Did not do the reading?
Have seen, flickering past me in the sidebar on GoodReads - I assume these are promoted works - something that declares 'No more wimpy heroines!'
Hellooooo? Quite apart from this being late to the party as far as the notion of the Strong Woman Character goes, I think a case can be made that there is a long tradition of heroines who do not conform to the model of appropriately feminine behaviour of the context (even if they get policed for it and tamed), are quirky, and even (I suspect that this is far more a thing than wimpy) faux-feisty (spirited filly seeks rider...).
When I think of wimpy heroines I think of ---- hmmm. Mrs de Winter II?
I so do not count under that heading Fanny Price in Mansfield Park or Violet in Yonge's Heartsease, who are both quiet, physically timorous, suffering from ill-health and also labouring under social disadvantage (Violet is suspected by certain of her in-laws of having deviously married up from her not-quite background) but still manifest moral courage and grace under pressure.
I am pretty sure that I have heretofore bemoaned the fact that Strong Woman Character means ass-kicking leatherclad ninja in too many minds.
And, as Hadley makes the point today: And let’s talk a little more about expenditure. Because no doubt it’s because my ladybrain is soft and can only cope with things like leather trousers, but I don’t understand the snottiness around money and clothes. Would it have been more acceptable if May had spent that money on home improvements? On a holiday? On taking friends to the opera? Because it’s extremely easy to spend that on any of those things, and I don’t see any of them as more beneficial to the greater good than May’s trousers, or Morgan’s handbag, for that matter. Yet because fashion is seen as frivolous, because it is associated with women, we end up with the situation we have right now, with women forced to apologise for spending their own money on themselves.
I think it altogether likely that did she dress exclusively in Marks and Spencer, she would get flak for it, because, as has oft been pointed out, women in power (or just visibility) cannot get it right in matters of dress.
Also, I think relevant, this interview with screenwriter Sarah Phelps and getting away from the cosy image of Dame Agatha when adapting her for the screen. I'm also very taken with her insight into Dickens' marrying of goodness with simplicity amounting to stupidity.
Another stereotype I should like to see die: okay, let's do away with menstrual shame and stigma, and I will concede that the article does mentions 1970s menstrual art, but what's with all the Wise-Woundy-woo-woo and the assumption that basically The Whole of History is just one thing that ended, I don't know, yesterday? and that there were no significant differences by period or culture within that. I think that many women would rather have effective analgesia than a deep sense of connection with the cycles of nature. This entry was originally posted at http://oursin.dreamwidth.org/2539821.html. Please comment there using OpenID. View
comments.