"I hate Strong Female Characters"
Aug. 19th, 2013 01:14 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
elle-winters.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
queensthiefI might be late to the party but did ya'll read this article someone wrote??
I just feel like we need to talk about
Here's the link: http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2013/08/i-hate-strong-female-characters
And here are some quotes...
"Sherlock Holmes gets to be brilliant, solitary, abrasive, Bohemian, whimsical, brave, sad, manipulative, neurotic, vain, untidy, fastidious, artistic, courteous, rude, a polymath genius. Female characters get to be Strong."
“Of course, normalwomen are weak and boring and can’t do anything worthwhile. But this one is different. She is strong! See, she roundhouses people in the face.”
Can we just talk about this, please? I'm not going to to lie and say I didn't notice this either. The 'strong' female character is usually super strong, knows kung fu and yet has perfect hair. Like in what world is that fair? Sure she's no longer damsel in distress but, really? How is this anymore realistic?
And then I couldn't help but think of ATTOLIA. She's drop dead (almost literally) gorgeous but I just can't see her drop kicking anyone...instead she's quiet and calculating smart, she makes sacrifices but doesn't flaunt them. And while, yes, somethings she's done are pretty down right crazy and extreme, her overall personality is more real. Quiet is her unmatchable strength and at the same time (through Gen) we see that she is very human and vulnerable.
Eddis on the other-hand definitely has the kung fu down, but I can't imagine Eddis being the "strong & sexy" character. More like "Strong and sensible" Ag
And this is why I love this series so much. Does anyone feel the same?? Or different?
I just feel like we need to talk about
Here's the link: http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2013/08/i-hate-strong-female-characters
And here are some quotes...
"Sherlock Holmes gets to be brilliant, solitary, abrasive, Bohemian, whimsical, brave, sad, manipulative, neurotic, vain, untidy, fastidious, artistic, courteous, rude, a polymath genius. Female characters get to be Strong."
“Of course, normalwomen are weak and boring and can’t do anything worthwhile. But this one is different. She is strong! See, she roundhouses people in the face.”
Can we just talk about this, please? I'm not going to to lie and say I didn't notice this either. The 'strong' female character is usually super strong, knows kung fu and yet has perfect hair. Like in what world is that fair? Sure she's no longer damsel in distress but, really? How is this anymore realistic?
And then I couldn't help but think of ATTOLIA. She's drop dead (almost literally) gorgeous but I just can't see her drop kicking anyone...instead she's quiet and calculating smart, she makes sacrifices but doesn't flaunt them. And while, yes, somethings she's done are pretty down right crazy and extreme, her overall personality is more real. Quiet is her unmatchable strength and at the same time (through Gen) we see that she is very human and vulnerable.
Eddis on the other-hand definitely has the kung fu down, but I can't imagine Eddis being the "strong & sexy" character. More like "Strong and sensible" Ag
And this is why I love this series so much. Does anyone feel the same?? Or different?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 8/19/13 10:04 pm (UTC)And there was an article in the NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/03/magazine/a-plague-of-strong-female-characters.html?_r=2&) a while back asking specifically for WEAK female characters.
no subject
Date: 8/19/13 11:04 pm (UTC)I thought it was interesting that the article discussed imagining switching the genders of the characters, as I know we've discussed here with our favorite series. How some things (like punching people) are somehow more OK for female characters you're supposed to like than for male characters. Why? Well, because they're girls, so they have to show that they're strong.
So if ruthless King Gen cut off spy/thief Attolia's hand, she fell in love with him and they got married... people wouldn't like it. I wouldn't like it.
Why is it more OK for me the other way around?
We discussed awhile ago in my Adolescent Literature class the culture that pops up around popular books and how it would also be Not Ok if the gender roles were switched--Like you have a bunch of women, some probably married, fangirling over a picture of Jacob (or whatever his name is, the werewolf guy in Twilight) with his shirt off and people think its kinda weird or funny or whatever but its acceptable. Make it men looking looking at a picture of a young woman, and it becomes VERY NOT OK.
I think the end of the article got close to what I think the ultimate solution is--even out the ratio of men and women on the screens. Then the sole female characters won't have to be "strong" in order to somehow represent all the other women who aren't there. No longer simply the token female characters, they can become themselves.
no subject
Date: 8/19/13 11:48 pm (UTC)I largely agree with the author's point, but wish the headline was different & less focus on criticism of characters. I mean, I absolutely want more complex, flawed awesome female characters. There's a way to say that which doesn't invoke hate. Warrior women heroines aren't my favorite type, but if they're empowering for someone else, why not? The problem's exclusion. I just want more Attolias, and more Eddises, and more of every experience and personality. THERE. NOW YOU HAVE MY THOUGHTS.
no subject
Date: 8/20/13 12:13 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 8/20/13 01:20 am (UTC)While most girls aren't undercover knights, I think it points out that there is a place for "utilitarian" clothes or behavior, but that doesn't mean they have to sacrifice dresses and prettiiness.
Hope that made some kind of sense .....
no subject
Date: 8/20/13 01:33 am (UTC)See, I feel like this is too general? Like, I love that Attolia is female, because there aren't nearly enough complex women in YA lit, but I think she's complex in a way that's specific to her own characterization. She's never painted as an ideal woman, just as herself, and we get fascinating background information as to why she's like that.
What I'm trying to say - in a rather roundabout way - is that maybe, to reduce them to "male" and "female" is to miss out on a whole layer of complexity, shades of their development and pasts that aren't related to gender, development that's so individual and specific that it isn't seen as ideal or okay but just the way their personalities have been shaped.
Attolia might be female, but I don't think anyone takes that to mean that her cutting off Gen's hand is more okay than if she'd have been male. Even to say that she does it because she's female is a bit reductive, because you have Eddis in direct contrast to her, Eddis who doesn't need to execute her barons. It's not just that she's female, it's also Attolia the country's fractious politics, too. Not that her gender is irrelevant - in fact, the barons are more fractious because she's female and they're all jostling to be her king and take her power in a way they likely wouldn't be if she was male - but it's not her sole defining characteristic.
Which is amazing, and like you said, we need more of that. Characters not notable because they're specifically female, but because they're real and grounded and female, too.
(I hope I'm making sense! This comment ended up way longer than I expected.)
no subject
Date: 8/20/13 05:02 am (UTC)I think the article made a really good comparison with the 'strong box' example and how ridiculous the "strong" role is when the gender is switched.
I especially liked this line: "We need get away from the idea that sexism in fiction can be tackled by reliance on depiction of a single personality type, that you just need to write one female character per story right and you’ve done enough."
I definitely do not think either Attolia or Eddis are crammed into that 'strong box' but I've often said I would really enjoy it if there were more female characters who did things in the series. They suffer from being the 'princess surrounded by 5 guys.'
no subject
Date: 8/20/13 01:24 pm (UTC)I'm going to use Battlestar Galactica as an example, because back when it was on TV people were complaining about Starbuck as this type of Strong Female Character and ignoring the fact that the TV show had a bunch of complex, flawed female characters who displayed all different kinds of strengths and weaknesses. I mean, it had a female president who tried to keep the remains of the human race together while fighting cancer. But because Kara Thrace was a punk-ass jock of a flygirl who put up a tough front, BSG was guilty of the "Strong Female Character" who just kicks ass.
This, of course, ignored the fact that Kara Thrace was a complex, flawed and in many ways extremely damaged character whose facade of toughness and fighting first covered for a very fragile center and it was a survival strategy. She was a brilliantly nuanced, flawed character, but people were too busy complaining that she was a one dimensional Kick Ass Girl to notice either her complexity or the fact that Laura Roslin and others were also right there in the script, stepping up to do what needed to do and making really hard decisions.
I'm all for variety in well-drawn female characters who Do Things -- and more of them -- but I find that people who complain about the Strong Female Character trope don't seem to be paying attention to what's already there. Besides, I like to see female characters kick ass, and there still aren't that many out there in comparison to male characters who kick ass.
no subject
Date: 8/20/13 02:01 pm (UTC)I think there's also more focus on what a girl does rather than why she does it. The reason sometimes is so much more important than the action itself. Not all girls who roundhouses people do it for the same reason. There's a difference between a girl who takes up kung-fu because she thinks it will get her into the boys' club since she dislikes the girls' club, and another girl who does it to protect those she loves, and another girl who does it just because she thinks the discipline is cool and useful. And I think this is where the three-dimensionality comes in, or should come in.
no subject
Date: 8/20/13 05:01 pm (UTC)'nuff said, haha
no subject
Date: 8/21/13 01:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 8/22/13 03:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 8/22/13 03:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 8/22/13 03:27 pm (UTC)Lol, this is why I continue to have general not-good feelings about Attolia and QoA. Even as it is, I don't like it.
no subject
Date: 8/22/13 06:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 8/23/13 04:46 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 8/24/13 03:22 am (UTC)http://seanan-mcguire.livejournal.com/528621.html
There's some wonderful snark on gender-swapping, Mary Sues, Sarah Janes, and lots of other character types. For example:
"Female characters should be people. Flawed, glorious, interesting, enthralling people."
no subject
Date: 8/27/13 03:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 9/7/13 06:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 9/7/13 06:28 pm (UTC)