Double standards regarding female heroesboot_the_grimeJanuary 5 2011, 00:59:03 UTC
I loved your post, particularly the points about the double standards regarding female characters. I hope you don't mind if I copy paste my answer from Buffyforums.
This is something that I could call "protagonist burden" or "hero burden"... and even more precisely, "female protagonist burden" or "female hero burden". Notice that people tend to be much harsher to female characters and hold them to a much higher standard than men? Flawed heroines are rarer in fiction, and tend to elicit much more controversy and love/hate reactions. Male characters that are flawed and morally ambiguous will usually get almost universally embraced for being 'so cool', while female characters will get a lot more bashing and character-hate for the same things. See, for instance, Battlestar Galactica fandom reactions to Kara Thrace or Laura Roslin and Saul Tigh.
I recently read a discussion on a SciFi/F forum I regularly post on, about which series is better, BtVs or AtS; what I found interesting is the number of people arguing that AtS is a better show because it's "darker, edgier and more mature" while simultaneously complaining about the late seasons of BtVS and how much they were 'disgusted' by the darker, edgier and more mature story lines and characterizations in that show... And one particularly common complaint is that characters became 'unlikable' and that Buffy became 'bitchy', 'dour', unlikable, and not 'fun' anymore (combined with a lot of moralistic outrage about her 'disgusting' relationship with Spike; one quote: "Buffy lost all credibility as a heroine when she started sleeping with monsters"). It struck me that the "edginess" in AtS is the kind that people on that forum find 'cool' and can pat themselves on the back for liking something edgy and dark (i.e. a noir setting and morally ambiguous male heroes using violence to fight evil), while the darkness and edginess on BtVS is of the kind that makes them very uncomfortable - because, hey, it's so cool whenever Angel goes dark and morally ambiguous, and everyone loves Wesley once he starts going 'dark', but on the other hand, Buffy is supposed to be a perfect heroine who saves the world and kicks ass while having perfect hair and being chipper all the time and also being the perfect girlfriend, friend and sister, and it's so shocking and disappointing when, after all the horrible things that she's been through and all the responsibility, pain and loss, she's not the funny and bubbly teenage heroine of season 1! (Or, for that matter, that Willow doesn't remain an incredibly sweet cute little nerdy thing, but turns out to have a dangerous and dark side to her.)
"Bargaining" made a great ironic comment on that with Buffybot: here it is, that's the 'perfect' Buffy, one who can fulfill every one of these roles and be everything everyone wants her to be, and remain chipper and pleasant. Of course, she is not a woman, she's not human, she is a robot.
It struck me that the "edginess" in AtS is the kind that people on that forum find 'cool' and can pat themselves on the back for liking something edgy and dark (i.e. a noir setting and morally ambiguous male heroes using violence to fight evil), while the darkness and edginess on BtVS is of the kind that makes them very uncomfortable - because, hey, it's so cool whenever Angel goes dark and morally ambiguous, and everyone loves Wesley once he starts going 'dark', but on the other hand, Buffy is supposed to be a perfect heroine who saves the world and kicks ass while having perfect hair and being chipper all the time and also being the perfect girlfriend, friend and sister
I know - it's maddening. And it reminds me, as a "for instance" of the controversy that arose from the movie Thelma and Louise - which is simplistic and sophistic on some levels but I nonetheless love, esp for the performances and hits one of my sweet spots, hard - and how it was shocking that these women were being violent, in very specific situations, how they were being "bad", when men are expected to be "bad". Movies are full of violence perpetrated by men - Rambo, for instance - of bad boys, anti-heros, cool villains, etc. Boys will be boys, but girls have to be good.
Part of that of course is that male writers, critics, fans etc still dominate a lot of the dialogue. I've seen on the internet, over and over, men shout a woman down on her own website for having opinions about movies, characters etc they love, for calling out abusive or misogyny etc. These woman are told over and over that they're wrong, they're hysterical, etc. (I've been shouted down on FB by people half my age - friends of friends) for calling out unreasonable standards and exaggerated physical sex characteristics in comics and art in general, on the double standards for male and female characters. Silly me, I should have kept my mouth shut. I can't possibly know what I'm talking about despite decades of knowledge and experience.)
Thanks for your replies and for reminding me of this old discussion! Sadly, I've lost some of the zest for the Buffy discussions these days, since the comics have been so lackluster, especially when it comes to Buffy's title, since the current writers really don't know how to write her, so they're making her bland and passive. :(
What we said about Buffy here can be applied to pretty much any fandom with a female protagonist. I'm seeing the exact same things in The Hunger Games fandom - only on a much bigger scale and on more absurd levels - probably because it's more popular and mainstream-present than Buffy, especially after the movie has come out.
I wrote about it a couple of months ago in a bit LJ rant which I think you've read. As a rule, if male heroes are flawed, they are cool and edgy; if men are aggressive, they're being real men, if they're abrasive, they have a wonderful roguish charm; but if a female hero has actual flaws and issues, she's is constantly bashed and called everything from a bitch, when she's not sweet and 100% forgiving of everything (including things like attempts on her life), to "whiny" (the most ridiculous and annoying of complaints, which you will always see about female protagonists), when she dares to be vulnerable and affected by absolutely horrible things happening to her, which may include risking her life, (almost) dying multiple times, destruction of her home, deaths/kidnapping./torture of loved ones... while men in the same situation would be lauded for their noble manpain. The standards required of a female hero are truly ridiculous.
Sadly, I've lost some of the zest for the Buffy discussions these days, since the comics have been so lackluster, especially when it comes to Buffy's title, since the current writers really don't know how to write her, so they're making her bland and passive. :(
This is something that I could call "protagonist burden" or "hero burden"... and even more precisely, "female protagonist burden" or "female hero burden". Notice that people tend to be much harsher to female characters and hold them to a much higher standard than men? Flawed heroines are rarer in fiction, and tend to elicit much more controversy and love/hate reactions. Male characters that are flawed and morally ambiguous will usually get almost universally embraced for being 'so cool', while female characters will get a lot more bashing and character-hate for the same things. See, for instance, Battlestar Galactica fandom reactions to Kara Thrace or Laura Roslin and Saul Tigh.
I recently read a discussion on a SciFi/F forum I regularly post on, about which series is better, BtVs or AtS; what I found interesting is the number of people arguing that AtS is a better show because it's "darker, edgier and more mature" while simultaneously complaining about the late seasons of BtVS and how much they were 'disgusted' by the darker, edgier and more mature story lines and characterizations in that show... And one particularly common complaint is that characters became 'unlikable' and that Buffy became 'bitchy', 'dour', unlikable, and not 'fun' anymore (combined with a lot of moralistic outrage about her 'disgusting' relationship with Spike; one quote: "Buffy lost all credibility as a heroine when she started sleeping with monsters"). It struck me that the "edginess" in AtS is the kind that people on that forum find 'cool' and can pat themselves on the back for liking something edgy and dark (i.e. a noir setting and morally ambiguous male heroes using violence to fight evil), while the darkness and edginess on BtVS is of the kind that makes them very uncomfortable - because, hey, it's so cool whenever Angel goes dark and morally ambiguous, and everyone loves Wesley once he starts going 'dark', but on the other hand, Buffy is supposed to be a perfect heroine who saves the world and kicks ass while having perfect hair and being chipper all the time and also being the perfect girlfriend, friend and sister, and it's so shocking and disappointing when, after all the horrible things that she's been through and all the responsibility, pain and loss, she's not the funny and bubbly teenage heroine of season 1! (Or, for that matter, that Willow doesn't remain an incredibly sweet cute little nerdy thing, but turns out to have a dangerous and dark side to her.)
"Bargaining" made a great ironic comment on that with Buffybot: here it is, that's the 'perfect' Buffy, one who can fulfill every one of these roles and be everything everyone wants her to be, and remain chipper and pleasant. Of course, she is not a woman, she's not human, she is a robot.
Reply
Reply
Also:
"Buffy lost all credibility as a heroine when she started sleeping with monsters"
Didn't that start in Surprise? With Angel? Talk about double standards.
she's not the funny and bubbly teenage heroine of season 1!
Yes. I feel almost like people expect her not to mature, which strikes me as missing the point in a big way.
Reply
That was exactly my answer to that comment (which you'll get to see coming from the moralistic early seasons fans a lot).
But then I usually get a reply that it's not the same thing, because Angel had a soul, so he wasn't the same guy, etc.
Reply
I know - it's maddening. And it reminds me, as a "for instance" of the controversy that arose from the movie Thelma and Louise - which is simplistic and sophistic on some levels but I nonetheless love, esp for the performances and hits one of my sweet spots, hard - and how it was shocking that these women were being violent, in very specific situations, how they were being "bad", when men are expected to be "bad". Movies are full of violence perpetrated by men - Rambo, for instance - of bad boys, anti-heros, cool villains, etc. Boys will be boys, but girls have to be good.
Part of that of course is that male writers, critics, fans etc still dominate a lot of the dialogue. I've seen on the internet, over and over, men shout a woman down on her own website for having opinions about movies, characters etc they love, for calling out abusive or misogyny etc. These woman are told over and over that they're wrong, they're hysterical, etc. (I've been shouted down on FB by people half my age - friends of friends) for calling out unreasonable standards and exaggerated physical sex characteristics in comics and art in general, on the double standards for male and female characters. Silly me, I should have kept my mouth shut. I can't possibly know what I'm talking about despite decades of knowledge and experience.)
Reply
What we said about Buffy here can be applied to pretty much any fandom with a female protagonist. I'm seeing the exact same things in The Hunger Games fandom - only on a much bigger scale and on more absurd levels - probably because it's more popular and mainstream-present than Buffy, especially after the movie has come out.
I wrote about it a couple of months ago in a bit LJ rant which I think you've read. As a rule, if male heroes are flawed, they are cool and edgy; if men are aggressive, they're being real men, if they're abrasive, they have a wonderful roguish charm; but if a female hero has actual flaws and issues, she's is constantly bashed and called everything from a bitch, when she's not sweet and 100% forgiving of everything (including things like attempts on her life), to "whiny" (the most ridiculous and annoying of complaints, which you will always see about female protagonists), when she dares to be vulnerable and affected by absolutely horrible things happening to her, which may include risking her life, (almost) dying multiple times, destruction of her home, deaths/kidnapping./torture of loved ones... while men in the same situation would be lauded for their noble manpain. The standards required of a female hero are truly ridiculous.
Reply
I share your feelings on this. Woe is us.
Reply
Leave a comment