MLP and gender roles

[mlpfan]

There's a really interesting book called Sold Separately that talks about this (and even has a chapter devoted the MLP--the 80s show and the toys) and examines how "girls" shows and toys differ from "boys" shows and toys.  I highly recommend it, it's an interesting read.   There are both pros and cons to girls being shunted into "the pink ghetto."


visitors can't see pics , please register or login


One of the pros is that in the pink ghetto, female characters can have more range.   There are some "gender neutral" shows that have strong female roles--Avatar The Last Airbender comes to mind--but all too often when you have a mixed cast of boys and girls, the female characters always end up in the following roles:

The Girlfriend / Love Interest.  Even in G.I. Joe, where I believe it is technically against the rules for soldiers to date within the chain of command, you just KNEW Scarlett was going to end up as the Love Interest.   

The Sultry Temptress.  Oh, curse those villainous women and their tempting ways!!

The Mother.  Thank goodness the sensible female character is there to take care of sensible matters and allow the male characters to be irresponsible layabouts!

I mean, this is a simplification obviously, but the fact remains . . . it's really, really hard to break female characters out of all the baggage that our society automatically heaps on girls and women unless you shake things up.  And one way to do that is to create a "pinkified" world where the very setting screams "THIS IS FOR GIRLS!!!"

I don't see it as being sexist.  I see it as trying to provide a haven.   Of course I am fine with boys / men watching girls shows;  but only if they accept them for what they are, in all their pinkness, and don't try to "mannify" the show into "G.I. Joe with ponies," if you know what I mean.

I do notice on tv when it comes to kids the father is almost always a moron(burns dinner,can't control the kids ect) and the mother is the perfect mother. but gender roles and sexist views are ingrained in our very culture even our very brains! when you think of a nurse or teacher you think girl, when you think soldier or doctor or mechanic you think man.! girls have always been girly and did girls things and men have always been manly and done manly things, since the very begining of time. gender roles are almost part of our dna

[NoDivision]

I don't see it as being sexist.  I see it as trying to provide a haven.   Of course I am fine with boys / men watching girls shows;  but only if they accept them for what they are, in all their pinkness, and don't try to "mannify" the show into "G.I. Joe with ponies," if you know what I mean.

Yes yes and very yes. I have a lot of friends who work in the entertainment/animation industry, and they are really trying to take advantage of the opportunity to make girls programing into something diverse and positive. Society at this point pushes people in certain directions, and while some people break these norms more often than not children are going to feel that they should be in their gender appropriate niches. So if girls are going to be watching "girls" programing, great! Thats our opportunity to make fun, exciting, entertaining, educating, programs aimed at girls that teach important lessons, provide role models, and show diversity.

This is something that girls programing does WAY better than traditional boys programing - girls programing has a huge advantage here, because they CAN include so many things that boys programing can't. It's boys programing that is really falling behind and I feel sorry for those creators - because they don't get to write shows hilighting as many important issues, they get to make things explode and kick some ass.

Boys don't know what they're missing!

[starrypawz]

There's a really interesting book called Sold Separately that talks about this (and even has a chapter devoted the MLP--the 80s show and the toys) and examines how "girls" shows and toys differ from "boys" shows and toys.  I highly recommend it, it's an interesting read.   There are both pros and cons to girls being shunted into "the pink ghetto."


visitors can't see pics , please register or login


One of the pros is that in the pink ghetto, female characters can have more range.   There are some "gender neutral" shows that have strong female roles--Avatar The Last Airbender comes to mind--but all too often when you have a mixed cast of boys and girls, the female characters always end up in the following roles:

The Girlfriend / Love Interest.  Even in G.I. Joe, where I believe it is technically against the rules for soldiers to date within the chain of command, you just KNEW Scarlett was going to end up as the Love Interest.   

The Sultry Temptress.  Oh, curse those villainous women and their tempting ways!!

The Mother.  Thank goodness the sensible female character is there to take care of sensible matters and allow the male characters to be irresponsible layabouts!

I mean, this is a simplification obviously, but the fact remains . . . it's really, really hard to break female characters out of all the baggage that our society automatically heaps on girls and women unless you shake things up.  And one way to do that is to create a "pinkified" world where the very setting screams "THIS IS FOR GIRLS!!!"

I don't see it as being sexist.  I see it as trying to provide a haven.   Of course I am fine with boys / men watching girls shows;  but only if they accept them for what they are, in all their pinkness, and don't try to "mannify" the show into "G.I. Joe with ponies," if you know what I mean.

I do notice on tv when it comes to kids the father is almost always a moron(burns dinner,can't control the kids ect) and the mother is the perfect mother. but gender roles and sexist views are ingrained in our very culture even our very brains! when you think of a nurse or teacher you think girl, when you think soldier or doctor or mechanic you think man.! girls have always been girly and did girls things and men have always been manly and done manly things, since the very begining of time. gender roles are almost part of our dna

Another type I notice is when you have a character who is say a tomboy its nearly always in such a way of 'LOL I'M BETTER THAN THOSE GIRLY GIRLS AS I DON'T LIKE GIRLY STUFF' and that if a female character acts 'feminime they're weak. I believe it's described by TV tropes as something like 'Real women don't wear skirts'
It's annoying though as there seems to be two extremes, hyper feminine or really masculine and no one seems to be allowed to stay in a middle ground. And vice versa as how dare a male character differ from usual 'male interests'
It's like you'd have a character who is say... a cop and the show seems to be set up in such a way of 'hey look, this is a cop and she's female' and generally seem to go out of their way to go 'oh look a female character is doing this' and 'watch how this female character does this' and well it gets annoying.

[Stuntmang]

To be fair, MLP aims itself at girls. Any toy line that aims itself at one gender specifically is sexist in its own right, regardless of anything else in said line. Why can't we just have toys instead of "THESE ARE FOR BOYS AND THESE ARE FOR GIRLS"?

Not this again. :/

If you think it wouldn't cause an uproar, go make some pastel ponies that are mostly pink with long, colorful brushable hair and other typical "girly" stuff (dress-up dresses and hair ties, wedding playsets, pink castles, etc) and aim them at boys. Good luck with all the hate mail and angry parents you'd have to deal with. I doubt your toy line would last long at all, if you even made it into mass production.

That would not in any way be acceptable in modern society (talking about the US since I don't know anything about other countries). Parents would go absolutely ballistic over such a thing, and claim the toys were for gays, made by gays, would turn your children gay, are evil tools of Satan/devil worshippers/etc probably something about gay, blah blah blah gay bad evil, etc etc etc. And although I know some parents don't and wouldn't care if their son wanted to play with MLPs, they'd be teased at school most likely. And although most kids get teased in my experience, you have heard about the kids, some in elementary school, being bullied about being "gay" (whether or not they actually were) committing suicide, right?

Simply put, society is not ready for such a thing. And for parents who don't believe in "girl toys" and "boy toys", they'll buy their kids the toys they like regardless of the gender they're aimed at and more than likely try to teach their child(ren) that gender stereotypes are not something that needs to be followed.

I did not suggest aiming it at boys. I suggested aiming it at children, regardless of gender.

[LadyMoondancer]

I want to add that this issue is way more complicated than “the G1 show was sexist” or “the G1 show wasn’t sexist.”   Like most things in life, it was progressive in some ways and not in others.

 You have to look at it in context.  It was a product of its time, the 80s.  In the 80s, many adults were still grappling with the idea that woman could be a doctor or a businesswoman!  There were things that you could show female characters doing in a cartoon show, and things you couldn’t show them doing.  Just by having an all-female cast, MLP avoided some thorny issues of how women are portrayed in “80s style” romances.    By having no regularly occurring male characters in the cast except two young boys (Danny and Spike), they could allow The Brainy One and The Brash One of the group to be females (Wind Whistler and Gusty respectively).   The characters were brave and most of the time succeeded with little or no male help.

 That said, it would be silly to pretend it was perfect.  One of its failings, I think, is that the ponies always seemed a little too nice  and one-note.   They were a little cardboard around the edges.

 Again, this goes back to the time period—the 1980s.  With FIM, Lauren Faust had to work long and hard to get Hasbro to accept characters like Applejack and Rainbow Dash, and to get even mild insults like “egghead” past the censors (even though “boys cartoons” with the same rating can say much, much worse things and no one will bat an eye).

 If it was that hard for her, in the year 2010, can you imagine what it would’ve been like in the year 1984??  Especially when little girls were still portrayed as uber-innocent little things in frilly dresses living in a world of fuzzy, golden light?  (Look at the commercials from that time.)

 So in that sense, I do feel that FIM expands gender roles better than G1 . . . but only because it had a woman at the helm who was willing to fight tooth and nail to expand those gender roles.  That doesn’t mean “MLP & Friends” was written by particularly sexist people or was a particularly sexist show for its time.  In fact, it was BETTER than a lot of shows of its time—and also better than a lot of shows that came later, like G3 (which took “ponies can ONLY be nice and NEVER EVER angry or flawed” to ridiculous extremes.  Prime example being when Minty ruins Christmas and Pinkie Pie is upset with her for about 5 seconds) or the current Strawberry Shortcake.

 Basically, I feel G1 MLP was above average for its time (though not perfect) and FIM is truly extraordinary for its time (but only thanks to the seeds planted by G1).  They are both awesome, and I wish bronies would stop feeling like they have to trash G1 in order to prop up FIM.

 Okay, sorry about the wall of text . . . This is a topic that really interests me.  I love studies of gender.    I hope we can keep discussing this in depth!

[Sunset]

 Okay, sorry about the wall of text . . . This is a topic that really interests me.  I love studies of gender.    I hope we can keep discussing this in depth!

Yes, thank you all for the good and levelheaded discussion. 


Thanks, LadyMoondancer, for the book recommendation.  I might have to see if I can borrow it through the library.

Another type I notice is when you have a character who is say a tomboy its nearly always in such a way of 'LOL I'M BETTER THAN THOSE GIRLY GIRLS AS I DON'T LIKE GIRLY STUFF' and that if a female character acts 'feminime they're weak. I believe it's described by TV tropes as something like 'Real women don't wear skirts'
It's annoying though as there seems to be two extremes, hyper feminine or really masculine and no one seems to be allowed to stay in a middle ground. And vice versa as how dare a male character differ from usual 'male interests'
It's like you'd have a character who is say... a cop and the show seems to be set up in such a way of 'hey look, this is a cop and she's female' and generally seem to go out of their way to go 'oh look a female character is doing this' and 'watch how this female character does this' and well it gets annoying.

Yes, this is very true.  It actually reminds me of my sister.  She has always loved sports: softball, basketball, cross country... you name it.  But she *loves* gowns.  I mean at one time she had to own about 6-8 formal gowns.  She likes to get dressed up and look girly from time to time.  She's told me before about the reactions she sometimes get from people who usually only see her dressed for playing and getting dirty and are shocked to see her all dressed up.   

[Opalescence]

Sometimes I wish, as much as I respect Lauren Faust, that she wouldn't have put the idea of FiM being the manliest of manly things into the heads of easily impressed young males.

[LadyMoondancer]

Additional note, because  I kind of feel like I wasn’t clear enough in my previous post . . .

What I was getting at is that cartoons are artifacts of their time.   Just because a cartoon doesn’t push gender boundaries that in place TODAY doesn’t mean that they weren’t pushing gender boundaries WHEN THEY WERE CREATED.   And if a current cartoon is able to push the boundaries further, well, that is thanks in part to the cartoons that came before.  “If we have seen farther, it is because we stand on the shoulder of giants”—that kind of thing.

Here’s another example, from comics.  So, after the civil right movement DC Comics finally thought, “Hey, how about having some superheroes who aren’t white?”  One of those heroes was Black Lightning who was African-American.  With lightning powers.   (SUCH A SUBTLE NAME.) 

So he was in his own book, doing his own thing.  Meanwhile, the Justice League members, mostly white men (and a few white women, and a couple aliens who were green, etc), were hanging out in their own comic book.

In the 1970s, DC published a comic where the Justice League members debated offering membership to Black Lighting.  This comic was, of course, written by white men, like most of (all?) DC’s comics at the time, and as a result it is sort of . . . amazing . . . to read.  Like, you have to wonder what black comic book readers made of Black Lightning using all these terms like “jive turkey.”  Or of the Green Lantern of the time, Hal Jordan, actually making the “we don’t need a TOKEN BLACK on the team” argument.   

If you published that same comic today, it would be both offensive (“jive turkey”???) and hilarious (because it is so, so, so not normal for today’s society).  But that’s the point—it was NOT published today.  It was published in the 1970s, and for that time period it was a pretty brave and progressive thing to publish.  It also tells us as much about society in the 1970s as it does about the person writing the comic, or about the Justice League.

I think “MLP & Friends” was pretty progressive too, despite its imperfections.  Especially considering it was written by Sunbow’s regular “stable” of writers, who I imagine did not have any particular  love of My Little Pony or any of the other cartoons they wrote, aside from loving that they brought in a paycheck.

[Nonnavlis]

Basically, I feel G1 MLP was above average for its time (though not perfect) and FIM is truly extraordinary for its time (but only thanks to the seeds planted by G1).

I don't feel for it's time that the G4 cartoon is doing anything extraordinary. If it is considered groundbreaking (Not saying it's that much of a change. I just can't think of the right words), it's only because we're not expecting enough from children's cartoon. At it's core, it's still just a show about a gaggle of girls having adventures about 'The magic of friendship'. Doesn't sound all that... modern/groundbreaking/what-have-you, to me. For the time, I don't find the characters personalities to be all that unique, either. They are all character types that I would expect from a cartoon for girls. They may be slightly less one dimensional than in other cartoons (For instance, Rainbow Dash actually reads books), but they are still a bit more one dimensional than I think real little girls are.

I realize Friendship is Magic is, by comparison to other little girls cartoons, a very good show, but looking at it on it's own I don't think it's nearly as modern as it could be. I'd really like to see them tackle some more 'real world issues' like they did with the episode where Zecora is introduced. I have nothing wrong with lessons of friendship or on the importance of being your own individual and doing what is right, but those seem like stereotypical messages for a girls cartoon to me.

This is not to say I don't enjoy it. I really do enjoy watching it.

[hyenacub]

I did not suggest aiming it at boys. I suggested aiming it at children, regardless of gender.

THIS!  : D

As someone who has said he would like to see some girl things being marketed toward boys AS WELL as girls...and seeing some of the...er...less than thrilled responses to that sort of thing, lemme try to explain better.

I don't want to "change" my little pony to make it more manly.  I like the show as is, don't I?  I like the toys as is right?  People who speak of changing the marketing (not the toys, the marketing) like my little pony, even though it's girly, don't they?  Else they wouldn't care about the marketing.  C:

But I *would* like to see it aimed, as someone has said already, at KIDS not GIRLS.  (Same with "boy" toys.)  Are girls still gonna be the main target?  Sure they are.  But commercials could have a boy playing with them...pictures and articles could speak of male fans, or even non-girly female fans.  The packing could be LESS PINK!  (see rant below lol)  I like the G1 packaing anyway...  They took away the rainbow.  :c  (Rainbows are considered girly, too...I wonder why they took it away--thanks a lot, G3s  : P  lol)

I',m not saying they should target boys.  but they should send the message that it is OKAY for boys to play with ponies...just as it's okay for girls to play with soldiers.  C:

I'd also like to see more boy charactes in FIM...honestly.  Just because there are men and boys in real life!  Snips and Snails...ugh.  They're not very realistic characters, unlike most other Fim characters.  They don't even have kids' voices.  (It took me quite a while to realize they were colts, not just small adults.)  They have a voice that I heard in a lot old cartoons, that was probably funny at the time, but that was 30 years ago.  They're just comic relief.  Comic relief doesn't have to be caricatured.  Rainbow Dash and Pinkie Pie aren't one-dimensional and caricatured and they're funny often!  I like Big Macintosh.  He's decidedly male (and an infuriating big brother...lol like my big brother except nicer) but he's realistic.

I'd also like to see a few more boys because...girls are allowed to be friends with boys!  Without it being romance!  I thought Scootaloo was a boy at first...yes, pink hair and all.  And I was pleased that they had thought it A-OK to have a boy be part of a close group of friends with girls.  But then I realized she was female and was a bit disappointed.  I thought for a boy to be an equal part of the group--not better, worse, or different somehow--was awesome.

I know in real life that girls usually are friends with girls, and vice versa (I guess I was weird ) but I wonder how much of that is natural, and how much is ingrained by media and society.

Oh, and... Pink.  Yes, lots of little girls like pink.  But it's not the only color little girls like!  Some pink stuff, great.  But why does EVERY SINGLE TOY made for girls seem to have pink packaging?  : P  I don't really like pink (or red for that matter, speaking of old color "roles" )but even if it was a color I liked, I would still want more variety.  Seeing orange constantly in the girls' aisles, even though it's my favorite color, would begin to annoy me too.  Maybe that's the artist in me, but yeesh.  That's one reason I liked Cabbage Patch Kids' packaging.  It was yellow.  It stood out. 

So...I hope that all made sense.  One of the things that's wrong with my brain is that I am not very good at SAYING the things in my head.  One of the shrinks I saw once even sasw it.  My explanation skills are at an eighth grade level...frustrating. 

Wow I wrote a lot.  OK rant over LOL

[Evening_Moonstone]

A few things that my husband and I have discussed about FiM - that it is actually a bit more progressive for a girls' show in that the guy characters aren't utterly useless.

1. Mr. and Mrs. Cake.  They show dad taking care of the babies, along with his wife.  He's not shown to be bumbling or useless.  And both of the Cakes run the sweet shop.  It's not like mom takes care of the babies and dad runs the shop.  That's pretty progressive, since most EVERYTHING shows that "lol, dads can't handle kids!"

2. Shining Armor.  Ok, he was possessed by the Big Bad for most of the 2nd part of the finale.  But he's the captain of the guard, and has an important job to do, making the magical barrier around the city.  And it wasn't the princess alone who saved the day - it was the partnership and love of the TWO ponies that defeated Chrysalis.  He's a strong, magical pony who is also in a position of authority.

[Wardah]

(Rainbows are considered girly, too...I wonder why they took it away--thanks a lot, G3s  : P  lol)

Actually rainbows are considered something else now.

[Dragonflitter]

At it's core, it's still just a show about a gaggle of girls having adventures about 'The magic of friendship'. Doesn't sound all that... modern/groundbreaking/what-have-you, to me. For the time, I don't find the characters personalities to be all that unique, either. They are all character types that I would expect from a cartoon for girls. They may be slightly less one dimensional than in other cartoons (For instance, Rainbow Dash actually reads books), but they are still a bit more one dimensional than I think real little girls are.

I realize Friendship is Magic is, by comparison to other little girls cartoons, a very good show, but looking at it on it's own I don't think it's nearly as modern as it could be. I'd really like to see them tackle some more 'real world issues' like they did with the episode where Zecora is introduced. I have nothing wrong with lessons of friendship or on the importance of being your own individual and doing what is right, but those seem like stereotypical messages for a girls cartoon to me.

This is not to say I don't enjoy it. I really do enjoy watching it.

I agree with this. Although I do love FiM, I don't think it's really revolutionary or breaking any real ground for girl cartoons. I realized this on the day I was describing the show to my college friends. "There's a group of girl characters, one is an intelligent brainy one, one's a tomboy, one likes fashion........oh, you know, this is like any other girl show ever invented when I say it like that." Haha. (I know I'm dating myself wicked when I say this but their group of personalities reminds me of The Babysitters Club. )

[hyenacub]

Babysitters Club!!    you're right   Though Claudia isn't nearly as obnoxious as Rarity....

Actually rainbows are considered something else now.

Not exclusively.  C: 

[ValeofSpring]

Hello and great thread!  You brought up Rescue from Midnight Castle in your initial post.  I think that special, and Katrina, and the cartoon series, and then anything that followed need to be considered separately.  They were created at different times and to some degree by different writers.  I think Rescue did the best job of going against the grain. 

If you think about what one would *expect* a My Little Pony adventure to be about (most people would think of what G3 cartoons typically offered--tea parties, butterfly chases, etc.), Rescue is completely out of the blue.  It is really much more like a He-Man cartoon and is quite dark.  Not only did the creators of Rescue create a world in which a group of females could handle very dark forces, but they assumed their audience--of young girls--could also handle it. 

As for the critique of the ponies/Megan needing men to ultimately save them (particularly the Moochick), I say bah humbug!   The Moochick is completely passive.  Apparently he was content to let the Night That Never Ends just happen.  Scorpan is emasculated through most of the show.  He also gives up easily--"all . . . is lost . . ." whereas the ponies ultimately duke it out w/ Tirac.  The ponies in Rescue are VERY physical--they run, jump, kick, etc.!

Rescue I think also does a good job of making the ponies a unified front.  In Katrina, some of the ponies are rather mean at the beginning.  Yes this moved the plot along, but I like MLP better when it's about female characters working as a team and solving problems.  This eventually happens in Katrina, but only towards the end, and then it culminates in a fashion show--where they actually invite a character, who, until earlier that evening, was a *very evil cat creature* into Dream Castle!  Don't get me started on that.  I guess fashion and forgiveness go hand in hand, ha ha!