• barsoap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    11 months ago

    I’m not sure whether whoever made this is aware that the skimpy outfit wasn’t something Leia chose to wear, this was. Now I don’t mind canon-bending Jabba the Hutt into being gay or bi but “equality is when slave outfit” nah I’ll pass.

    • LesserAbe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      In the movie universe it was a creepy evil guy who made her wear the slave outfit, and doesn’t make sense to get mad at a fictional character. In real life the people making the movie decide what outfits people wear, and we’re allowed to have opinions about that.

      • barsoap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        If we carry this to the meta level: The same people also decided that Leia kills Jabba in that very outfit and generally break a ton of damsel in distress tropes. Now you could say “But Ellen Ripley is just as if not even more badass, why not do that”, well, then you wouldn’t be messaging that getting demeaned by your captors doesn’t change anything about your capacity to badass, that the outfit, or Jabba’s general grossness, does not need to have power over your mind, just as horror doesn’t have power over Ripley’s mind. And you can’t just turn Star Wars into body horror so it has to have different hero characteristics.

        I see nothing wrong with that message.

        The same thing gender-swapped, though? Wouldn’t have the same impact as men typically get sexualised differently. It’s certainly been done in a sense, though, e.g. in Pulp Fiction.