Gears of War is a science fiction boys club. For boys who have no necks. So where, exactly, do women fit into all this? Why, they don't. They're all busy. Busy making babies. Giant, neckless babies.
A great piece over at the Boston Phoenix, by Maddy Myers, points out the absurd gender inequality present in humanity's war against the Locust in Epic's Gears of War video game series.
See, while every man who can draw breath is off gaining glory and spilling blood in combat, women have been barred from the front lines. According to Gears of Wars' lore, because the Locust have wiped out so many people, the women are needed to make babies.
Sure, there are exceptions - Alex Brand, who features in Gears 3, is one of them - but they're exceptions because they can't have kids. So the only way a woman can fight is when they can't have kids? Pretty much.
This brings us to the heart of Myers' piece. "What if a woman just didn't want to make babies, and wanted to serve humanity in another way? Can the developers really not imagine a scenario where a woman wouldn't want to to choose this path? According to this premise, the only reason why a woman would want to fight off an endless Locust Horde destroying her planet would be if she had absolutely no other way to spend her time."
Interesting point. I could of course offer "what if a man just didn't want to fight?", and reply with "well, it's the end of the world, he'd be shot", but that's another topic for another day.
Gears of War 3: Adding a Female Character? [The Boston Phoenix]