I watched the straw feminist one and while her points are good I do have issue with the PPG example. Seeing as the last act was actually real feminists vs straw one. what happened was Ms Bellum had the girls in and they said that they were defending women then they show 3 women who the straw woman hurt.
The straw feminist is often shown as harming women in their "crusade for superiority", so quite frankly, her point still stands.
It still portrays feminism as "unnecessary and harmful".
I guess the execution could have been better honestly half of the cases are just poor execution.
The straw-feminist in PPG was
supposed to be seen as a straw-feminist that wasn't an attack against women, they were merely showing that just because a person claims to have good intentions and claims to support your group (in this case a feminist since the PPG are girls) that does not justify all means and in fact they showed how her
misguided feminism was harming real women who in fact had broken out of the stay-at-home-mom stereotype and were working in challenging (and dangerous) fields. (I saw the episode years ago so I don't remember how much of actual feminism that episode had but it did show that women were in the police at least and I don't
think there was any anti-women theme in that episode.)
If the main characters had been black it might have been some black-power^2 group that would have had the same role and you would have had the same lesson. OK, maybe they wouldn't have shown that on TV, but my point is that just because there is a straw portrayal of an ideology it does not mean that the show is against the ideology.
In fact if we demand that there must be no straw/negative/silly portrayal of an ideology where does that lead us to? "There must be no negative portrayal of our Glorious And Most Justified Goverment." I like comedians like Mel Brooks who can laugh at themselves, and like most jewish comedians he makes jokes about jews as well
as a proof that nothing is too sacred to make a joke about. And I really like that ideology, it does not mean that everything is frivolous and that
nothing is sacred, it simply means that if you laugh at others then you must also be able to laugh at yourself. I am a christian but I accept that sometimes the a character on a show/book/game is a silly/evil/etc. christian but this isn't necessarily an attack against christianity. In fact you could replace christian with nerd, Finnish, white, man, soldier, democrat (as in democracy, not the democrat party of USA), etc. and I would still stand by my claim. Sometimes someone must take a pie to the face in order to make a silly show.
I would also like to point out that that the straw-feminist isn't an unique character, there are also political-strawmen and other such straw-tropes. Besides most of those straw-characters are portrayed as straw-characters, that is to say, they aren't claiming that all feminists are as crazy as the straw-feminist character simply that one character has taken an ideology (and a straw character can have any ideology) and twisted it, OR it could be that they are just being silly.
Let me explain that last bit. When a straw character is used in an argument it is meant to weaken the opponents claims by twisting their words but in a a show (especially in comedy) the straw person isn't necessarily a part of an debate. It might be that these exaggerated characteristics are just a way of making the person "silly" and aren't
meant to be seen as an example of real actual feminists. Homer Simpson being a fat stupid white man is not an example of the show trying to say that all white men are fat and stupid. Mayor Quimby being a corrupt politician isn't supposed to be an attack on all politicians. These are simply characteristics of these comedic characters.
Sorry about rambling, besides I haven't watched all her videos, I just recognised that character from a PPG episode I saw and got curious.