We live in interesting times.
In October 2014, Marvel Comics, in its endless quest to placate a demographic that never read its stories anyway, replaced the Thor we all know with another Thor- this time a woman, Jane Foster. With a stroke of their magic wand, the geniuses (*ahem*) over at Marvel transformed the concept of Thor; suddenly, some-crazy-how, Thor was no longer a name but rather a title, and the man Thor was found to be "unworthy" to wield the hammer Mjolnir.
In December 2015, Disney, now in control of Lucasfilm, released Star Wars: The Force Awakens, replaced the traditional male lead with a female character named Rey. George Lucas' intention of Star Wars being an opera for men concerning the relationships of fathers and sons was simply too old fashioned for Disney. The message has become clear: From here on out, Star Wars would be about how men are just too feckless or stupid or violent to get the job done. We have only to witness the destinies of the most important male characters to see the writing on the wall: Luke Skywalker- dead; Han Solo- dead; Ben Solo- an emotional wreck of a villain, and probably soon to be dead.
In December 2017, Prime Minister Theresa May called for the next James Bond to be a woman, citing the recently de-masculinized Dr. Who as a precedent, and noting that the castration of James Bond would be a victory for "girl power." Never mind the fact that James Bond is everything feminists like Theresa May despise: a violent, misogynist womanizer who shoots first and asks questions never- and that's why we love him. James Bond is worth watching only because of his masculinity; a female James Bond would be less than useless, a disgrace to both sexes, and absolutely intolerable at the artistic level.
The case for a female Dr. Who, incidentally, is not totally illogical, as Dr. Who is not a human at all but an alien who takes on human form in order to interact with other humans. Altering the character for each subsequent series is the entire point of Dr. Who, and changing the character's sex, race, etc, works well within the context of the story. In the case of Thor, Luke, Bond, and others (i.e. the female Iron Man, which sounds like gibberish even at the grammatical level), however, the alteration of the sex of the character, aside from disregarding the characters' entire histories, runs entirely contrary to spirit of the stories. These are stories about men, about manhood, and about what it means for a man to stand for something; they are not about, and cannot ever effectively be about, women.
But why should that be?
The premise behind this gender-bending trend is that man and woman are not fundamentally different from one another, that manhood and womanhood have no meaning, and therefore that they are entirely interchangeable. According to this train of thought, men can be turned into women with nothing lost in translation- though, strangely enough, the reverse is never attempted. This is a strategic move, and it reveals something about their intentions: The goal is not equality at all, but rather the un-writing of men in traditionally heroic roles from film. Those who support such artistic gibberish are well aware that life imitates art- or tries to.
Aside from proving that Marvel Comics, Disney, and the Prime Minister of England, are entirely lacking in the creativity necessary to simply create new stories with new characters of their own, it also proves that they have no idea how men and women function. Men and women are fundamentally different; we are different genetically, hormonally, structurally, developmentally, physically, neurologically, mentally, and culturally. There are no measures by which we can be found to be equivalent; we show differences from head to tail.
These differences, much to the frustration of liberals, also result in psychological differences. Males, for instance, display higher degrees of violent behavior, greater concentration of thought, are more strategic and tactical in their outlook, and naturally organize hierarchically, and are thus less democratically-oriented than females. All of these characteristics lend a certain heroic quality to the male mind, and this should not come as a shock: Men are built for war.
This is why simply changing the sex of the hero never works: It comes across as contrived, and is rarely believable. Heroism is a quintessentially masculine trait, and so the female hero must always express herself in entirely masculine terms, and that is very difficult to do without destroying the femininity of the character entirely. For this reason, the female hero is often but a shadow of heroism, a mere facsimile, and almost always distorted. That is not to say that female characters cannot be virtuous, but masculine virtue and feminine virtue are two very different things; their rhythm are nothing alike at all.
Masculinity is designed for the external, for the world out there, where danger and death await. This risk is acceptable because men do not bear children; men are in a sense expendable. Women, however, are not; women bear children. For most of human history, the species stood perpetually at the threshold of destruction: war, famine, pestilence- whatever could kill man did. The value of children, the value of creating new human beings to replace those that had been, and would inevitably be, lost, cannot be overestimated. Childbirth ensured the survival of the tribe, and therefore women could not be risked. Moreover, women are not built for war, either physically or psychologically, which we tend to forget because modern militaries are equipped with weapons that were unthinkable in the ancient world: Guns are equalizers; without guns, the notion of the female warrior is ridiculous.
Everything about male psychology is oriented towards violence, and towards self-sacrifice in the midst of violence. The meaning of male psychology is to preserve the tribe at any cost- even at the cost of oneself. Why? So that women and children may carry on, so that the tribe may not perish, so that the book of humanity may not be finally shut. And that is the very essence of heroism. That is why a female Thor, a female Luke, a female Bond, are all so nonsensical: Such ideas turn the world upside down; they fly in the face of our own humanity.
The quintessential hero will always be a man because the heroic is manhood itself.
~ Joshua van Asakinda
20 April, 2018