I almost feel like I should upload a new icon for this.
As a response to the flowchart that's been making the rounds, there is a meme that is simply posting all the icons you have uploaded of women/female characters. I kinda suspect this is half an excuse to show off icons, because we like that. This is me not objecting.
I've been thinking though, about how the flowchart could have been improved. Because I think the apparent intent (to highlight how fiction tends to stereotype female characters more than male characters, and how creators frequently give them less development) is sound, but the way it was done ended up pretty much reducing female characters to nothing but stereotypes, sometimes with no apparent logic. So, if I had the patience to do such a flowchart, this is what I would have done differently:
1. Don't include real people in a chart about fictional characters. No, seriously, I can't even understand why you would do that in the first place . Even if you think their public personality if fake and just for publicity, they still aren't fictional characters.
2. Don't just slap character images onto the chart with no explanation. Why is Azula being compared to Hitler? How is Usagi an adorable clutz? Why is Uhura useless?
3. Consider how many of the terms used are actual character types, and how many are terms that represent dismissive, often insulting attitudes towards both real and fictional women. I mean, Wet Blanket? Slut? Useless? Crazy Ex? Trophy? Prude? Shrew? Ditz? Yes, some of these can be used to describe peo regardless of gender, but they're most often use to insult and dismiss, usually instead of actual thought or consideration.
At this point, you basically have a chart of common character types, and the tropes and plotpoints that often result in the types, without actually reducing existing characters (or real women, because really...) to the stereotypes and unintentionally contributing to exactly what you're protesting. If you ally want to include examples:
4. Explain how you came to that conclusion, instead of just attaching faces to labels.
5. Better yet, give an example of what you mean, and a counter example of a character with similar traits who you don't think fits the stereotype, and why.
Alternatively, you could just check out annwyd's revised version.
Now for my icons.
It was very hard to not, like, subdivide by country and fandom. But there are books to read. Also, some people are including icons with both women and men, and some aren't, so I divided them.
Nonfandom icons of women:
Mostly actresses and fantasy/medieval stock imagery. A few are screencaps or bookcovers, but not used for the fandom connection, and only one is really something that jumps out as distinctive to its canon. (But Angels Make Vampires was just so...perfect to express annoyance with awful male leads!)
Icons of fictional portrayals of historical and few women of ancient mythology (no matter how much was made up for the version in question):
Fandom icons of women:
Fandom icons of women and men: