Female Role Models: Pop Culture vs Geek Culture [Picture]


Advertisements

So geeks, got any thoughts about this picture? Agree? Disagree? Let us know in the comments section below!





23 Responses to Female Role Models: Pop Culture vs Geek Culture [Picture]

  1. I'm just going to point that even they are not "the walking boobs", those characters in the geek culture roleplay "the girl" role. You can rarely see same amount of girls with different roles as males, at best you have 2 females: one with a strong personality and another more shy.
    They're better references than in pop culture, of course, but still unfair.

    • Having read the article I'm very sorry ofr you that GAS chose to take the easy (cough-popularist) way out – really interesting read.

  2. Where's Starfire, or the majority of famous female videogame characters? Geek culture invents just as many terrible female characters as the real world does.

    • Maybe so, but did you notice how all of the women are actually real? all of them are actual women, where as Starfire isn't. some of the women there are fictional, sure, but its showing the women who play them.

  3. Kristen Stewart has been acting since like age 11, makes mucho bucks, I wouldn't call her a bad role model. Same with Lady Gaga, she works damn hard, has talent, plays the piano (can you?) writes music, and fights for acceptance for LGBT youth, good role model.

    • Well, considering the bottom row are all characters, not people, we can assume that the top row are characters, as well. (The reality stars are all characters who happen to share the same name as their actor. Lady Gaga is a character played by Stefani Germanotta.)

      Kristen Stewart, the actress, may be a great role model. Bella Swan, the character, is most definitely not. Likewise: Stefani Germanotta, the singer, may be a great role model. Lady Gaga, the character, is not.

  4. ok, first the difference in how much skin is revealed: there seems to be a difference however this difference is created by careful picture-selection. you could put slave-leia in her “chainmail”-bikini in the lower row, and it would still be geek culture. and there are other geek-heroines that are dressed just as scantily.

    second the just sexy vs. sexy and badass aspect: all of the woman in the lower row have fought in a war, or otherwise fired a weapon in anger. however they all have a fictional universe as their respective background, which allows them to do so. what to compare have the woman in the upper row as background? some 3 and a halve minute song? thats not enough to describe a universe, establish them as competent fighters, put them in a dangerous situation and let them solve said situation. but that’s what’s needed to make the woman in the lower row appear so badass as they are.

  5. First off what are the bounds between "popular culture" and "geek culture"? Does Hermione Granger count as popular or geek? How about Buffy Summers (Buffy), Sarah Walker (Chuck) or the Black Widow (Avengers)? I mean Chuck was a fairly popular show but if you showed a picture of Sarah Walker in her slave Leia costume to the average American would they recognize the Sarah Walker character or just the slave Leia outfit?

    The second part that bothers me is the Sexy = Bad formula. Take Kate Beckett from Castle for a moment. Is she tough? No doubt. Is she sexy? Even less doubt. Is the Kate Beckett character a sexist objectification of women? I'm not buying it. Sexy does not equal Objectifying.

    And lastly, what's the real difference between the Geek and Popular cultures? Competence. The complaint has been leveled that the geek list is cherry picked for warriors. Let's take a couple of other examples then:

    Katy Perry vs Laura Croft
    Sings in her birthday suit / Athletic treasure hunter/archeologist

    Marilyn Monroe vs Willow Rosenburg
    Alcoholic second rate starlet / Sorceress, computer hacker, magic addict

    Princess Diana vs Princess Dejah Thoris
    Married a prince, died tragically / Swordswoman & Helium's leading scientist

    In each case the geek icon actually has useful skills, something more than just being pretty and popular. And that's why the geek culture icons win over the popular culture icons.

    • you're so right Princess diana did nothing but marry a prince, except of course run over 100 charities dedicated to helping people who suffered with AIDS, leprosy, helped homless people get off the streets, was president of Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children oh and won the nobel peace prize for her support of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines and did this while having the setback of actually existing

      • My first response never came out of review, so here's the short version again:

        The Nobel Peace Prize is a popularity contest of the grandest order- how else can you explain both Barrack Obama and Yasser Arafat both winning it? And she didn't "run" those charities, she "patronized" them. That is, she drew public attention to their causes. There is no indication that Diana possessed any talent for medicine or building housing. If she had not married a Prince her contribution to those causes would likely have been insignificant. It's morally commendable that she decided to use her popularity for the benefit of those less fortunate, but that doesn't mean she was anything more than pretty & popular. I stand by my assessment.

  6. Ok, first of all the argument "the bottom row are all characters, not people" is a bullsh*t argument(not referring to comments here, but have seen this said elsewhere). Never mind the fact that all the so called "real people" on the top row are also characters, thats what pop culture and reality TV does, turns people into characters. But characters are role models, be they geek or otherwise, people look at them and aspire to be them. Its not a relevant argument.
    The problem with this is character selection. Lady Gaga is a bad pop culture role model? Someone who preaches tolerance and acceptance of those different than you? Yeah, whoever selected the choices for this is an ass. The geek choices aren't even that inspired…where is Buffy? And who the hell is the chick on the left? Is Dax a badass role model? I don't know, no one outside of DS9 fandom does. So overall, good meme, poor execution.

  7. I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment behind this, but believe that – as many other commenters have stated – the choices of individuals her were perhaps not the best.

    The Geek-Culture women here are very much a representation of a single character-type in Science Fiction. While there are a large array of female character-types in sci-fi, Zoe, Vala, and to an extent Carter are the kick-ass women used simply to show that, yes, chicks can hold their own in a fight.

    Instead of choosing so many characters that rely heavily on their combat ability, perhaps other characters – with a more varied skill-set – could have been shown along side these women. Characters like Kaylee (Firefly) – who is not kick-ass in the traditional sense, but a simply well-rounded individual – or perhaps Lara Croft – who uses her brains rather than her boobs to complete her goals – would have shown a much more varied display of the potential of women in science fiction.

    At any rate, these women are certainly better role models than the shallow 'pop-culture' representatives.