multifaceted female characters in fandom
eta: It would probably help if I could spell "multifaceted"! *FACEPALM OF DOOM*
In a discussion of the hackneyed line "there aren't any well-written female characters in canon" as an excuse for why people ignore, deride, and bitch about female characters in fandom, I had an interesting conversation with dknightshade about the inability of fans to get the idea of multifaceted women into their heads. (The whole post is found here.)
I'm beginning to think that the problem is only half with the writers of shows - the other half is fans' reluctance to attribute anything more than a single ability or aspect to a female character.
So I'll start with this question for the Atlantis fans: How many times have you heard from your f-list or yourself thought that Teyla's "just" the tits and ass of the Stargate Atlantis outfit?
The fact that Teyla has a kind of telepathy based on her Wraith DNA that has saved the members of the expedition more than once (Siege III and Submersion immediately spring to mind), or that she picked up the use of Earth weaponry (and Wraith and Genii) in less than three months and seems sufficiently proficient in it that none of the military men around give her a second glance when she's wielding it, or that Ronon defers to her authority while challenging almost everyone else's, or that it took her all of ten seconds to make an assessment of Rodney's work on the "Shadows" machine in Phantoms and tell crazy-visions!Sheppard to "pull that plug now!" doesn't seem to register on these peoples' radars.
No, the only thing that matters is that her clothing shows her belly button (omg! my eyes! a belly button!) and the curves of her breasts (dear god, what are those things? dirtypillows! cover them up!).
Hyperbole? Maybe a little - but not all that much from the attitudes I've seen around fandom.
Have you ever noticed that the definition of women on TV starts with their clothing? Moreso than male characters, a woman's clothing defines her. So if female characters dress "like men" then they may have a claim to being worthwhile characters - Sam Carter, Elizabeth Weir, and most of the female complement of Atlantis fit into this category. But Teyla Emmagan and Vala Mal Doran? If Teyla dresses skimpily (and there are some interesting thoughts on Teyla's clothing in friendshipper's LJ), then fans are far more inclined to dismiss her as mere eye-candy for the masses and without any other purpose or function within the show.
Female characters who aren't "dressed appropriate to western standards of modesty" start off hampered by the assumption that they're eyecandy (and in the world of television pretty, they may be - but no more than Cameron Mitchell, John Sheppard or Ronon Dex) and are summarily dismissed by most fans thereof. Anything they try to do is thereafter ignored or offensive to said fans.
The perception of one-dimensionality in female Stargate characters doesn't stop with Teyla, and isn't limited to appearance. Does anyone remember the kerfuffle when Sam showed an emotional preference for Jack O'Neill in Stargate? "Outrage! Offense! It makes her weak/pitiful/stupid/useless/[insert derogatary term here]!" Part of that was related to fan identification and shipping wars, but bringing Sam out of the box of merely "the soldier providing the technical solution" caused conniptions in fandom.
The idea of Sam as a soldier/scientist and a woman blew fandom's brains. The idea of Teyla as a primitive alien who is yet capable and trusted enough to be left in charge of the city has received similar dismissal. And I recall (somewhat vaguely - it was back in S1) this conversation with a group of people who believed Elizabeth was a pacifist because she'd been a negotiator/diplomatic figure on Earth.
A strong woman cannot love a man without appearing weak; just the same way an alien from a primitive culture cannot learn to use computers; or a negotiator would never use a gun as a weapon of last resort (or first resort). Fandom has quite a bit of trouble assigning more than one characteristic to women.
We seem to carry the madonna/whore dichotomy into our perception of feminine ability. Female characters must be either this or that, they cannot be both.
A woman cannot be good and flawed. She cannot be emotionally strong and show weakness. She cannot show skin and be intelligent.
John Sheppard may be a military man with a geekish side, but Teyla cannot be both a woman from a primitive culture and capable of running the city in the two weeks of Elizabeth's absence.
And it works with flaws and weaknesses as well: Rodney can be a brilliant astrophysicist and an arrogant ass when he blows up five-sixths of a solar system, but Elizabeth can't be a steel-balled power-monger in her head-games with the IOC and still be an idiot when she walks into a room with Buggy!Shep and closes the door behind her after being warned twice!
Why do we do this to female characters - boil them down to a single feature or a single aspect, as though every woman who ever lived was a cardboard cutout? Why must we pick one female character, give her all the graces of the universe and then make every other woman inferior to her? (Mary Sue-ism - whether Mary-Suing a canon character, or creating our own self-insert Mary Sue.)
Is there any way to persuade fans to stop it?
I applaud gehayi and the people participating in the femgenficathon, as well as the people running comms like samcarter_gen, and encourage fans to get involved there (although the femgenficathon is about to conclude for 2007) - they're great places to start.
Anyone got any other thoughts on how to work at developing a greater acceptance of multifaceted women in fanon?
In a discussion of the hackneyed line "there aren't any well-written female characters in canon" as an excuse for why people ignore, deride, and bitch about female characters in fandom, I had an interesting conversation with dknightshade about the inability of fans to get the idea of multifaceted women into their heads. (The whole post is found here.)
I'm beginning to think that the problem is only half with the writers of shows - the other half is fans' reluctance to attribute anything more than a single ability or aspect to a female character.
So I'll start with this question for the Atlantis fans: How many times have you heard from your f-list or yourself thought that Teyla's "just" the tits and ass of the Stargate Atlantis outfit?
The fact that Teyla has a kind of telepathy based on her Wraith DNA that has saved the members of the expedition more than once (Siege III and Submersion immediately spring to mind), or that she picked up the use of Earth weaponry (and Wraith and Genii) in less than three months and seems sufficiently proficient in it that none of the military men around give her a second glance when she's wielding it, or that Ronon defers to her authority while challenging almost everyone else's, or that it took her all of ten seconds to make an assessment of Rodney's work on the "Shadows" machine in Phantoms and tell crazy-visions!Sheppard to "pull that plug now!" doesn't seem to register on these peoples' radars.
No, the only thing that matters is that her clothing shows her belly button (omg! my eyes! a belly button!) and the curves of her breasts (dear god, what are those things? dirtypillows! cover them up!).
Hyperbole? Maybe a little - but not all that much from the attitudes I've seen around fandom.
Have you ever noticed that the definition of women on TV starts with their clothing? Moreso than male characters, a woman's clothing defines her. So if female characters dress "like men" then they may have a claim to being worthwhile characters - Sam Carter, Elizabeth Weir, and most of the female complement of Atlantis fit into this category. But Teyla Emmagan and Vala Mal Doran? If Teyla dresses skimpily (and there are some interesting thoughts on Teyla's clothing in friendshipper's LJ), then fans are far more inclined to dismiss her as mere eye-candy for the masses and without any other purpose or function within the show.
Female characters who aren't "dressed appropriate to western standards of modesty" start off hampered by the assumption that they're eyecandy (and in the world of television pretty, they may be - but no more than Cameron Mitchell, John Sheppard or Ronon Dex) and are summarily dismissed by most fans thereof. Anything they try to do is thereafter ignored or offensive to said fans.
The perception of one-dimensionality in female Stargate characters doesn't stop with Teyla, and isn't limited to appearance. Does anyone remember the kerfuffle when Sam showed an emotional preference for Jack O'Neill in Stargate? "Outrage! Offense! It makes her weak/pitiful/stupid/useless/[insert derogatary term here]!" Part of that was related to fan identification and shipping wars, but bringing Sam out of the box of merely "the soldier providing the technical solution" caused conniptions in fandom.
The idea of Sam as a soldier/scientist and a woman blew fandom's brains. The idea of Teyla as a primitive alien who is yet capable and trusted enough to be left in charge of the city has received similar dismissal. And I recall (somewhat vaguely - it was back in S1) this conversation with a group of people who believed Elizabeth was a pacifist because she'd been a negotiator/diplomatic figure on Earth.
A strong woman cannot love a man without appearing weak; just the same way an alien from a primitive culture cannot learn to use computers; or a negotiator would never use a gun as a weapon of last resort (or first resort). Fandom has quite a bit of trouble assigning more than one characteristic to women.
We seem to carry the madonna/whore dichotomy into our perception of feminine ability. Female characters must be either this or that, they cannot be both.
A woman cannot be good and flawed. She cannot be emotionally strong and show weakness. She cannot show skin and be intelligent.
John Sheppard may be a military man with a geekish side, but Teyla cannot be both a woman from a primitive culture and capable of running the city in the two weeks of Elizabeth's absence.
And it works with flaws and weaknesses as well: Rodney can be a brilliant astrophysicist and an arrogant ass when he blows up five-sixths of a solar system, but Elizabeth can't be a steel-balled power-monger in her head-games with the IOC and still be an idiot when she walks into a room with Buggy!Shep and closes the door behind her after being warned twice!
Why do we do this to female characters - boil them down to a single feature or a single aspect, as though every woman who ever lived was a cardboard cutout? Why must we pick one female character, give her all the graces of the universe and then make every other woman inferior to her? (Mary Sue-ism - whether Mary-Suing a canon character, or creating our own self-insert Mary Sue.)
Is there any way to persuade fans to stop it?
I applaud gehayi and the people participating in the femgenficathon, as well as the people running comms like samcarter_gen, and encourage fans to get involved there (although the femgenficathon is about to conclude for 2007) - they're great places to start.
Anyone got any other thoughts on how to work at developing a greater acceptance of multifaceted women in fanon?