Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-26516813-20190711012913/@comment-28986801-20190921004135

Gilgameshkun wrote: What I'm saying is not only that her portrayal was sexist, but also that she never should have been named Venus de Milo in the first place, because with it already not striking anyone as a realistic personal name in any language, it combines the namesakes of four male artists of skill and one female art subject of looks. If a character with that name existed in isolation, it wouldn't be an issue. But when the symbolism of her name is compared with the symbolism of the other four's names, the implications were always going to be unfortunate: That men are doers, and women are there to look pretty for men. And considering both Venus de Milo's naming and portrayal came from the same show, I don't really think this was an accident&mdash;she was conceived from the top down in a sexist manner, which hinders any rehabilitation of a rebooted version of the character as long as she has that name.

Well, what if Venus was loosely named after Alexandros of Antioch, spelt as Alexandra, who sculpted the Venus de Milo statue? That’s technically naming after an artist.

Also, characters can have a personality do-over because their first portrayal wasn’t very good. Look at Webby Vanderquack of the Ducktales 2017 reboot. She was changed from her more girly 1987 self to be the same age as the triplets and be more of a role model for young girls. She’s actually one of the inspirations for my version of Venus, next to Tangled’s Rapunzel and Big Hero 6’s Honey Lemon. There’s also Mona Lisa, who made only one appearance in the 87 version. In 2012, she was way more expanded and made more appearances.

If Webby and Mona can be brought back and have their personalities changed, I don’t see why we can do the same thing for Venus to make her less sexist.