Vixor

But that's wrong, nothing whatsoever in that article proves anything as canon. It's all just marketing talk and buzzwords, and Hasbro boasting about how they've expanded their IP on a variety of different fronts, but in no way does it say that anything is canon. All it really says is that they have a variety of products for fans to enjoy, but it does not in any way suggest canonicity any moreso than some random fanfic being a 'product' that fans enjoy. Hasbro's marketing makes no real distinction between what's actually canon and what's not, it's all just an expansion of their IP to them, making them more money and raising brand awareness and so on. Doesn't mean it's canon. EQG I can see the argument for canonicity (to an extent, I still see some fair debate over it) due to other factors. But the comics? No, absolutely not, anyone who thinks those are canon is frankly just being unreasonable, to put it bluntly. And as far as quality goes, they've had some good parts/moments and good issues, but they've also had no shortage of really bad or awful parts/issues and some stuff that's just downright insulting (the show also obviously has some moments/tidbits or episodes with really bad or awful writing too though, mind you). And not just the big things, it can be a bunch of little things that add up, for a variety of reasons. There's definitely plenty of bad there, on multiple fronts. Sometimes it can be a whole issue, other times it can be a few tidbits that are awful, sometimes even in an issue that would otherwise be alright, or both. I'd rather not go into details, but you get the idea. Anyway, I'm sorry, but this thread is pure clickbait. You've misunderstood the marketing buzz and intend to use it as a bludgeon to try and argue for something being canon, but in reality there's no real proof of that at all. Again, EQG, I can understand, for reasons completely unrelated to what you've linked though, but the comics? No. If you enjoy them, that's fair enough I guess, suit yourself, but they clearly aren't canon. Anyway, I'm really tired, so eh, maybe gonna take a nap soon.

You can discuss anything you want for fun as a 'what-if' or an alternate universe type deal, but slavery and oppression and stuff like that requires portraying the ponies as straight up evil (when in reality they're clearly very benevolent and are the clear good guys and so on), and thus pretty much trashing the setting and making the characters horribly out of character, and so on. It's not plausible, not even "somewhat". Grimdark stuff like that and the canon doesn't mix. Fallout Equestria for example, that's something that a lot of people discuss but doesn't really make a bit of sense for canon. You can discuss those fanfics, and lot's of people do, but it's important to remember not to take them too seriously because they really go against everything in the show. But yeah, discussing what-ifs that you aren't actually taking seriously is one thing, but some morons try to take this stuff and make the claim that it could somehow actually happen or that it's happening or something to that effect, which is clearly completely and utterly nonsensical, as that sort of grimdark BS would never be accepted in Equestria. Not by the benevolent citizens, and not by the benevolent rulers. Anyway, I'm going to bed, I have to be somewhere tomorrow, and I really don't feel there's much else to be said here.

What are we defining as bootleg? A near copy? Or just something kind of similar? I remember that Filly Funtasia show which looked kind of interesting I'd say, but I don't know if you'd call it a bootleg just because it has similar concept. It's probably pretty different in reality. Anyway, I might, but as others said, it depends. Probably not though, I guess? Would have to judge for myself.

Purposely? Yeah, no. As I said, it's a cartoon, and stuff like the cows clearly aren't meant to be taken seriously. The mistreatment or even slavery of sapient beings like that is not something that would happen or ever be tolerated in Equestria. It goes against everything the show stands for, contradicts everything in the setting, and just does not remotely fit. The idea that sapient beings are being mistreated in Equestria is completely and utterly nonsensical, and is not even remotely a legitimate position. You can discuss stuff all you want, that doesn't make it remotely sane or reasonable. This is a show about friendship and other positive things, and that is absolutely reflected in the setting. Meanwhile, stuff like slavery and oppression takes a huge dump on that, to put it as least vulgar as possible. We haven't even seen something like a cow talk or anything a long time, have we? The writers likely scrapped that altogether, given that some people seem to be unable to realize that it's not meant to be seriously, certainly not in the sense of using them in a way that the target audience would identify with for the sake of a minor gag. Either way, if they are sapient, they have equal rights to ponies, end of story. Anything less would quite literally require portraying the ponies as evil, and you should know that's not reasonable or reflective of reality. Anyway, I said that not all things in a cartoon are supposed to be taken seriously (not that there aren't things worthy of taking seriously, there's plenty), and this is one of those things, unless you care to magic up some explanation that isn't dark. That doesn't magically change on a discussion forums, because the idea that slavery or oppression exists in Equestria is frankly, an utterly nonsensical position. You can discuss anything for fun, I guess, but I certainly hope people that discuss such grimdark nonsense don't take themselves too seriously when they do, because again, this is MLP, and the setting and characters are as benevolent as they come. On MLPforums, things that I'd expect us to discuss more seriously are the characters, setting, and stuff like that, there are plenty of topics in the realm of those categories that don't go completely off the rails and suggest things that contradict pretty much everything in the show and sound like they'd belong in a bad grimdark fanfiction or something.

No. That's overly grimdark nonsense, nobody is a second class citizen in Equestria. It's a pretty darn nice place after all, not totally perfect, but certainly quite benevolent and with a long list of nice things you could say about it, which is to be expected from the setting of MLP. The sheep/cattle were at most a sort of running gag that obviously weren't meant to be taken seriously, and wouldn't be taken seriously by the target audience, who would identify with seeing farm animals like in any other cartoon. The clear reality that some people seem to somehow miss is that not every little thing in a cartoon is meant to be serious/literal or whatever, especially when it contradicts the rest of the cartoon and/or it's setting or whatever so heavily and blatantly. Either way, Equestria quite clearly has equality. You'd have to be a total lunatic to suggest anyone is being treated as 'second class' or worse. This is MLP, not some sort of cartoon format Game of Thrones or something else equally grimdark. There's no slavery or mistreatment of sapient beings in Equestria, period (and even just animals like squirrels and etc seem pretty darn well taken care of in comparison to us). There have been villains like Sombra that employed slavery and similar stuff, but they were quickly shut down by the good guys, who know very well how wrong it was. The ponies would never support something like that, and the rulers like Celestia certainly wouldn't either.

What? No, that's just ridiculous. Not being a pony is completely irrelevant, Spike is just as much a citizen of Equestria as the other characters, and is thus also in fact a subject of Celestia and the others. Also, I doubt Celestia really cares too much about stuff like the bowing. She and the other rules are very benevolent, and she seems pretty approachable and all, if that's a good way to put it.

Yeah. I also edited my post to say that you could also see her as his parent, considering she raised him, but I dunno which fits better honestly, and Twilight was also a foal when she hatched him. Oh well, either way the main point to get across is that they are clearly family, and that they're clearly equals and all.

That's completely nonsensical, and anyone who thinks otherwise is simply out of their mind, to put it lightly. Spike is a sapient dragon who is equal to the ponies, and it's quite clear in the series that, while he's her number one assistant, by choice mind you, he's also most definitely like a little brother to her (she also raised him from an egg, mind you, so she could be considered his parent too, dunno, not sure which way fits better, maybe I'll think about it more later). So yeah, either way, they ARE in fact family, period.

I mean, she didn't really need to point out his heels specifically (the dress is also a handicap, too, as it would restrict movement), the disguise was an inherent part of his choice to participate. The judges didn't disqualify him, and I'm sure they would have let him compete had he just asked, but his disguise was an obvious handicap that he wore because of the circumstances. I'm sticking by my points there, Dash is not a pony who would be or act sexist. Rainbow Dash did not mean anything about his gender, she meant his handicap, and was quite possibly nervous because she knew how strong he was. We've also seen Dash interacting with other male characters, and she always treats them as an equal. Anyway, hopefully we end this conversation here, I'd like to be doing other stuff, and I'm not feeling too well. I don't really have much else to say about the state of sexism in other media, I just don't think MLP should involve it. There's just no real benefit to it, and I'd prefer the show keep on the path of positive-themed approaches to gender-equality that aren't in your face, but rather organically develops and fits seamlessly into the rest of the show.

As long as Hasbro is convinced that princesses sell toys, they're likely to churn out more of them. That being said, there's no reason whatsoever to think that gender is at all relevant to alicornhood, as it's an earned position based on merit, being a good and benevolent leader, and so on. Genitals don't matter there, and it would destroy their legitimacy to restrict something like that based on gender. Starswirl almost became an alicorn, mind you, but as Celestia mentioned, he didn't really fully understand friendship, certainly not as well as Twilight anyway, and as we all saw, friendship got Twilight to where she is today. And the only reason the two princes aren't alicorns is because their situation is completely different from, say, Twilight and Cadance, and thus not comparable. While the latter two ascended through doing special things (and we saw the full, extended process with Twilight), Shining Armor is a prince consort (married into the title), and Blueblood likely simply inherited his title, and there's no reason to believe alicornhood comes on a silver platter with title alone. Also, there's absolutely no way that Dash is sexist, you're misinterpreting that scene pretty heavily. She's just the last pony who ever would be, especially given that she also has some obvious tomboyish traits. She was clearly referring to the fact that he was heavily disadvantaged by having to wear a dress and high heels of all things to disguise himself, something that the other contestants did not have to do. She was also likely afraid, because while mares and stallions overall actually seem pretty evenly matched physical wise, it seems pretty fair to assume Big Mac is the strongest pony in Ponyville in general, and it showed despite his handicap in that competition. It's fair if you think that sexist ponies might exist in Equestria in small pockets, but none of the main characters are even remotely sexist, especially not Dash. If you absolutely HAD to pick one, Rarity would be the closest IMO. But really, bottom line, there are no implications of sexism, certainly not from any of the major characters. And I certainly wouldn't call trading cards a solid source of canon or anything, but here's an example of where it's more clearly spelled out. It's worth mentioning at least, because what we saw in the show was clearly not sexism, it was Dash either stating she wasn't going to hold back because he decided to wear a dress and high heels of all things, or that she was afraid of his athletic ability, and quite likely both. Anyway, I disagree that the female sexist perspective doesn't exist at all in entertainment. I think it's actually fairly common in stuff like reality TV and things of that nature. Unfortunately, it also seems like it's commonly downplayed or attempted to be portrayed as somehow less bad when it's not, and other injustices like that. That's certainly bad, but I don't think MLP should touch that topic with a ten-foot pole, it's just not worth it and has no real benefit when the show is already doing pretty damn well in this regard. There's also a million ways the writers could monumentally screw it up, and scarce few where they could get it 'right'. You mentioned part of that yourself when you brought up the traps that the show could fall into.

Absolutely not. There's nothing physically stopping writers from doing whatever they want, mind you, other than restrictions placed by Hasbro and the shows rating, but a sexist character would not go over well, especially in a show like this which. Pardon my french, but it'd be a massive shitstorm. The show has a goal of gender equality, and the setting of Equestria reflects this as it's quite clearly gender-egaliarian with no gender roles. It's far better for the show to just continue doing it's thing and having lots of good characters of both genders, nothing ridiculous like a sexist character is needed. It doesn't help or benefit the show in any way, the show already quite clearly portrays both genders as equally capable and equally respected. That wouldn't make more sense at all. The show is more focused on female characters screentime wise for obvious reasons, but it has never portrayed either gender as more dominant or more advantaged, and there are no real gender roles. There are plenty of influential ponies of both genders in the show, especially socially and economically, and there's not more 'powerful' ponies of one gender, whatever we're defining that as. Politicians, we've seen some of both genders, but that's really not the focus of the show, so they're obviously a rare sight, and are often just background or very minor characters. Either way, Equestria is gender-egalitarian, and it doesn't make more 'sense' for one gender to be more sexist than the other or anything like that. Some people may have their own perceptions or interpretations that will make them see one gender being sexist in media as somehow magically being worse, and there's the optics of it all depending on a lot of factors, but in reality the gender of a hypothetical new sexist character isn't relevant, especially in an egalitarian setting, and either way it's nonsense to suggest that one somehow makes more 'sense'. Either way it'd go, I think it's a bad idea that doesn't benefit the show in any way, as the show has no shortage of good characters of both genders already, and a positive message in general, and so on, you get the idea hopefully, I'm pretty tired so I don't want to spend too much time typing all of this. Anyway, going to agree with Albatross there, the show should not shoot itself in the foot for something like this, when it's already promoting gender equality while remaining a good cartoon with good and varied characters and a gender-egalitarian setting. Adding a sexist character is a bad idea that would not benefit the show, nor would it fit in the first place. The show has portrayed it's gender equality message by having 6 and counting seasons of both genders interacting and being portrayed as equally capable and equally respected and so on, not by being in your face with nonsense like sexist characters and other unpleasant things, and risking disaster.

That's a very oddly specific thing to make a topic about. But yeah, sure, "doubly stallioned" or whatever would work. It doesn't roll of the tongue quite as well (it does somewhat, though), but it certainly works, and there's no way the pool would only work for one gender, that's a silly idea. The writers make their rhymes with whatever sounds good, there's not any thought process behind it beyond that. That doesn't mean it has to perfectly rhyme to work or anything, though, it's just a quirk or whatever of the writing. I'm sure either gender could hypothetically use the pool if they found it. There's no reason whatsoever to believe that. The whole one gender as 'default' thing in our world is a sexist habit/attitude that some people have (not saying people do it premeditated with malicious intent or anything, but it's definitely a bad habit that should be shaken), and would not exist in a gender-egalitarian society like Equestria. Equestria has de-jure and de-facto gender equality, and there's no sexist assumption of a 'default' gender or anything like that; it just doesn't exist there. Mares and stallions hold equal status, respect, and so on. Quite sure they'd use gender-neutral pronouns, unless they're referring to an individual or something, in which case they'd obviously use the appropriate one. And frankly, when it comes to rhymes, or plays on words, the writers just use whatever rolls off the tongue the best, and when it comes to puns, whatever let's it be a pony related pun. It's not something they put any special or complex thought process behind, it's just made to sound catchy or roll of the tongue well.

The voice actor of a major character up and changing like that would be incredibly jarring. I'm sure that everyone has grown quite used to Twilight's voice by now. They'd likely attempt to find a voice actor that can pull off something somewhat similar, but it'd still be very noticeable and hard to overlook. Would really, really suck for a voice actor change. Tara Strong is a pretty great voice actor, and fit's Twilight perfectly, so I really hope it doesn't come to that, not for her or any of the other major character voice actors. I'm sure it won't though, I think she likes her job as a voice actor for MLP, and I'd imagine she gets paid pretty well too. Maybe she will do a role for a Marvel movie or something sometime, but I don't think that will get in the way of her role in MLP.

Complete nonsense, it's not a fact, it's something you made up despite nothing whatsoever indicating that. And it is terribly sexist to say blatant generalizations like you are; generalizing is a big component of sexism. Also, kids are perfectly capable of understanding it, teaching kids (and all the adult fans who enjoy MLP too, of course) that gender roles and all are bad and unnecessary is one of the big messages of the show. Kids are more than capable of learning that people shouldn't be judged, discriminated against, or generalized based on their gender, among other things that could be said there. The ponies have been quite clearly shown to have pretty equal potential for this sort of thing (things that may require physical strength, we've seen both mares and stallions are capable), both mares and stallions. If you think a pony like, say, Applejack wouldn't be just as capable of being a guard hypothetically, then you're just being silly. And no, neither gender has been shown to be 'tougher', there are again, a wide variety of personalities in both genders when it comes to MLP characters, and the ponies are individuals, aren't judged by their gender, etc. Neither gender has been portrayed as 'tougher' or more 'dominant', but rather both genders have been portrayed as individuals, end of story.

Because the animators haven't taken the time to make art assets for them, in the same way they haven't made many art assets for diversifying the colors of their coats, for example. There's no reason whatsoever for there not to be female guards, as we've seen that there are mares that are just as capable physically as the stallions. The only reason for one gender to be excluded would be pointless discrimination, which is completely nonsensical because Equestria is a gender-egalitarian society with no gender roles, as well as de-jure and de-facto gender equality. We've also seen some mare guards in places like those alternate timelines, and the comics too, if you care about those any. Guard mares most definitely exist, but we don't see them because DHX simply doesn't have the art assets prepared for them. The generic guards in the background are an incredibly low priority for them. It's perfectly safe to assume that there are indeed mares in the guard, though. There's simply no reason for there not to be. There are an even number of male and female Wonderbolts. Completely nonsensical. Equestria is a gender-egalitarian society with no gender roles. There is no indication whatsoever that either gender is advantaged or dominant, and both genders have been shown in a large variety of walks of life. Nobody is being discriminated against for the job they want. The show is usually more focused on female characters, screentime wise, but it's never portrayed either gender as superior or dominant. There most definitely are, but this is not exactly a show focusing on hospitals, so we don't see many medical ponies in the first place. You're wrong about the whole 'societal norms' and all that nonsense too, as it's pretty clear that Equestria has no real gender roles. We've seen ponies of both genders in all sorts of different careers and walks of life. And even from a meta perspective, shattering the notion of gender roles was one of the big messages/goals of the show, besides the primary purpose of simply being a good cartoon with great characters. God no, that's incredibly sexist, both to men and women. Now that's just plain and utterly wrong, not to mention terribly sexist. There are a wide variety of personalities in MLP characters, of both genders. The male characters aren't required to be 'tough' just like the female characters aren't required to be 'submissive'. Both mares and stallions are allowed to be individuals, and aren't judged based off of their gender or anything like that, as it should be. There are no gender roles and there's no reason whatsoever to actually believe that all the guards are male, especially when we've seen that both mares and stallions are perfectly capable of having enough potential strength to do that job.

We haven't seen much politics in the show period, as that's simply not the focus of the show. However, there's nothing stopping the idea of Equestria also potentially having something like a senate or congress, or something else. What that something could be is up to headcanon obviously, but nowhere does it says there can't be more elements of the government that we haven't seen. Also, a lack of market regulations? No, an assumption like that just isn't reasonable. Economics aren't exactly a focus point of the show either, but proper regulations are a good thing, and all developed countries have them. Equestria would absolutely have protections in place to protect it's citizens and the environment, among other things. Ponies being able to have successful businesses if they so choose does not mean no regulation or anything of the sort. And you can bet that Equestria does in fact have strong social safety nets, which includes welfare. Zephyr Breeze didn't go to the forests because of finances, he went there because he was scared and uncertain about what to do. He had a pretty big fear of failure and all, you know, he essentially ran away on his own because of it, nothing forced him to go to the woods. Luckily Fluttershy and Dash genuinely cared about him and were there to help him all the way through, they weren't ever about to abandon him or anything. Anyway, the ponies aren't ever going to let anyone starve or go without a home, that would very much go against many of the messages in the show, and wouldn't fit the setting at all. Strong social safety nets in Equestria are a given. As far as the technology variance in the show, I dunno. One thing I will say is that Ponyville and other towns stylized with older architectures most definitely have stuff like modern medical care, electricity, construction equipment, etc. Ponyville seems to have a pretty good hospital, it has a hydro-electric dam, and it has construction equipment, among other things. So it's an interesting and fun part of Equestria, being able to have both modern towns and fantasy castles and so on in the same setting, but it doesn't mean that some ponies are living a lesser quality of life or anything.

"That idea in itself applies a notion of gender roles to him, that liking something associated with the other gender automatically assigns him that gender identity." Hence my significant apprehension of the idea. I edited my post extensively and included the fact that I'd disagree with the whole transgender thing for that very reason. Anyway, it just sounds like you're trying to disengage the argument at this point, so whatever, we'll end it here, as I'm rather exhausted from arguing with people nonstop lately. I'm not at all convinced by your points there, and I find it to be a fact, that based on what we've seen so far, Equestria is quite clearly gender-egalitarian, but no point on dragging the conversation out any longer, we've already pushed a lot of arguments out there. And you're right that we have two very irreconcilable viewpoints when it comes to how to look at the cartoon. It would just drag the conversation out further if I responded to many of your other points in that post though, so I'll refrain from saying much more, even if I feel like I should. Quite difficult to do honestly, especially when I very much do not share the sentiment that Equestria's gender equality is up for debate. I will say though, as stated, we've had a whole five and counting seasons to observe this stuff by various means, and it's simply a fact that there is no inequality or bias there, and so on, I've already argued all this stuff and more multiple times, not just to you, but to others in the forum as well, as I'm sure you've noticed. And I've already addressed the question of alicorns, and the fact that the Mane 6 and Spike are the protagonists, so of course they're going to do stuff regardless of their gender, and that's certainly not an indication of bias. But yeah. Whatever. Would rather be doing other things than continuing this. edit: Bah, didn't quote. Oh well.

'Princess Big Mac' was solely a fandom based joke that the writers decided to throw in for fun, in the same way as Slice of Life was a big nod towards the fandom in it's own way. It would be a mistake to take it too seriously (you can certainly try though, I suppose), it's a joke that the fandom came up with because some people found the idea of someone like Big Mac wearing a tiara and being a 'pretty princess' to be humorous. I'm no fan of the joke, as you might imagine, but I don't take it seriously either, especially given the context of the episode and it's general content of weirdness. And no, it's not the case that people in a gender-egalitarian society are going to be deluded into thinking that they need to change their gender to be like their role models. As argued multiple times, Big Mac has no reason to imagine the other gender as being more successful, nor should anyone else have such a delusion, end of story. Anyway, I think my points have simply flown over your head like a rocket, pure and simple. I never argued that MLP wasn't a CARTOON being targeted/marketed to some extent at little girls by the higher-ups at Hasbro (all of us here enjoy it however, regardless of age or gender, and it's been made into a quality cartoon, albeit not perfect), I argued that the setting that it's portraying is gender-egalitarian, and that there's no evidence whatsoever that either gender is more dominant or successful there, nor is there any evidence whatsoever that either gender is PERCEIVED as more dominant or successful by it's citizens. As a cartoon, MLP is obviously being marketed towards certain demographics, but this does not mean that the fictional setting we see in it is unequal or anything of that sort. And Hasbro's marketing brings things into the show sometimes, but there is no direct connection between the fictional setting that is quite clearly gender-egalitarian and not leaning towards any one gender, and Hasbro's attempts at creating certain brand image and sales goals. Either way, this discussion is not really even about the cartoon from a meta perspective like you're trying to make it, it's about the setting and country being portrayed in the cartoon, and while the cartoon is more focused on female characters in that it gives them more screentime (not really the case with secondary characters, though), it has never portrayed that setting as anything other than gender-egalitarian with both genders being equally influential, capable, and respected. It has made it totally clear that Equestria is gender-egalitarian, both in equality-of-law and by having an equal society, economy and culture (and so on), and nobody in Equestria would need to associate success with the other gender. Big Macintosh may very well look up on his sister's exploits, but it has nothing to do with her gender, and unless you want to try and argue that he's transgender or something like that (I'd very much disagree, even if he's more in touch with his 'feminine' side, that certainly doesn't automatically make someone transgender), he has no reason whatsoever to need to imagine himself as the other gender. And discussions about transgender issues is not something I've put much thought into. Anyway, yeah, I do have other things to say in this whole conversation, but should probably end this post here, as there are other things I'd rather be doing right now and I need a break.

As Concerned Bystander and I said, mares and stallions ultimately hold equal status and influence, and equal capability to achieve, so no, Big Mac has no reason whatsoever to associate success with any one gender. He may, again, associate his personal idea of success with his sister, who's gone out and done a lot of stuff that he may be interested in trying himself, but it has nothing to do with her gender. And you can try to disagree with my arguments about the 'wider Equestria' that we don't see all you want, so be it, but I won't be agreeing with you there. Not that there aren't plenty of socially and economically influential ponies of both genders in the show already, as well as ponies of both genders in all walks of life in general. There's a greater focus on female characters when it comes to screentime, but there is no lack of role models of either gender, both from what we've seen directly in the show, and all the things we don't see directly too. And Hasbro's marketing strategy has nothing to do with the fictional setting that we are discussing, it has to do with brand image and selling their products. At most, it causes the writers to occasionally insert things, but it is not indicative of any in-universe bias or dominance or anything. MLP has a target demographic, it caters to that demographic by focusing on it's mostly female main cast, but this does not at any point mean that it's portraying a fictional setting where either gender is more influential or is somehow seen as more successful. And Hasbro's marketing strategy is only potentially promoting some traces of gender roles (marketing their toys towards girls I guess? I mean, they've got stuff like Guardians of Harmony coming up too, and all sorts of licensed merch that isn't targeted towards any one gender, but whatever) from our perspective and in our world solely. From an in-universe perspective on Equestria however, there are no gender-roles and Hasbro is not even remotely upholding them there. As you've hopefully noticed by now though, I've also been arguing that the cartoon is not all of Equestria like you seem to believe, but rather a window into Equestria, a limited and sometimes flawed medium through which we can watch things in that fictional universe. The cartoon itself is focused more on girly things, at least to some extent, as it's quite neutral all things considered, especially in more recent seasons, but the fictional universe that it is portraying is not more 'focused' on one gender, and there's no reason whatsoever that anyone in that fictional universe would have to associate success with the other gender. They have a greater level of gender-equality than Western nations by far, and with that comes a lack of gender roles, people of both genders in all walks of life, and even a disassociation of gender from role models in the first place, which means you can look up to someone without considering their or your own gender to be a relevant factor, as success and gender are not associated in a gender-egalitarian society.

Physical strength potential is the only real thing that is uneven between the genders (other than genitals/reproductive organs and such, of course), and I didn't necessarily deny that much, especially when I even mentioned in one of my posts that "Even with just physical strength, the mares and stallions seem pretty darn even compared to humans" when referring to physical strength specifically, as I feel like the physical strength difference between mares and stallions in MLP is fairly minimal compared to humans, if it even exists at all (we've seen fit ponies of both genders doing heavy duty work). Literally everything else is not restricted to one gender however, and that goes for humans too, so he's still very much in the wrong about gender roles being necessary or desirable, as there aren't personality/character types/roles that are exclusive to one gender or anything. And I very much disagree that there is gender-equality in the west in our world. It's not slanted in favor of one gender or anything, but there are plenty of problems facing both men and women. Law-wise, there are relatively few issues compared to the past (though they certainly aren't nonexistent, and some of them are very alarming), but from a societal perspective, there are still large numbers of rigid expectations and remnants of various gender roles, among other issues, which we need to be rid of to ever truly have equality. Of course, there's no real way to immediately legislate that away with the wave of a magic wand or anything, it will take time for our culture and society to reach true gender-egalitarianism. I'd say more, but it's extremely late and I'm really tired, so I'm probably just gonna head to bed now.

You can certainly try to look at the show as something fully contained, but it's an extremely limited viewpoint, and not really a useful or realistic one, especially for these discussions. All that's assumed to exist should naturally include things that aren't actually shown directly, as well as things that are shown but are not expanded on. What those things are can be a matter of debate, but it's pretty clear that as far as Equestria goes, they have great gender-equality, a culture and society that is gender-egalitarian, and no real gender roles. We've been observing male and female ponies going about their lives this whole time, and there's no indication that either gender is socially, culturally, economically, or politically advantaged. And you aren't simply talking about the show, you're talking about Equestria itself, the setting of the show. Not that females are portrayed as actually more important or 'superior' in the show, they simply receive more screentime. Or rather, again, the main protagonists receive the most screentime, and other characters of either gender don't receive as much. Even Celestia does not have her own episode, but you wouldn't dare to suggest that she isn't important from an in-universe perspective. And my arguments are supported by the show, which we've had a full five and counting seasons to both observe things directly, and make common sense conclusions based on various things. Big Macintosh lives in a gender-egalitarian society, and has no reason to view either gender as more 'heroic'. Maybe he wants to do more stuff like his sister Applejack specifically, but that has nothing to do with her gender, it's just that he hasn't tried it and she has. And while MLP was created to have interesting female characters, it does not have a culture of femininity in the sense that it's portraying females as superior or that one gender is always taking the lead. What you're suggesting is sexist too, to suggest that those things you mentioned are limited to the gender stereotype of girls (traditionally in the past, many of those things may be seen that way by many, but certainly not now, and the show will go out of it's way to emphasize that). One of the other goals of the show is to show that those things aren't restricted by gender, and quite frankly I find any other insinuation offensive, as here I am, finding all of those things perfectly normal and enjoyable, along with most other people who enjoy the show. And compared to the old versions of MLP, this cartoon should look pretty gender-neutral to anyone. Also, I'm not arguing that MLP as a cartoon is completely gender neutral in the sense of screentime (both genders have been portrayed as equals, however), as clearly female characters overall receive more screentime, but what I'm arguing is that the society it's portraying is indeed gender-egalitarian, which is pretty darn clear. And it's nonsense to suggest that "the whole world is based on gender roles", as it's quite the opposite. The country of Equestria clearly has no real gender roles, and from an out of universe perspective, one of the the goals of the show was to strike down gender roles. And if Faust is to be believed and is not some sort of female supremacist or anything else tinfoil, then she is also opposed to gender-roles. I've seen other people in the fandom with your views, so it's not a shock at this point, but I do find it amusing, as the show is quite literally the antithesis to those beliefs of yours. The shows focus is more on female characters, but it has never portrayed either gender as superior, dominant, or anything less than full equals with equal capability to achieve.

The facts are that the shows scope is limited and it uses that limited scope to focus on the Mane 7, and a few other characters like the CMC. That certainly doesn't mean that there isn't a world of stuff to be found outside of that scope. And yes, the things we see are important to Equestria, but it's ignorant to say they are the only important things, considering this is a whole fictional country we're talking about; important to the immediate narrative/plot of the show determines what we see and what we don't. The window through which we see Equestria is extremely limited and focused on certain things. We don't see much of politics, our exposure to towns other than Ponyville has been limited outside of a few others, though that has been picking up in recent seasons, with the theme of this one being more into exploring Equestria. And the fact that the show focuses it's screentime on it's mostly female main cast does not in any way imply some sort of inequality or dominance, of any sort. You also totally ignored the fact that the show doesn't feature many heroes of either gender, as the Mane 7, CMC, and occasionally others do the bulk of the things we've seen directly onscreen, both mundane AND heroic (doesn't mean they are the only things that do those things though, just that the show is focused on them the most). Either way, the focus of the show is extremely relevant to consider, and the way you just seemingly brush it off is nonsense. The Mane 7 and CMC receive the bulk of the focus, and other characters of either gender receive much less screentime. Lot's of things obviously happen offscreen. The current alicorns being female means you can argue that they have a matriarchy at the top of their government, however, this is just a technicality, no really different than the UK, so it's pretty meaningless. Also, there's no reason whatsoever to believe that gender is relevant to who can become one, as it's a merit based position, based on who is a good and benevolent leader, so gender is totally irrelevant. To restrict it on something as irrelevant as gender would destroy their legitimacy. Also, it's pretty clear that Starswirl almost become one, but Celestia said he didn't understand friendship. Now, all of this doesn't necessarily mean I expect to see a male alicorn in the show itself, simply because of Hasbro's marketing department being so focused on princesses, but there's no reason to assume gender discrimination there, and until we do see one, it is obviously correct to assume that one could exist, because it's just not somewhere where gender is relevant. Maybe the comics will do it one day with Shining Armor, as he's the obvious candidate, but alas the cartoon doesn't give him enough screentime to give that proper justice, as it would likely require a dedicated two-parter. And as I already mentioned, the underlying culture of Equestria is quite clearly gender-egalitarian, if you can't see that, you are just delusional, or maybe you just don't watch the show closely enough. Again, we've had a full five and counting seasons to observe this stuff, and there is no evidence whatsoever of a culture, society, economy, or ANYTHING that favors one gender or otherwise advantages them. We've seen ponies of both genders in all walks of life, including socially and economically influential positions. Again, pretty clear that there is de-jure (by law) and de-facto (in reality) gender equality there, full stop. There's no evidence of one gender being dominant, seen as superior, or anything. As for your last paragraph, that's quite the controversial statement you've got there, and I intend to point out that you are, in fact, wrong. Full egalitarianism with gender IS possible, and part of that means treating people as individuals, and not generalizing or assuming things, among many other things and considerations that I don't particularly have the time or will to try and explain. And there are some components to biology in gender, sure, but these arise as averages in large populations (and these are often overstated, even), and there is no such thing as a trait or personality type or whatever that is exclusively male or female. Gender roles serve no purpose other than society attempting to force it's will on the individual in an attempt to coerce them into conforming. In reality, people ARE indeed individuals, even if certain traits are somewhat more likely for certain population groups. Gender roles are not justified, and should be eliminated because there are plenty of people who simply don't fit those rigid views, to varying extents. I should know, because I absolutely hate many of the things about the traditional 'male gender-role' and I want nothing to do with those aspects. And no, TV shows often have their screentime unevenly divided by gender, but this does not in any way imply that they are portraying a fictional world where one gender is advantaged, and it would be silly to think otherwise. And I find it funny you'd tolerate MLP with that kind of stance, given that one of it's goals at conception was to strike down the gender roles BS and promote gender-egalitarianism. Equestria clearly has no enforced gender roles, and both genders in MLP have been portrayed as equally capable. Even with just physical strength, the mares and stallions seem pretty darn even compared to humans, given what we've seen.

I think as others have said here, this stuff is mostly left up to viewer interpretation. I don't really think there's any deep implications there, other than Big Mac wanting to help and spend time with his little sister, but I do like the idea of him being in touch with his 'feminine' side, though I don't necessarily think that translates to outright crossdressing or anything. Not something I've thought much about, though, and there are potentially different things you guys could be meaning by that, so I'll hold off on saying anything concrete, if that's the right way to put it. There's no evidence that "all of Equestria's heroes are female" or anything of that sort. The bottom line here is that the show is very focused on the exploits and lives of it's protagonists, like most other shows, and those protagonists happen to be female. The shows focus is limited, and because the main characters are primarily female, it it biased towards showing them doing things, mundane and at some points heroic, however this does NOT translate into an in-universe bias of any sort. There's a lot to Equestria we don't see, not to mention there are already male heroes shown and mentioned in the show (and comics, if you care about those), to varying degrees, even if the focus isn't on them, or any other side characters of any gender for that matter. And there isn't exactly an abundance of heroes of either gender shown onscreen in the show in the first place, outside of the main cast and princesses/princes. Bottom line, only conclusion that can be fairly reached is that most of the shows protagonists/main cast are female, and a show is naturally going to focus on those protagonists and their lives. The comparison to Mulan is nonsense because Mulan lived in a very repressive (for both genders, really, there were strict expectations for both women AND men that were wholly unfair) society/time period where males were dominant and females were expected to be subservient (again though, not a nice place for the average person of either gender, harsh and strict expectations abound). This is absolutely not even remotely the case for Equestria though, and anyone who thinks otherwise is just downright delusional, as it's pretty clear that they have pretty perfect gender-equality, both de-jure and de-facto, there is no indication that either gender is advantaged or dominant, and there are no real gender roles, so people are treated as individuals, and both genders have been portrayed as equally capable. It's pretty clear that they are gender-egalitarian. The show focuses more on female characters screentime-wise because of it's target audience. Do not mistake this for some delusion of the show portraying a society where either gender is dominant or advantaged, as that is a pure falsehood. We've had a full five and counting seasons to observe Equestria, and it's pretty clear that there is no gender-inequality of any sort.

Eh, well I already went ahead and deleted the quote from my post. Anyway, I'm tired and stressed, so I'll be going now, hopefully.

Oh, it was indeed sarcasm? Bleh, good to hear. I'm not the best at detecting that sometimes, especially when there's a lot of extremist rhetoric going around on the internet these days. It's true that it was rather difficult to tell, and I'm not exactly a fan of that sort of humor in the first place, but you didn't really need to delete the post outright or anything, just making it a little more obvious that it was sarcastic would have been enough to stop anybody from getting the wrong idea. It just came off as potentially serious because I've read the comments of some people who might actually think that way in the past. If you insist on deleting your post though, I'll remove me quoting it from my post, and you can remove quoting me from yours.