As I have often pointed out in threads here like in Spidey 3, TPOC3, even in Final Fantasy 8, et al, such sterotypes can be over rated, to the point that sooner or later, people WILL get sick of in the end. Yet why do the Babylon known as Hollywood and other places use such stereotypes? To make sometinhg just as over rated--money. Money they say, is the root of all evil, and more often than not, they use money for substance abuse like drugs and alcohol, debuachery, hedonism, fancy, useless foolish stuff like fancy clothing and cars and houses and costume jewlery, combine with pride, stiffnecked arrogance and worse. Such stuff is what spelled the end of such people like, for instance, Anna Nicole, aka Vicky Hogan.

Such over rated stereotypes include too much romance, especially in what's SUPPOSED to be action films, NOT romance films, especially damsel stuff--that gets old, women hate to consent to demeaning roles like that, as is glorifies that all women were weak, cowardly subhumans that get in trouble all the time, and don't know how to stay out of danger. Other stereotypes glorify "forgive and forget offenses," that it's OK for sex in or out of marriages, that violence and revenge is OK, that all people should be rich and famous, and that it's right that they should get a so called "pat on the back."And so forth.

I don't like having to do so, but sometimes, the truth must be pointed out sometimes. Ask anyone that denounces such cliches and they'll tell you what I just told you that such "Hollywood cliches," should be outlawed. I used to work in the editorial field long ago, and people like me talk for the truth, just as The Lorax spoke for the trees, with the famous, greedy and such as The Once lers turning the tree into Thneeds, which, in truth we didn't need. That, comes from a book, for the record, from [I]The Lorax[I], by Dr. Seuss. Well, they say the truth is out there......so here it is, for all of you Final Fantasy forum stalwarts to see.

Best regards,
Wolf359.

One stereotype I'm not too found of in anime is how the main character always has some inexplicable power that can only manifest when he protects others. There are very few shounen anime that doesn't fit this stereotype. Other than that, it really irks me when more interesting supporting characters are overshadowed by less interesting archetypes. "Main character" ,"New villain", "Rival character".

There are many other stereotypes too like when the main character and the main heroine don't get along, yet the two somehow end up together in the end. That just irritates me.

The main character in anime has an inexplicable power, yet he/she ends up killing every villain with that power. Why not have a hero or heroine that has ONLY his/her wits to rely on to defeat the super-powered badguys?

I find that in most American action movies, what frustrates me is if you are from any nation in the general "Orient" area, you're going to know martial arts. The worst example of this, recently, was in "The Condemned". But then again, that movie IS a bad example of a movie, period. But you get my general idea.

There are many other stereotypes too like when the main character and the main heroine don't get along, yet the two somehow end up together in the end. That just irritates me.

The main character in anime has an inexplicable power, yet he/she ends up killing every villain with that power. Why not have a hero or heroine that has ONLY his/her wits to rely on to defeat the super-powered badguys?
Home Alone & Home Alone 2
lolz

Such over rated stereotypes include too much romance, especially in what's SUPPOSED to be action films, NOT romance films, especially damsel stuff--that gets old, women hate to consent to demeaning roles like that, as is glorifies that all women were weak, cowardly subhumans that get in trouble all the time, and don't know how to stay out of danger. Other stereotypes glorify "forgive and forget offenses," that it's OK for sex in or out of marriages, that violence and revenge is OK, that all people should be rich and famous, and that it's right that they should get a so called "pat on the back."And so forth.It's all fine and dandy to say "Hollywood cliches" should be outlawed, but not all are out right cliched. You're oversimplifying "cliches". From a writer's point of view, what you call a "damsel in distress" cliche may mean something entirely different and not intended to be a cliche at all.
I'll admit that lots of Action flicks are nothing but damsels in distress, senseless explosions, gun fights, fist fights, car chases, and unbelievable heroic escapes. and like you, I dispise them. But I can also tell when a movie is feeding me a cliche, or an actual interesting plot with meaning.

How can such stereotypes have any meaning?

How can such stereotypes have any meaning?Symbolism. Women are often a symbol for life, as they are life givers. In that sense, a hero's motivation is the protection of life. If you were in the "Editorial" field as you say you were, then you should have some kind of knowledge of English Literature. If so, then you're doing a pretty bad job of analyzing, and criticizing movies.

Symbolism. Women are often a symbol for life, as they are life givers. In that sense, a hero's motivation is the protection of life. If you were in the "Editorial" field as you say you were, then you should have some kind of knowledge of English Literature. If so, then you're doing a pretty bad job of analyzing, and criticizing movies.
But guys can be symbols of life themselves, because without them, women cannot give birth, so the door swings 2 ways. Any way you slice it, it's still stereotype to me. Many a woman in NOW would agree. Also, not all women can give birth; some have genetic defects in their works, in effect.

Many a woman in NOW is also a raving psychopath. It's one of the most worthless organizations the world has ever seen.

How about the world chess boxing organisation?

I think the STRONG INDEPENDENT I KICK EVERYTHINGS ASS BECAUSE IM A GRRRL AND TUFF BET YOU DIDNT EXPECT THAT stereotypical is about 100x worse than any damsel type stereotype. Not to say that either are all that great.

Some things are blatant stereotypes, some are just what a character is. Stereotypes exist for a reason. Its not like the world is free of whiny, wimpy women who can't defend themselves.

I generally find that things that go too far against the grain (ie TUFF GRRRL in an action movie) are far more annoying than any stereotype. That is, unless it fits and isn't just thrown in there to be different.

But guys can be symbols of life themselves, because without them, women cannot give birth, so the door swings 2 ways. Any way you slice it, it's still stereotype to me. Many a woman in NOW would agree. Also, not all women can give birth; some have genetic defects in their works, in effect.I guess you don't know english literature or symbolism. Yes we all know the different technical circumstances of people, but in a story you can't take that into account. Either people, things, and events are literal, or metaphorical. Men are rarely seen as symbols of life, unless they're doctors, or some type of healer. If the story doesn't state a character's (lets say a woman) condition from the start, then the events and circumstances the characters are in show you what they stand for.
For instance:
A woman walks down a road, and stops at a crossroads. she stands trying to decide which road to take, as the afternoon sun slowly creeps closer, and closer toward the horizon. Toward the east side of the road, a huge lumbering city full of bright lights appears full of activity. Toward the west, the road leads to a small, quiet, lonely town, with no one in sight. She stands pondering as to which road to take, when suddenly she sees off in the horizon, big, dark, menacing clouds headed towards her. She thinks to herself "If I walk now, I can make it in time to get shelter from the on coming storm!" She looks toward the city, as the bright full moon shines upon the quiet road. "It looks pretty far, I don't know if I'll make it on time before the storm!" she thinks. "What if something happens on the way there? And if I do get there, where will I go? What will I do?"

Now, what is this short scene talking about? Was I being literal and just writing about a women who's trying to get out of an on-coming storm, or was I being metaphorical?
Stop being such a leftist Feminazi!
I'm all for feminism and all, but not everything is a freakin' issue for political correctness. Use some common sense!

I guess you don't know english literature or symbolism. Yes we all know the different technical circumstances of people, but in a story you can't take that into account. Either people, things, and events are literal, or metaphorical. Men are rarely seen as symbols of life, unless they're doctors, or some type of healer. If the story doesn't state a character's (lets say a woman) condition from the start, then the events and circumstances the characters are in show you what they stand for.
For instance:
A woman walks down a road, and stops at a crossroads. she stands trying to decide which road to take, as the afternoon sun slowly creeps closer, and closer toward the horizon. Toward the east side of the road, a huge lumbering city full of bright lights appears full of activity. Toward the west, the road leads to a small, quiet, lonely town, with no one in sight. She stands pondering as to which road to take, when suddenly she sees off in the horizon, big, dark, menacing clouds headed towards her. She thinks to herself "If I walk now, I can make it in time to get shelter from the on coming storm!" She looks toward the city, as the bright full moon shines upon the quiet road. "It looks pretty far, I don't know if I'll make it on time before the storm!" she thinks. "What if something happens on the way there? And if I do get there, where will I go? What will I do?"

Now, what is this short scene talking about? Was I being literal and just writing about a women who's trying to get out of an on-coming storm, or was I being metaphorical?
Stop being such a leftist Feminazi!
I'm all for feminism and all, but not everything is a freakin' issue for political correctness. Use some common sense!What's politics got to do with gender?

What's politics got to do with gender?sorry, wrong choice of word, I had just gotten out of ethics class.

disregard leftist.

sorry, wrong choice of word, I had just gotten out of ethics class.

disregard leftist.It happenes to anyone. Sort of reminds me of the following story:

FCC Exec: I regret we must pull the plug on some of your films and shows; we've gotten a lot complaints of violence, sex, and other stuff degrading to women and children.

Hollywood Producer: But we've GOT to have that kind of stuff in our films and shows!! Viewers love it!!

FCC Exec: Even on Sermonette and The Sunday Morning Religious Hour?