Strong Female Characters

[flyingskull]

The short version: When Angua was all chirpy and happy for Cheery because female dwarfs can do everything that the male dwarfs do, Cheery replied: "Yes, PROVIDED we ONLY do what the males do."

That's what I don't like in a lot of so-called strong female characters: they only do what the males do and the authors seem to forget they're, primarily, NOT males. Granted we're two genders of the same animal; granted, the similarities are more than the differences; but there are some differences and I think that to ignore them is the apex of bad writing. Well, maybe not that, but any author who writes males with boobs who are not transsexual or transgendered and calls them 'female' offends me.

I mean, it's not as if there's a dearth of strong female characters in literature that are primarily female with all the natural - I KNOW! Wrong word, perhaps, imprecise word at best. Not really important methinks, please bear with me - differences in mental/emotional processes, not to mention the differences generated by the cultural demands of society regarding gender roles.

Look at Sophie Hatter. She's strong, she's as badass - and it's so typical of male gender stereotyping that strong = badass a lot - as they come, she's the protagonist and hero of the story, she saves everyone... AND she's so female she uses housekeeping as a weapon of mass destruction; she's so female her magic is literally life-giving; she takes passive-aggressiveness to new heights and she makes wonderful lovely magic hats.

Look at Ayaka. She is the epitome of demure young womanhood and she steamrolls over everybody's life until they're living it the way she thinks it's best for them. She has a backbone of solid titanium - adamantium, even - that one. She takes ultra-polite badassness to and over the top.

And, of course, of course look at Granny, Nanny and Magrat. Look at Agnes. Look at Sybil. And look at how I could go on and on and on naming fucking STRONG female characters who are primarily female and do a lot of things that males do, but not all because they're not really interested in doing ALL the things that males do.

Mind you, some times the line dividing a well written truly strong FEMALE character and a sort of travesty of femaleness is really really thin. I admit I go by intuition while reading. It depends of what kind of subtext and implied bias I perceive in the text and I'm sure it's a very personal reaction, but I strongly feel there are lines that have not to be crossed.

Got that off me chest. *PUFF* Next, I think, villains. I love villains, there can be no hero without a suitable villain. I hate and loathe and despise badly written villains. I'd rather have a not so well written hero (of both sexes) than an uninteresting villain (of both sexes). Villain, how I love thee! :-D

Comments

[baeraad.livejournal.com]

Ahhh... our old discussion... =]

I do understand what you mean with a properly feminine character. But I don't see what it is you think is inherently female, in the sense that every female character must have it and every male character must not have it. As best as I can determine, these things work as a scale - typically male/female behaviour is typically male/female because in any given group, you will find more men/women behaving like that than you will women/men. Having a few organs of a different shape doesn't really hardwire you to act in a certain way, though the different hormone balance that comes with it might encourage you to do so - so what does it matter if some female characters are taciturn or aggressive or whatever it is you feel they ought not be? For just about any stereotypical male trait, there is some woman out there who has it in spades. Why limit yourself to stereotypes when that makes things less realistic instead of more?

It's even one of the few things I don't like with Pratchett, actually - he has a tendency to do gender stereotyping. It's not as bad as all that, because his characters are individuals first and foremost (and sometimes he even subverts it, like with Adora Belle Dearheart puzzling over why only men seem to become so wrapped up in a single interest that they lose all ability to deal with life outside of it - and Moist very wisely not pointing out the irony to her), but it's there. Especially in the whole wizard/witch divide - what, no women are suited to be air-headed intellectuals, no men are practical and down to earth?

In essence, I can understand you wanting heroines who are strong and feminine at the same time. Sure, I'm all for that. And certainly I can understand you wanting a reasonable proportion of girly-girls to tomboys, and feeling that the latter are overrepresented - it is probably true that they are.

What I don't understand is why you seem to consider every female character who isn't all caring-sharing to be an abomination that needs to be killed by fire. There is room for some of those, surely? Especially if we throw in some long-haired girly-men for balance? ;)

(also, I'm not clear on how my comment on Quality of Mercy prompted this one?)