectively doing nothing when they could be writing really good stories with them. The IDW comics are doing a great job of this, why can't the games be like that?
 

Tatsuru

2.3 will have menus
Moderator
Sonic Team Junior
Judge
It's important to remember that Amy's (and by extension Rouge's) interactions with Shadow in SA2 are nothing more than plot devices for him to remember Maria, another female character that happens to be dead. Amy even repeats something Maria said verbatim just so a plot driving flashback can be triggered. This makes her an accessory, an object made for Shadow's development, not a character with agency. Rouge warming up to both men she interacts with just because she was saved from death by them is not a character trait either.

You mean to say that Sonic, Knuckles, and Shadow aren't stereotypically male? And yet, there's far more to their characters than just them being male. We've just spent multiple posts talking about how exactly that fact is true for the female characters as well. The problem isn't that the female characters are neglected. It's that everyone is neglected after Sonic 06 other than Sonic himself and a limited cast of supporting characters.
Having appeal to young boys because they look cool does not mean they embody a stereotype. The essential difference between them and the female characters is that they're agents of the stories they debut in, not just tagalongs like the girls usually are.
 

Velvet

Why hello there ~♥
You're writing so long that I cant even reply to you without opening up Wordpad to individually seperate the texts I want to address with quote brackets, so imma do this @timeeater

1} First off, I used the plural "you" instead of the singular "you" which should've been clear by the context with the surrounding text around my statement.

2) Saying capitalism and big business doesn't negatively impact female sexuality is just plain WRONG. It's completely different issues between the dimensions of the sexuality of a fictional female character being marketed and the sexuality of a real life human being being exploitated like a toy, but because of that im not addressing that since thats a whole nother can of worms that has nothing to do with my point. A female fictional character being marketed as sex appeal with a common pattern in the industry of girl characters not having any purpose but titties and ass doesn't really hold the same gravity to whatever capitalism does to real life human beings.

3) Men overwhelmingly dominate sexual discussions wherever you go, except for sex work. Denying this just makes you look out of touch with reality. I dont know why people like you are so convinced women have the same sexuality as men and we think the same like yall do, but for the most part we dont. Im not saying women are asexual beings or husbando/fujoshi stuff never happens but its done in a different way and also male characters are far less likely to have their purpose just based on sex appeal like female characters are which are just facts. Boy love, romance novels, ect all aren't even popular like they used to be, the last mainstream example I can think of where sex appeal played an important part in male characters was something like Twilight. Im done arguing this with you because I dont buy the shit youre saying because its just a false equalvency. Its a weak argument that goes against statistics and common sense.

4) Nope, you're wrong again. When Cream was more relevant she literally did replace Amy's former role and made a different dynamic of the Amy character in the process.
EvgeT-SVIAEGRPH.jpg
EvgeW5NVcAMxlcj.jpg
EvgeObXVgAEmjgX.jpg


Imagine the Amy character threatening to beat up her friend because she told the truth about her delusions about her idol before Cream was introduced. I can't, because Amy was never like that.

As for Cream's popularity, I dont know about it but considering she got shafted it means she wasn't really popular to begin with lol

5} I think thats just headcanon, brah. SEGA or ST doesn't really think like that, especially in that Western centric way tbh. Intelligent, morally questionable women being portrayed as dangerous and sexy is a very old trope that goes back centuries. Its nothing new much less anything to be said that its reversing a stereotype when it just plays into one lol.

6) I mean, you do have to admit a lot of the girl characters are characterized based on how their sex is perceived to act, like Rouges sexuality, Amys fangirling, Creams docility because of her age, ect. The only character who doesnt really do that is Wave and Blaze, I think? But theyre not very well written or get enough appearances either. As for IDW, I dont find the writing the best tbh but I dont like the majority of the writing in this franchise. I agree most of the game characters are written like shit, just for different reasons.
 

time gear

Eternity in an hour
Having appeal to young boys because they look cool does not mean they embody a stereotype. The essential difference between them and the female characters is that they're agents of the stories they debut in, not just tagalongs like the girls usually are.
My point is that the males aren't treated special in this regard. The last time characters that weren't Sonic were written well not counting Blaze was the Adventure games. Tails gets to play sidekick, Eggman is the main villain, and literally everyone else is a tagalong at best aside from maybe Shadow in his own game and Forces. Knuckles doesn't even have any consistency to him anymore. He used to be a loner who just wanted to protect the Master Emerald because it was his sworn duty as the Emerald Guardian. Then Heroes made him into a tagalong friend of Sonic's, and his role since then has basically been Tails without the smarts and with a dumb ego, except for in Forces where now he's suddenly general of the resistance for some reason.

Tails had his character development from SA1 outright removed in Forces, Shadow had all his character development from SA2 removed immediately after SA2 and now instead of having layers he's just a stereotypical edgelord, and everyone else might as well just not exist. The females get the same treatment as the males here, and it's crappy for everyone.

Let's talk about debut games for characters for a moment. Amy debuted in Sonic CD to be a Damsel in distress. Okay, not a great start. Product of the 90's, even SEGA decided not to keep her this way after, moving on.

Rouge debuted in Sonic Adventure 2, and has one of the more compelling character arcs in that game right alongside Shadow. Cream debuted in Sonic Advance 2, in which she's on a quest to rescue her mother from Eggman and is no more or less a tagalong than Tails or Knuckles is in that game, and Blaze debuted in Rush, in which she's Sonic equal in plot relevance and his superior in character development.

Tails debuted in Sonic 2, in which he was literally just a tag along that wanted to be just like Sonic. Knuckles debuted in Sonic 3, in which he acted as a rival character. Big debuted in Adventure, in which he barely interacts with everyone else and could be removed from the story without consequence. Shadow debuted in Adventure 2 in which he acted as another rival character.

I'm really just not seeing this "SEGA doesn't treat women as equals" thing.

That's probably enough for this post however, since length is getting complained about. I'll just leave it with this: It doesn't look like we're going to be able to see eye to eye or convince each other here, and I don't really like that this is becoming so much of an argument. In the interest of this topic not getting any more heated than it's already getting, I'm going to propose that we agree to disagree, rather than continue doing this same routine of going back and forth over the same points over and over and not making any progress.
 

Icarus

Phantasy Savior
Let's remember that Cream was just created to give Team Rose a Fly character and that in Advance 2 she was just here to give a very easy mode to the game with Amy being reduced to a super secret character that wasn't even relevant to the story.

Speaking of Heroes, apparently Rouge was supposed to be a power type (I don't know for which team) but she was changed to fly with Omega being introduced.
 

Tatsuru

2.3 will have menus
Moderator
Sonic Team Junior
Judge
I'm really just not seeing this "SEGA doesn't treat women as equals" thing.

[...] I'll just leave it with this: It doesn't look like we're going to be able to see eye to eye or convince each other here, and I don't really like that this is becoming so much of an argument. In the interest of this topic not getting any more heated than it's already getting, I'm going to propose that we agree to disagree, rather than continue doing this same routine of going back and forth over the same points over and over and not making any progress.
Admitting you don't see something is fine, but there is no such thing as "agree to disagree" over observable phenomena. Not all points of view are automatically equally legitimate - you may very well be unequipped with enough experience to see or having specific biases that prevent you to. What matters is the conscious effort to try to see (else you're denying their experience or knowledge which is far more undesirable), but it's not what's going on here, since you shifted focus to glossing over the problem in your later posts with "hey, everyone is written badly" when we never disagreed on that and the actual point is that there are different reasons for each set of characters being badly written, all of which were already explained quite eloquently to you.

There really isn't much to add since all the cards are on the table already, but don't leave the thread under the impression that you could have convinced anyone here they're paranoid about their experiences of a franchise they are passionate about.
 

time gear

Eternity in an hour
Admitting you don't see something is fine, but there is no such thing as "agree to disagree" over observable phenomena. Not all points of view are automatically equally legitimate - you may very well be unequipped with enough experience to see or having specific biases that prevent you to. What matters is the conscious effort to try to see (else you're denying their experience or knowledge which is far more undesirable), but it's not what's going on here, since you shifted focus to glossing over the problem in your later posts with "hey, everyone is written badly" when we never disagreed on that and the actual point is that there are different reasons for each set of characters being badly written, all of which were already explained quite eloquently to you.

There really isn't much to add since all the cards are on the table already, but don't leave the thread under the impression that you could have convinced anyone here they're paranoid about their experiences of a franchise they are passionate about.
I bring up that everyone is written badly because it's important to the discussion. Pretty much everyone who isn't Sonic is getting shafted equally, and yet the big narrative going around here is that females are somehow special in this regard. I bring this up, and now you are acting as though me bringing this fact up is a glossing over of things. It's almost as though the points I try to bring up in defense of my perspective on things are getting waved off while the points others make in favor of the original point I'm arguing against are getting treated seriously. This whole combined thread so far basically comes off to me as "If you don't agree with the original post, you're stupid, and any argument you make must be stupid.". A certain viewpoint is taken seriously, while others are treated as though they don't matter or are inferior because they're not the other viewpoint, and this doesn't feel like fair discussion to me.

I got involved with the thread to begin with because my viewpoint is also that of someone who's also passionate about the franchise, I just don't really like getting into arguments and don't like that this thread has been getting into such sensitive territory in regards to potentially becoming one. My proposal to agree to disagree was in this interest; I can't budge anyone else and nobody else is budging me. As such, rather than going around in circles arguing the same points over and over turning this thread into a big never ending argument between opposing viewpoints, I feel like it would be healthier to acknowledge that we have different views and that that's okay.

I'm not trying to take away from anyone that their viewpoints are valid, I just wanted to give my viewpoint representation within the discussion. I was hoping that by doing so, I could bring perspective into the issue that might not have been considered before, so as to help keep the discussion on the matter fair. Instead, my contributions are being overwhelmingly rejected, and I'm continually put in the position of having to not only defend them, but also defend myself against labels being applied to me because of them. This thread has become everything I was trying to avoid to begin with.

If I'd had the forward knowledge to predict that this is actually how it would turn out, I would have saved everyone the trouble and not posted to begin with. When the thread started to feel political, I hoped I could just drop my thoughts on the issue and let them speak for themselves from then on so as to avoid making an argument out of it, but I had to draw the line on that when I started to have labels applied to me as a result. I briefly started to feel as though more fair discussion was happening for a short while after that, only for things to flip back around to alternative viewpoints -and therefore mine by extension- not mattering. I want to stop. Not just because of the rejection of my viewpoint, but also because this thread is becoming a burden on me in regards to stress and anxiety. It feels more and more like it's become an argument more than a discussion, and I don't like that. I like to participate in healthy discussions in which both sides are both tested and taken into consideration. Here, it feels like the only side being truly tested is those of us who don't agree with the original premise, and the only side truly being considered is the original premise.
 

Who is viewing this thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Top