>>83461678"why" they keep making the same character has a clear answer but i doubt she wants to go down that road.
in short, the concepts expressed by the narrative are thought to influence real life social rules, so therefore they take great pains to avoid showing "negative" traits in minority(?) characters who "need the help" in real life. that means instead of trying to show a female character's perspective, role, or traits in a realistic or creative way, they must only produce females in "uplifting" roles which eliminate those traits in an effort to diminish the real life idea of male and female. there are several competing schools of thought that cause them to become a bland slurry: they must directly oppose their stereotypical role in real life (main characters only, always smarter and quicker to react than others), they must also only show positive traits to "build up" female viewers (always confident, never wrong, sex symbol), they must show up and punch down on people with "positive" media stereotypes (men must be corrupt and pathetic), and then the educated types contradict everything by insisting on "positive female traits" they learned about in college (emotionally intelligent, caring).part of the problem is that companies send all of their scripts to third-party editing firms, which is where a team of retards gets paid top dollar to jettison all character, flavor, and realism following these highly destructive and contradictory rules. what you end up with is a featureless action dummy who checks all of the political boxes but never leaves a lasting impression on anyone. we live in a weird time where extreme sex and violence is encouraged, but dialogue which "damages the standing of women in society" is heavily scrutinized.