|
Post by 𝐛𝐥𝟒𝐜𝐤𝐬𝐨𝐥 on Jan 4, 2022 18:21:14 GMT -5
Why’s that? And what do you consider “textbook”? As I mentioned, it seems to me that there’s no clearly defined understanding of “fridging”, so I’m curious as to what you think. i looked it up and the bare bones definition is a male character's love interest being killed for the sake of motivation. the bare bones definition could apply to firepaw when spottedleaf is killed, but i dont really remember if firepaw actively sought out revenge for spottedleaf specifically...? No, not really. He became angry at Clawface when he ran into him while fighting in ITW, and almost killed him out of anger before Whitestorm stopped him, but he never actively sought out revenge for her.
|
|
|
Post by ᏞᎪᎠᎽ Ꮎf fᎪᏁᎠᎾms ミ☆ on Jan 4, 2022 18:49:47 GMT -5
i looked it up and the bare bones definition is a male character's love interest being killed for the sake of motivation. the bare bones definition could apply to firepaw when spottedleaf is killed, but i dont really remember if firepaw actively sought out revenge for spottedleaf specifically...? No, not really. He became angry at Clawface when he ran into him while fighting in ITW, and almost killed him out of anger before Whitestorm stopped him, but he never actively sought out revenge for her. i see what the other people on here mean now because now u have to ask more questions to figure out what "actual fridging" is. to me, him getting angry upon seeing his love interest's killer can loosely fit but u're right, he didnt sneak into shadowclan just to avenge her and her alone?
|
|
|
Post by 𝐛𝐥𝟒𝐜𝐤𝐬𝐨𝐥 on Jan 4, 2022 18:50:27 GMT -5
Alright, I'm going to be honest here. I consider a woman being treated below a man or other men misogynistic. I consider the idea that all women want kids and/or relationships misogynistic. I do not consider fridging misogynistic. Misogynistic means strongly prejudiced against women. That's it. I don't understand how fridging is being prejudiced against women. And yes, maybe that's just me being close-minded, but I really don't see it. It's a character who is killed off so the main character's story can develop. That is how stories work. As long as the female character is treated as an equal to the male characters, it's fine. Dawn of the Clans has some fridging in it, but all there is no prejudice against the female characters.
Tall Shadow had hate thrown at her because of a reason I don't remember (it could have been because she did not allow Wind and Gorse in camp and the other cats didn't like that), but I know they had a reason. It was not because she was a woman.
Also, how dare people forget about Micah. He got 'fridged' too.
|
|
|
Post by 𝐛𝐥𝟒𝐜𝐤𝐬𝐨𝐥 on Jan 4, 2022 18:54:19 GMT -5
No, not really. He became angry at Clawface when he ran into him while fighting in ITW, and almost killed him out of anger before Whitestorm stopped him, but he never actively sought out revenge for her. i see what the other people on here mean now because now u have to ask more questions to figure out what "actual fridging" is. to me, him getting angry upon seeing his love interest's killer can loosely fit but u're right, he didnt sneak into shadowclan just to avenge her and her alone? Nope, he just got angry. I dare to say that killing Spottedleaf's wasn't really fridging because it almost did not affect Firepaw at all.
|
|
|
Post by vectoring34 on Jan 4, 2022 20:13:34 GMT -5
Alright, I'm going to be honest here. I consider a woman being treated below a man or other men misogynistic. I consider the idea that all women want kids and/or relationships misogynistic. I do not consider fridging misogynistic. Misogynistic means strongly prejudiced against women. That's it. I don't understand how fridging is being prejudiced against women. And yes, maybe that's just me being close-minded, but I really don't see it. It's a character who is killed off so the main character's story can develop. That is how stories work. As long as the female character is treated as an equal to the male characters, it's fine. Dawn of the Clans has some fridging in it, but all there is no prejudice against the female characters. Tall Shadow had hate thrown at her because of a reason I don't remember (it could have been because she did not allow Wind and Gorse in camp and the other cats didn't like that), but I know they had a reason. It was not because she was a woman. Also, how dare people forget about Micah. He got 'fridged' too. By itself, it's not. Viewed as part of a larger culture where it's usually a female love interest with little personality outside of being that being killed off, it's something of a problem. The issue is the broad trends, not individual works.
|
|
#a3c5e6
Name Colour
𝓣𝓲𝓷𝓾𝓿𝓲𝓮𝓵
Warrior Fanatic
All hail me, the flower-flushing queen of Prague
|
Post by 𝓣𝓲𝓷𝓾𝓿𝓲𝓮𝓵 on Jan 4, 2022 20:15:03 GMT -5
No, not really. He became angry at Clawface when he ran into him while fighting in ITW, and almost killed him out of anger before Whitestorm stopped him, but he never actively sought out revenge for her. i see what the other people on here mean now because now u have to ask more questions to figure out what "actual fridging" is. to me, him getting angry upon seeing his love interest's killer can loosely fit but u're right, he didnt sneak into shadowclan just to avenge her and her alone? Well... He intended to avenge her, but it was more of a "in the moment" kind of thing, so take it as you will.
|
|
|
Post by vectoring34 on Jan 4, 2022 20:18:23 GMT -5
i see what the other people on here mean now because now u have to ask more questions to figure out what "actual fridging" is. to me, him getting angry upon seeing his love interest's killer can loosely fit but u're right, he didnt sneak into shadowclan just to avenge her and her alone? Well... He intended to avenge her, but it was more of a "in the moment" kind of thing, so take it as you will. It's also one of the only times Firepaw ever even thinks about her after her death, so it's pretty important. Even when it comes time for round 2 with Clawface, it's still got the vengeance for Spottedleaf bent.
|
|
|
Post by Spooky Alice on Jan 4, 2022 20:22:10 GMT -5
Alright, I'm going to be honest here. I consider a woman being treated below a man or other men misogynistic. I consider the idea that all women want kids and/or relationships misogynistic. I do not consider fridging misogynistic. Misogynistic means strongly prejudiced against women. That's it. I don't understand how fridging is being prejudiced against women. And yes, maybe that's just me being close-minded, but I really don't see it. It's a character who is killed off so the main character's story can develop. That is how stories work. As long as the female character is treated as an equal to the male characters, it's fine. Dawn of the Clans has some fridging in it, but all there is no prejudice against the female characters. Tall Shadow had hate thrown at her because of a reason I don't remember (it could have been because she did not allow Wind and Gorse in camp and the other cats didn't like that), but I know they had a reason. It was not because she was a woman. Also, how dare people forget about Micah. He got 'fridged' too. As said it's less about a singular instance in a book and more about a recurring pattern. Gail Simone coined the term "women in refrigerators" to reference a pattern commonplace in comics and touch on a broader issue of the treatment of women in media. The whole point of it is that stories don't exist in vacuums and things add up over time. You can swap out "women" with any minority (and men with any majority) and you find the same discussions going on. Twice a coincidence, three times a pattern and all that. edit: damn vectorring beat me to it
|
|
|
Post by tema on Jan 5, 2022 10:47:41 GMT -5
I would like to speak on behalf of a lot of people here. Yes, we know what "fridging" means. No, saying it exists and then insisting it's used while just throwing around names is not an argument. Please, sit down and explain things without using that crutch.
|
|
|
Post by Saint Ambrosef on Jan 5, 2022 11:49:48 GMT -5
By itself, it's not. Viewed as part of a larger culture where it's usually a female love interest with little personality outside of being that being killed off, it's something of a problem. The issue is the broad trends, not individual works. Then that raises my next question. Is there ever a time when a female love interest of a male protagonist dies and it is not considered fridging? Because if we must always compare individual works to broader trends, then it seems to me that every such instance would constitute a reinforcement of the "fridging" trend. It also seems that literary context doesn't bear much weight in the question (as numerous people so far have said that the female character's own development and plot purpose doesn't matter, only the fact that she dies to further a male protagonist's development). So does that mean every time a female love interest dies to further the male hero, it de facto becomes misogynist simply because other writers who do it are guilty of such motivation?
|
|
|
Post by Moonblazer on Jan 5, 2022 12:10:16 GMT -5
I think my biggest issue is that people keep talking about tropes and fridging in relation to the female characters in the series, and yet there is a lack of remembrance or focus on instances where it is the male character that is killed or shafted to boost the story of a female character. I could argue that Frogleap’s existence in Leopardstar’s SE was literally to provide angst and build up Leopardstar’s character. Did he ever need to exist or be her love interest for Leopardstar to be a strong and developed character? I’m not so sure. Additionally, with some of the examples I’ve seen, it still comes down to a matter of perspective when it comes to a she-cat dying who just so happens to also have a mate. Just because you feel as if that character has no other purpose, does not mean that they never did in the story. It just might not be all up in your face, considering most are background characters anyway.
Did Fallen Leaves’ character exist/was created to solely build on Hollyleaf’s pain and loneliness in the tunnels, and then further given a story? Stemleaf and Larksong were killed off, both in instances where their mates are going to have to raise kits without them. Did they need to die to further Spotfur and Sparkpelt’s stories as mothers? I have no idea, I’m not the author nor do I claim to know that these characters only existed to die off to just give their mates angst.
I’m sure some instances in the books can ring to many as misogynistic…but I personally think people will nitpick every little thing and twist it to be something it’s not to get clout or brownie points. In all honesty, the Warrior’s universe has always been one of the least misogynistic universes in book series to me.
|
|
Transgender
🌌dapple🌙 (formerly freckle)
I didn't get thunder yet but the one thing I wonder abt has been spoiled so should I still buy?
|
Post by 🌌dapple🌙 (formerly freckle) on Jan 5, 2022 12:21:26 GMT -5
I think my biggest issue is that people keep talking about tropes and fridging in relation to the female characters in the series, and yet there is a lack of remembrance or focus on instances where it is the male character that is killed or shafted to boost the story of a female character. I could argue that Frogleap’s existence in Leopardstar’s SE was literally to provide angst and build up Leopardstar’s character. Did he ever need to exist or be her love interest for Leopardstar to be a strong and developed character? I’m not so sure. Additionally, with some of the examples I’ve seen, it still comes down to a matter of perspective when it comes to a she-cat dying who just so happens to also have a mate. Just because you feel as if that character has no other purpose, does not mean that they never did in the story. It just might not be all up in your face, considering most are background characters anyway. Did Fallen Leaves’ character exist/was created to solely build on Hollyleaf’s pain and loneliness in the tunnels, and then further given a story? Stemleaf and Larksong were killed off, both in instances where their mates are going to have to raise kits without them. Did they need to die to further Spotfur and Sparkpelt’s stories as mothers? I have no idea, I’m not the author nor do I claim to know that these characters only existed to die off to just give their mates angst. I’m sure some instances in the books can ring to many as misogynistic…but I personally think people will nitpick every little thing and twist it to be something it’s not to get clout or brownie points. In all honesty, the Warrior’s universe has always been one of the least misogynistic universes in book series to me. I strongly agree with this take. ^^^^
|
|
|
Post by tema on Jan 5, 2022 12:27:59 GMT -5
…but I personally think people will nitpick every little thing and twist it to be something it’s not to get clout or brownie points. In all honesty, the Warrior’s universe has always been one of the least misogynistic universes in book series to me. Thank you. That elephant needed pointed out.
|
|
|
Post by vectoring34 on Jan 5, 2022 12:37:28 GMT -5
By itself, it's not. Viewed as part of a larger culture where it's usually a female love interest with little personality outside of being that being killed off, it's something of a problem. The issue is the broad trends, not individual works. Then that raises my next question. Is there ever a time when a female love interest of a male protagonist dies and it is not considered fridging? Because if we must always compare individual works to broader trends, then it seems to me that every such instance would constitute a reinforcement of the "fridging" trend. It also seems that literary context doesn't bear much weight in the question (as numerous people so far have said that the female character's own development and plot purpose doesn't matter, only the fact that she dies to further a male protagonist's development). So does that mean every time a female love interest dies to further the male hero, it de facto becomes misogynist simply because other writers who do it are guilty of such motivation? I found the argument that Skypaw13 made to be pretty relevant here where they defended Silverstream against this. If the character has any characterization and is relevant aside from their relationship to the male protagonist, then it's probably not exactly fridging. I myself have defended Bristlefrost's death on this count, that her sacrifice is still a natural progression for her character. Fridging is overdone but that doesn't mean that every possible case that MAY be fridging is misogynistic. I don't know which people are saying the character and plot development doesn't matter, as even the very inventor of the term makes it clear that it does when she points out that the dichotomy is more so main character vs supporting character, with most main characters happening to be males (remember, she came from the comicbook world and that's where the term originated from) and the majority of female characters being relegated to support roles which are usually more disposable and hence killable. The terminology always referred to wider trends and is not meant to crucify any individual examples except in egregious cases, like say, Spotteadleaf, in my personal opinion. Having not read Dawn of the Clans, I have no idea if it's a visible trend, if it's a one-off, if people are exaggerating, whatever, so it's not my place to talk on that note.
|
|
|
Post by Saint Ambrosef on Jan 5, 2022 13:27:27 GMT -5
Then that raises my next question. Is there ever a time when a female love interest of a male protagonist dies and it is not considered fridging? Because if we must always compare individual works to broader trends, then it seems to me that every such instance would constitute a reinforcement of the "fridging" trend. It also seems that literary context doesn't bear much weight in the question (as numerous people so far have said that the female character's own development and plot purpose doesn't matter, only the fact that she dies to further a male protagonist's development). So does that mean every time a female love interest dies to further the male hero, it de facto becomes misogynist simply because other writers who do it are guilty of such motivation? I found the argument that Skypaw13 made to be pretty relevant here where they defended Silverstream against this. If the character has any characterization and is relevant aside from their relationship to the male protagonist, then it's probably not exactly fridging. I myself have defended Bristlefrost's death on this count, that her sacrifice is still a natural progression for her character. Fridging is overdone but that doesn't mean that every possible case that MAY be fridging is misogynistic. I don't know which people are saying the character and plot development doesn't matter, as even the very inventor of the term makes it clear that it does when she points out that the dichotomy is more so main character vs supporting character, with most main characters happening to be males (remember, she came from the comicbook world and that's where the term originated from) and the majority of female characters being relegated to support roles which are usually more disposable and hence killable. The terminology always referred to wider trends and is not meant to crucify any individual examples except in egregious cases, like say, Spotteadleaf, in my personal opinion. Having not read Dawn of the Clans, I have no idea if it's a visible trend, if it's a one-off, if people are exaggerating, whatever, so it's not my place to talk on that note. I guess that's where "what does Fridging actually mean" comes into play. Some people say that it's any time a female love interest dies solely to further a male protagonist's character. Some say its only when there's no other prominent, well-developed female characters in the story. Others say it doesn't matter if there are such other well-written female characters in the story. I understand that it's not meant to single out and condemn any one particular use of the trope, and rather speaks to a broader overall trend that can have harmful undertones. But I guess what I'm trying to point out is that doing so seems fruitless, impossible, maybe circular. It's meant to condemn a trend and not individual works, but in doing so (analyzing the trend) it necessarily includes all individual works that fall into the trend's vague parameters, and then subsequent condemnation of the individual work merely for its inclusion in the trend. It seems to me like in the end, saying something matches a broader literary pattern which is sometimes used with prejudiced motivations isn't actually helpful in identifying whether that specific usage was misogynistic. It just says, "This is a thing that happens frequently in media portrayals". It doesn't help much for analyzing the individual work in front of us. Unless we go back to my original suggestion, that all individual usages of that specific plot device are misogynistic merely by association regardless of its own particular use. In which case it gets circular: Why is this individual usage bad? -> Because the broader trend is bad -> Why is the broader trend bad? -> Because of the individual works it encompasses. (Or at least, that's how it seems to me). But if we reject the premise that all usages are bad because of the trend, then what's the point of pointing out that it's part of a trend at all?
|
|
|
Post by Ravenwing on Jan 7, 2022 23:31:15 GMT -5
So a question based on what I've heard on youtube and such, do you think Frecklewish's treatment is based on the fact that she is a she-cat since only she got punished?
|
|
|
Post by vectoring34 on Jan 7, 2022 23:42:49 GMT -5
So a question based on what I've heard on youtube and such, do you think Frecklewish's treatment is based on the fact that she is a she-cat since only she got punished? No, it's pretty clearly because of two reasons 1. She is the one most directly related to the kits' deaths save for possibly Oakstar. Ravenwing was just a flunkie in the end who told his leader what his prophetic dream said and while one can say he expressed poor judgement and should have stood up for the kits, he also lacks the power or responsibility to do much in this situation. Appledusk was a jerk but none of what he did directly led to the kits' deaths, so the worst one can say is he cheated and lied. Bad mate, but not Dark Forest material. Of the only two others directly related to what happened, Oakstar and Frecklewish do hold some direct responsibility. Oakstar for ordering it and Frecklewish because she could have legitimately saved lives but chose not to. This then leads us to... 2. She died immediately after the bad thing happened. Presumably Oakstar had the luxury of living a long, successful life free of doing horrible things after the fact, and we know this can work to atone in Warriors. This is after all what both Blackstar and Leopardstar did despite their compatriots who did the exact same crimes ending up in the Dark Forest. In short, it's possible to atone through living well. Frecklewish did not get this chance due to dying fast, so she doesn't get the Oakstar benefits. Between her and Oakstar there's plenty of blame to share, but this is essentially a Clawface and Blackstar situation wherein one of them happened to be lucky enough to live a long and fulfilling life after their bad act while the other did not. Given those two as a precedent, the logic is sound.
|
|