Please please please stop using the phrase "don't get me wrong." It is a given, and we readers know, that you would like us to understand your point. But it is your job to make that point, not to accuse the reader of hastily jumping to incorrect conclusions. This is a lazy rhetorical devise that is offensive to the reader and can be eliminated through clear thinking and clear and organized presentation of ideas.

Which ports should I look for to properly sex a machine? OK, his name is "Wall-E", but I'm sure that's a backronym or something. Oh, and you forgot to mention Dora in "Finding Nemo", who was as much a star of the film as Marlin (and a far more interesting character, which isn't much of a fight when Albert Brooks is the opposition.)

But hey, you keep checking what those CG characters are packing in their pants. Or, something.

When animated characters are voiced by male actors and are playing "male" roles, it's pretty clear how the audience is supposed to identify them.

Well, there has been some progress with Pixar. The first bunch of movies were a veritable sausage fest. Even the iconic flexy lamps in their first or second short were desribed as a father and son. They moved into strange Female territory with some later movies. In "Finding Nemo", the sidekick is played by Ellen Degeneres. In "Monsters, Inc." the main human character is a feisty little girl named "Boo". In "Toy Story 2", Joan Cusak plays a spunky cowgirl. Of all of the movies, "The Incredibles" is the most balanced, with the stretchy wife ,the emo daughter, and the peculiar costume designer almost balancing out the brick shithouse dad, the speedy kid, "Frozone", and the petulant villain. (However, the peculiar costume designer, Edna Mode, is still voiced by Brad Bird. Sigh. Why not Kathleen Turner?) Nut then, they've stepped backwards into the land of the Little Boys again.

The underlying problem is this: The men still have the money. The men still write the scripts. There is so much money at stake, that they are afreid to take chances and try something new. They firmly believe that it is the males who make the decisions about who goes to the movies. "Asses in seats" is the term I have heard.

I wish that not only Pixar, but all movie makers would grow up and take a page from the books of the independent filmmakers and come up with interesting female characters. But with 100 million dollars at stake, they're too chicken to try it.

You could ask why are there no male lead stars of the movie "Evening"? Or in "The Hours"? Or in "Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood?"

********

The fact is that almost every Pixar film I know of (with the exception of the "Birds" short that precedes Nemo) features a heroine who defies so many gender stereotypes, i.e. she can lead, be decisive and think independently, stick to her guns (literally, in Toy Story 2) - and still be empathetic at the same time!

Your quibble about the #1 lead in the movie not being female....well frankly, that usually only occurs in movies such as those listed at the beginning of my message, i.e. films intended ONLY for women, that are ONLY about women & their lives, etc etc.

EXACTLY!

You've hit the nail on the head!

That is PRECISELY the problem. Male leads are regarded as universally appealing and female leads as appealing to females.

Pixar, with its string of critical and financial successes, is clearly in the position to breach that convention. It would be awesome if they did.

I hate to say it, but we are not in a day and age where women are considered drop-in replacements for men. Unless you want to make the femaleness of the character part of the story (and what a bore) a male character is just more of a neutral canvas. I'm not saying this is the way it ought to be, but I think it's the way it is.

It's difficult to find movies (or other media, for that matter) with a strong female lead who's an acceptable role model for girls. That's why our DVD shelf is stocked with Miyazaki's films (Spirited Away, Nausicaa, Kiki's Delivery Service, et. al.) These films were remarkably successful in Japan. Why can't US filmmakers do the same?

Back in the ancient (pre-1960s) days of the movies, both male and female stars commanded the box office and made movies that appealed to both genders. This - at a time when women's role in the greater society was largely subordinate to men's.

Now...when women have achieved some semblance of equality with men in most aspects of society, male stars almost completely rule the box office, while actresses are presumed suitable only for "chick flicks," or for decorating the scenery of male-dominated films.

We came a long way, "babies," for THIS???

Bette, Joan and Marilyn must be turning in their graves!

It's not just Pixar who are guilty. The latest Shrek film is so wrapped up with maleness that it forgets that Fiona is the heir to the throne of Far Far Away and has Fiona standing in the background while her dying father talks to his son-in-law about the succession.

Is there a reason why a Barbie doll couldn't have become really jealous of a Bratz doll and thus end up losing, and having to win back the respect of, a little girl's entire stable of toys?

Is there a reason an overprotective mother fish couldn't have gone on a quest to save her fatherless daughter with a bad fin from being trapped in a dentist's aquarium?

Given that a rat is a rat, why would it make things different if a female rat was determined to be a great chef?

Most of the Pixar stories are aimed at kids of both sexes, not at boys. Very few of them actually have storylines that depend on the characters being male. Okay, so you couldn't replicate Buzz Lightyear's weird belief that he is an actual astronaut exploring an alien planet with a Bratz doll (or a thinly disguised variant thereof), but on the other hand, it would be awfully funny to see someone who thinks she's a top-rated fashion maven and designer figure out that in fact she's just a doll. The story of an overprotective mother going on a quest to save her child is *just* as meaningful and relevant as the same character being an overprotective father. Admittedly, The Incredibles would have been a different story if the main character had been the mother -- stay-at-home moms and working moms have different life angst than working dads. But that's the only one I can think of off the top of my head.

Meanwhile, the movie Barnyard starred a male cow. Yes, that's right, a male cow. Teats and all. And then when his girlfriend had a calf, it was a male calf. With teats.

Animators aren't even really *trying* to achieve gender balance... and it's stupid. My son would eagerly watch the story of a girl who wants to be a giant mecha pilot, and in fact he has. Why do we have to look to Japan (which by most measures is more sexist than we are, anyway) for good female role models for our children? I mean, frickin' Sesame Street took until last year to add a main regular who's female and I *still* haven't seen her on the toys, diapers or sippy cups.