Big McIntosh and His Gender Identity

[Concerned Bystander 2,902]

 

 

One last thing, save me the BS about gender equality, because true gender equality is objectively impossible. Gender roles are not just social constructs, they're rooted in science.

 

 

 

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,

 

Wind Chaser does have the right of it here, men and women can never be completely equal in every sense, we are a sexually dimorphic species and to simply disregard or deny that fact offhand reduces any argument to the level of nonsense.  This is after all why we have separate men's and women's sporting events (for example).  You want absolute gender equality?  Sure, lets get rid of those separate events and then see how many women qualify to compete in the Olympics outside of equestrian events, target shooting, and the few other purely technique based events in which women are able to compete directly against men (although, even though many events allow for direct competition without gender advantage, I am of the understanding that only equestrian events are not split into separate competitions for some reason).

 

It does go without saying though, that professional athletes are a very small employment niche in which sex does matter, and only a few other such niches exist.  More broadly, equality is possible, and indeed we in the west do have it in most cases.

 

However, to haul myself back onto topic, there is nothing to suggest that stallions are in any way second class citizens in Equestria, aside from the easily explainable focus of the show being on female characters, there seems to be no social level that is beyond the reach of a stallion.  Equestria even has at least one one prince, even if we have no idea what his function is.  It does seem highly unlikely that Big Mac would be under any impression that he needs to be female in order to be seen as a hero.

[Vixor 80]

Wind Chaser does have the right of it here, men and women can never be completely equal in every sense, we are a sexually dimorphic species and to simply disregard or deny that fact offhand reduces any argument to the level of nonsense.  This is after all why we have separate men's and women's sporting events (for example).  You want absolute gender equality?  Sure, lets get rid of those separate events and then see how many women qualify to compete in the Olympics outside of equestrian events, target shooting, and the few other purely technique based events in which women are able to compete directly against men (although, even though many events allow for direct competition without gender advantage, I am of the understanding that only equestrian events are not split into separate competitions for some reason).

 

It does go without saying though, that professional athletes are a very small employment niche in which sex does matter, and only a few other such niches exist.  More broadly, equality is possible, and indeed we in the west do have it in most cases.

 

However, to haul myself back onto topic, there is nothing to suggest that stallions are in any way second class citizens in Equestria, aside from the easily explainable focus of the show being on female characters, there seems to be no social level that is beyond the reach of a stallion.  Equestria even has at least one one prince, even if we have no idea what his function is.  It does seem highly unlikely that Big Mac would be under any impression that he needs to be female in order to be seen as a hero.

 

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.

Edited May 1, 2016 by Vixor

[Wind Chaser 4,768]

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.

Again, I'm not trying to portray males in Equestria as disadvantaged, but to show how many strong female characters there are in the world as a whole, especially surrounding Big Mac, and present a theory on how that relates to Big Mac's imagination, not because of how any sort of "sexism" prevents males from achieving the same (which there isn't). Your steadfast denial of that simple fact and theory based on purely speculative evidence makes it pretty pointless to continue on that front. You've made your point there, I've made mine, and that's that.

 

There's no denying MLP's roots. It's still largely considered the "girl's toy". Hasbro's marketing is based on what society traditionally associates with girls. To challenge the stereotype traditionally held that shows either made for girls or with a young female protagonist are kitschy, mindless nonsense that only they can enjoy is what MLP set out to do. Kim Possible and the original Powerpuff Girls did that as well and succeeded the same way MLP did. They're great shows with female heroes that anyone can watch.

 

On one side, MLP does challenge gender roles, but on the other, I still see it as upholding them. MLP still is the girls' toy, MLP is still for girls mainly and visual themes traditionally associated with femininity are going to dominate no matter what. It's just the way traditional marketing works.

 

I still love this show because of the characters, writing, and visual styles, as well as the fan culture surrounding it. I see the show as the show first. That's what Lauren wanted us to do and that's what I am doing. It only sounds antithetical to my viewpoint because that's how you make it sound.

Edited May 1, 2016 by Wind Chaser

[cider float 2,537]

I dont think big mac is genderfluid/ trans, guys can love dolls, guys can have fantasies of transforming into female demi-gods without being trans and sisterhood social, it showed more of how great of a brother big mac is.

In a cartoon, where the characters are painted black and white in very obvious ways of the role they play... yes Big Mac has become the icon of a stallion that doesn't mind taking on the role of a mare if he wants to, there's nothing wrong with that.

[Vixor 80]

Again, I'm not trying to portray males in Equestria as disadvantaged, but to show how many strong female characters there are in the world as a whole, especially surrounding Big Mac, and present a theory on how that relates to Big Mac's imagination, not because of how any sort of "sexism" prevents males from achieving the same (which there isn't). Your steadfast denial of that simple fact and theory based on purely speculative evidence makes it pretty pointless to continue on that front. You've made your point there, I've made mine, and that's that.

 

There's no denying MLP's roots. It's still largely considered the "girl's toy". Hasbro's marketing is based on what society traditionally associates with girls. To challenge the stereotype traditionally held that shows either made for girls or with a young female protagonist are kitschy, mindless nonsense that only they can enjoy is what MLP set out to do. Kim Possible and the original Powerpuff Girls did that as well and succeeded the same way MLP did. They're great shows with female heroes that anyone can watch.

 

On one side, MLP does challenge gender roles, but on the other, I still see it as upholding them. MLP still is the girls' toy, MLP is still for girls mainly and visual themes traditionally associated with femininity are going to dominate no matter what. It's just the way traditional marketing works.

 

I still love this show because of the characters, writing, and visual styles, as well as the fan culture surrounding it. I see the show as the show first. That's what Lauren wanted us to do and that's what I am doing. It only sounds antithetical to my viewpoint because that's how you make it sound.

 

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.

Edited May 1, 2016 by Vixor

[Wind Chaser 4,768]

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.

That is partly the point I was trying to make. Big Mac's alicorn transformation in "Magic Sheep" has something to do with that as well. I'm assuming "feminine" isn't in your vocabulary when describing this show because you refuse to believe in any sort of gendering in the show, but I'll just say that traits that can be described as "feminine" may be found in Big Mac's character because of the influence of others. It doesn't matter who a person looks up to or what they do. It's natural for a person to want to be more like their hero.

 

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.

 

Actually, it does. How many times have you heard of Hasbro mandating something be in the show for the purposes of selling another playset? Where were you when the fandom balked at the notion that "every little girl wants to be a princess"? Hasbro has changed towards less stereotypical merchandise in recent times, but this stuff makes its way into the show more than you're willing to admit. Equestria didn't happen naturally. It was made to move toys and merchandise, and entertain on the side.

 

Any way you slice it, even if this unseen side of Equestria was what you say it was, there's still a lot of pink, a lot of princesses, a tea party or two, and a royal wedding all over the place. That influence is there. In fact, I think it's as much a disservice to the show to call it gender-neutral as it is inaccurate, because it implies that discounting its femininity somehow makes it more valid. Its fanbase is gender-neutral. Its appeal is gender-neutral. But the show is still girls-first and marketing has a lot to do with that.

[Vixor 80]

That is partly the point I was trying to make. Big Mac's alicorn transformation in "Magic Sheep" has something to do with that as well. I'm assuming "feminine" isn't in your vocabulary when describing this show because you refuse to believe in any sort of gendering in the show, but I'll just say that traits that can be described as "feminine" may be found in Big Mac's character because of the influence of others. It doesn't matter who a person looks up to or what they do. It's natural for a person to want to be more like their hero.

 

 

Actually, it does. How many times have you heard of Hasbro mandating something be in the show for the purposes of selling another playset? Where were you when the fandom balked at the notion that "every little girl wants to be a princess"? Hasbro has changed towards less stereotypical merchandise in recent times, but this stuff makes its way into the show more than you're willing to admit. Equestria didn't happen naturally. It was made to move toys and merchandise, and entertain on the side.

 

Any way you slice it, even if this unseen side of Equestria was what you say it was, there's still a lot of pink, a lot of princesses, a tea party or two, and a royal wedding all over the place. That influence is there. In fact, I think it's as much a disservice to the show to call it gender-neutral as it is inaccurate, because it implies that discounting its femininity somehow makes it more valid. Its fanbase is gender-neutral. Its appeal is gender-neutral. But the show is still girls-first and marketing has a lot to do with that.

 

'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.

Edited May 1, 2016 by Vixor

[Wind Chaser 4,768]

'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 targeted to some extent at little girls, 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 argue that he's transgender or something like that, 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.

You can choose to see Princess Big Mac that way. I could say it has more to do with his character. Nothing in the show confirms or denies anything either of us say.

 

All I can say in response to your points is that you and I see the show and the world two completely different ways. Best thing you can do there is just accept that others see the show completely differently and stop trying to prove me wrong. We've both provided evidence as to why we see the show the way we do.

 

I do have to bring the meta perspective in because author's purpose is a critical tool towards understanding what kind of message a work is sending. So far, since MLP:FiM is the only confirmed canon work here, that's all that exists by which to judge Equestria.

 

In all truth, by the same logic you're using to prove that Equestria is free of any gender bias, one could easily say that there is more bias in Equestria outside the show, or it could all be alien space bats for all we know, purely because MLP never made it an issue.

 

There may be successful male ponies everywhere, but others could say that there is bias because there are no male alicorns, or because all of the the most successful heroes in the show (the Mane 6) are female. To that end, it's one word against another and there's nothing that proves either side truly right.

 

So let's just leave it at that; this issue is speculation vs. speculation and there's no agreement that can be had here.

 

Let's not even think that Big Mac doing descriptively "feminine" things would qualify him as a transgender. 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. All this despite your insistence that gender roles objectively don't exist in Equestria.

[Vixor 80]

"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.

Edited May 1, 2016 by Vixor