I have talked, in other forums for Internet ranting, about how tired I am of people complaining. They complain about injustice, either due to gender or skin color or nationality or breakfast cereal preference. People will find a prejudice anywhere. I'm not saying, of course, that these injustices aren't taking place. I'm just saying that complaining about them doesn't actually accomplish anything beyond giving me a headache and mean case of the go-fuck-yourself's. Here, I want to talk about some of these things in entertainment (specifically in fiction, but I think it applies elsehwere).
Have you ever read a review about a book, or movie, or game, or anything where the words "strong female character" appeared? Or the even more damning "weak female character"? In my experience these things (the reviews, not the actual work in question) are written by someone trying to appeal to a liberal crowd that values equality and all of the enlightened ideals that come with being somewhat left-leaning politically and somewhat educated. You know, liberal arts students and feminists. That crowd.
My problem, I suppose, is that if these people are really in favor of equality, if they really have such a strong desire to see fairness in everything, then why are they using the gender definition? Real-life women aren't supposed to be defined by their gender, right? It's who they are as people that interests us. So why are fictional women any different? And why are fictional women who take a more submissive role, or a background one, considered weak? Maybe they aren't as assertive, maybe their circumstances aren't sufficiently explained, or maybe they don't have bombastic personalities, but why are they weak? And why define them as being weak, coupled with being women? You wouldn't define a male character with an assertive personality as a "strong male character". You'd call him assertive. Or dominant. Or commanding. Or a douchebag. You'd call a male character with no backbone a coward. Or a victim. Or uninteresting. Women can be uninteresting. Women can be douchebags.
The point is, by using a gender identifier, and demanding that every female character be at once assertive, and beautiful (but not so beautiful one could identify her beauty as an object of sexual attraction) and self-aware, you're both limiting the creative uses of characters that happen to be female, and creating a prejudice of your own.
There are other, equally idiotic, racial, social, and sexual cliches that drive me nuts, but right now the gender issue is first in my mind. Of the four primary characters in my novel Skyborn, one is a woman. In fact, she's very likely my favorite. But I don't want her to be a strong female character, or a spineless female character. I just want her to be seen for what she is in my mind. She's a woman, sure, but she's assertive and tough, she's sensual and funny, she's beautiful, occasionally cold, she's blunt when the situation calls for it. She's a warrior of the highest caliber, but her gender doesn't matter to the other men and women in her clan, or her family, or her chosen profession. As long as she's good at what she does. But being a warrior doesn't make her less feminine. Being feminine doesn't make her less of a warrior. She has weak moments, and moments of triumph. She has scenes where she weeps for her greif, and scenes where she kicks tremendous ass. She's a character that, sure, happens to be female.
The reason these prejudices exist, is because we allow ourselves to perpetuate them. Stop writing one-dimensional characters. The Damsel in Distress is an archetype, but there are innumerable ways to expand upon it and create a character with real depth that is, maybe, a woman, and might be in danger. Lots of women end up in dangerous situations. Chances are they didn't end up there because they're women. What are the circumstances that led to it? And chances are good they don't need rescuing because they're women. So why can't they get out on their own? Princess Leia didn't need help escaping from the Death Star because she had a vagina. She needed help because it was a massive military installation with a prison deep inside and it was called the fucking Death Star. Likewise, she didn't get captured because of her fantastic figure (although her later capture in Return of the Jedi damn sure showed us that she had one worth chaining up, but Jabba's a giant space dong so you can't really fault him for that one. Even the gross aliens were dressed like sluts), she was captured under suspicion of being a rebel sympathizer holding the plans to their massive military installation.
Holy shit, George Lucas wrote a "strong female character" and didn't portray her as "strong female character". The guy who was so bad at dialogue Sir Alec Guiness decided Obi-Wan had to die. He treated her as any other character (at least, in that film) and you educated fucks can't figure it out?
My point is that women, or black people, or homosexuals, can and should be identified, not by what separates them from heterosexual, white men, but by the characteristics that make them individuals. If your "strong female character" is kind of an asshole, then make sure you're painting her as an asshole that happens to be a woman. If your gay dwarf is sneaky and manipulative, make sure to show that he's a snake that only happens to like trouser snakes. Being gay or female or white or black is only one facet of who you are as a person. Fictional characters are no different. Strong female character is a template. The rest is up to your imagination. But if all the reviewers and the audience come away with is that your work contains strong female characters, either the character was without depth, or the audience needs a fucking slap in the scrotum. Or uterus, if they don't have scrotums.
I hope, by now, you're sick of seeing "strong female character". I could have done it with anything, really. "Strong black character" or "weak Australian character" or whatever. Any reason to come up with a prejudice would have been sufficient, but the gender issue really digs at me because I've known (and frequently loathed) so many misogynists and femi-nazis (I term I use for the type of feminist that thinks men are the root of all evil, rather than just kind of stupid and insensitive). I see no reason for this sort of gender bias, in real life or in fiction. There's nothing wrong with being proud of the type of person you are or the type of characters you create. Just don't let the things that make you (or them) different from other people become the things you take pride in.
Thought I was going to leave out pride, didn't you? Come at me Jane Austen fans.
Lasciviously Yours,
-S.R.
