Discussion: Strong Female Characters
Aug. 26th, 2009 11:02 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
strangetomatoThis is mostly for will_o_whisper, since we've had many a deep, meaningful conversation on the topic (and the same goes for ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
beyondheroism__ and smjoshsims), but I thought it might be of interest to a number of you that I can thing of offhand, and maybe even more. It's this article from the latest metafandom post, titled Ladies, Please (Carry On Being Awesome) by sarahtales. It's more discussion on the idea that we hold female characters up to a different standard than male characters. There's also a link to another article within that one about the Bechdel test, which includes lists of series/stories that pass it (even mentioning videogames such as FFVI, an old favourite of mine).
In particular, I love the example of "Harriet Potter" from this article. Wouldn't Harry most likely have been universally loathed if he were a female protagonist? I really think there's a lot of truth in that. I'm reminded of our conversation on the same topic (Will_o and I), where I mentioned that I thought my take on Frances J. Worthington III would most likely be received very differently if he were female. We (female consumers of stories, more specifically) seem to have a much higher tolerance for bullshit from male characters. Being selffish, whiny, brooding, and/or shy (not to mention the other extreme of assertive, aka bitchy) take on a whole different flavour when the character is a female.
The Sims 2 is more limited when it comes to actual storylines for characters, given that it's an open-ended videogame where you're only given a backstory, but I think it does give us some good examples of strong female characters (depending on how you take them, since it places the gamer in the driver's seat). We are pretty lacking in a female equivalent of Don Lothario, though (there are female romance sims, but none that are linked to so many lovers, with a fiance and all), and I wonder if the term golddigger would even come up if Dina Caliente were male and Mortimer were female. Heheh - imagine that! (How do people relate to that gender-switched Plesantview you can download from MATY? The idea intrigues me, in that it really shouldn't make that much of a difference, should it? But it does.)
Personally, I'm just as interested in "weak" female characters, because the idea of all female characters having to be completely in control and kickass (but not too kickass) is very limiting and also unrealistic. By "strong", I mean well-developed and rounded, for better or worse. Like the author of the article, my own beef with the whole concept presented in the example of the female Harry Potter is that the dominant parameters for a strong female character are often very limiting. I want to see all kinds of female characters, especially weak and messy ones, shown in a sympathetic light. And maybe even as the main character, once in a while.
ETA: Same goes for female villains. I love a good ruthless female bad guy, but I guess that's sort of obvious by now.
Anyway, I thought it might be of interest to some of you. Feel free to discuss in the comments, if ya wanna.
will_o_whisper, since we've had many a deep, meaningful conversation on the topic (and the same goes for beyondheroism__ and smjoshsims), but I thought it might be of interest to a number of you that I can thing of offhand, and maybe even more. It's this article from the latest metafandom post, titled Ladies, Please (Carry On Being Awesome) by sarahtales. It's more discussion on the idea that we hold female characters up to a different standard than male characters. There's also a link to another article within that one about the Bechdel test, which includes lists of series/stories that pass it (even mentioning videogames such as FFVI, an old favourite of mine).In particular, I love the example of "Harriet Potter" from this article. Wouldn't Harry most likely have been universally loathed if he were a female protagonist? I really think there's a lot of truth in that. I'm reminded of our conversation on the same topic (Will_o and I), where I mentioned that I thought my take on Frances J. Worthington III would most likely be received very differently if he were female. We (female consumers of stories, more specifically) seem to have a much higher tolerance for bullshit from male characters. Being selffish, whiny, brooding, and/or shy (not to mention the other extreme of assertive, aka bitchy) take on a whole different flavour when the character is a female.
The Sims 2 is more limited when it comes to actual storylines for characters, given that it's an open-ended videogame where you're only given a backstory, but I think it does give us some good examples of strong female characters (depending on how you take them, since it places the gamer in the driver's seat). We are pretty lacking in a female equivalent of Don Lothario, though (there are female romance sims, but none that are linked to so many lovers, with a fiance and all), and I wonder if the term golddigger would even come up if Dina Caliente were male and Mortimer were female. Heheh - imagine that! (How do people relate to that gender-switched Plesantview you can download from MATY? The idea intrigues me, in that it really shouldn't make that much of a difference, should it? But it does.)
Personally, I'm just as interested in "weak" female characters, because the idea of all female characters having to be completely in control and kickass (but not too kickass) is very limiting and also unrealistic. By "strong", I mean well-developed and rounded, for better or worse. Like the author of the article, my own beef with the whole concept presented in the example of the female Harry Potter is that the dominant parameters for a strong female character are often very limiting. I want to see all kinds of female characters, especially weak and messy ones, shown in a sympathetic light. And maybe even as the main character, once in a while.
ETA: Same goes for female villains. I love a good ruthless female bad guy, but I guess that's sort of obvious by now.
Anyway, I thought it might be of interest to some of you. Feel free to discuss in the comments, if ya wanna.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-08-27 09:13 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-08-29 05:30 pm (UTC)I can readily admit that I get a bit (hah!) irrational when it comes to Y. Mostly over 355. I *hope* I'm not knee-jerking, but it did take me a week to figure out why the changed ending to Coraline bugged me so much.
Yes, women are human. Yes, this means we can be just as mean, stupid, racist, homophobic, insert character failure here as men can. Yes, the series takes place after a mass disaster which , if anything, is underplayed. Yes, everyone is scared and confused, with good reason.
I don't know if I'm being accurate when I say misogynist- I'm not terribly certain what it is that upsets me (aside from 355's treatment). I'm re-reading it, trying to figure it out. It's a bit odd/disconcerting how strong the male gaze is. Nothing really changed after the men died. There was never really the expected perspective shift- I don't mean a womyn-only utopia of bunnies and kittens. It's almost that, in the absence if men, the women became men. I don't know if it's just because it was written by a guy or what. Though Terry Moore and Mike Carey were able to create worlds with different kinds of women in different/evolving role with less head-desking for me. If I can figure out my problem with it more conclusively, I'll pm you.
no subject
Date: 2009-08-30 02:56 am (UTC)...although, mind you, the fact that virtually all the characters grew up being conditioned in the same way as people in our world means that there should logically be some sort of difference anyways. But maybe the writers depicted there being no change because it seemed less sexist than the alternative? I dunno.
*One sex may be somewhat more likely to be good at one thing or have a certain personality trait, but I don't think there's a strong enough trend for it to be much more than a statistic curiosity.