Strong Female Characters

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dreity

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 9, 2011
Messages
1,031
Reaction score
180
Location
Upstate NY
That's kind of the problem we're all having with the word "strong", though. Assertiveness isn't what determines whether or not a person is strong, and since women are people, that means that a woman does not have to be assertive to be of strong character.
 

BunnyMaz

Ruining your porn since 1984
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
2,295
Reaction score
412
Age
40
Male and female aren't distinct categories with hard lines drawn around them, however much we tend to act as though they are. There is not such thing as "no female character would x" or "no male character would y".

In a given society, female characters might be socialised in a way that encourages nurturing and discourages competition and violence, but even within that culture you'll see a wide spectrum of behaviours, with some people being perfect examples of that cultures ideal female, some being polar opposites and most being somewhere in between.

I may not be as physically strong as most men I know, but I have a higher pain tolerance than many and am generally more willing to act as a meat shield for others, because I can take the hits. I'm also pretty good at using my low, wide body and my weight to my advantage. Maybe I can't knock a dude out with one punch, but I can barrel into him and knock him to the floor.

Hell, we have female military officers entering mixed-gender MMA cage fights and holding their own, and even in Ye Olde Sexist Past, we have women like Julie D'Aubigny.

All human traits lie on bell curves. Women might be more inclined towards one side of the curve than men, but that doesn't mean any individual woman will always be, for example, physically weaker than any individual man, or short, or more nurturing, or less capable of solving 3D puzzles in her head or whatever.
 

Kittens Starburst

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 6, 2013
Messages
117
Reaction score
11
Location
Scotland
That's kind of the problem we're all having with the word "strong", though. Assertiveness isn't what determines whether or not a person is strong, and since women are people, that means that a woman does not have to be assertive to be of strong character.

Exactly. A person can be shy and not forthcoming but strong in an endless number of ways, such as if they are faced with a terrible situation, like an illness or bereavement, and they face it with dignity and courage. Then again, someone can lack dignity or courage, yet in their own way still be strong.

I think we're far too quick to judge people, especially women. 'Strong' is subjective.

A strong character, for me, isn't someone I make an approving moral or value judgement on, just simply a character with a gripping three-dimensional personality.
 

kuwisdelu

Revolutionize the World
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
38,197
Reaction score
4,544
Location
The End of the World
Love how this thread always keeps slipping back into "strength = masculine traits".

Sigh.
 

onesecondglance

pretending to be awake
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
5,359
Reaction score
1,661
Location
Berkshire, UK
Website
soundcloud.com
That's kind of the problem we're all having with the word "strong", though. Assertiveness isn't what determines whether or not a person is strong, and since women are people, that means that a woman does not have to be assertive to be of strong character.

You said what I was trying to say a lot better. :)
 

ArachnePhobia

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
1,070
Reaction score
214
I believe the purpose of the Bechdel test is not to identify strong women, but to identify strong characters that are female. If the only women in your story spend all their conversations chatting about the male protagonist, they are not strong characters. Alien and Terminator fail this test because Ripley and Sarah Connor are pretty shallow, one-dimensional characters even though they are strong women.

I'm almost afraid to wade into this again, but this is where my confusion is coming from.

I read the comic back in college, and I really enjoyed it. But I'm beginning to think I misinterpreted it, because what I got out of it is this: fiction, and specifically in this case movies, have been artificially constructed to revolve around men. This construction is so rigid that authors are constructing stories to revolve around men even when no men are present, and they're doing it by showing female characters wondering where the men are, obsessing over what the men are doing, and defining themselves by their relationships to the men.

However, if a movie (or book, or whatever) passes the Bechdel test, it doesn't necessarily mean the female characters involved in the conversation aren't horrible stereotypical cardboard cutouts. It doesn't necessarily mean their dialogue is poignant or well-written. What it does mean, however, is that there is at least one scene in the story that does not rely on the presence of a man, explicit or implied, to function. There is at least a part of the fictional world that wouldn't collapse on itself if all the male characters were removed.

In other words, I thought the Bechdel Test was about the narrative, not the characters.

I'm beginning to think I've been doin' it rong this whole time.
 

bearilou

DenturePunk writer
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 5, 2009
Messages
6,004
Reaction score
1,233
Location
yawping barbarically over the roofs of the world
I'm almost afraid to wade into this again, but this is where my confusion is coming from.

I read the comic back in college, and I really enjoyed it. But I'm beginning to think I misinterpreted it, because what I got out of it is this: fiction, and specifically in this case movies, have been artificially constructed to revolve around men. This construction is so rigid that authors are constructing stories to revolve around men even when no men are present, and they're doing it by showing female characters wondering where the men are, obsessing over what the men are doing, and defining themselves by their relationships to the men.

However, if a movie (or book, or whatever) passes the Bechdel test, it doesn't necessarily mean the female characters involved in the conversation aren't horrible stereotypical cardboard cutouts. It doesn't necessarily mean their dialogue is poignant or well-written. What it does mean, however, is that there is at least one scene in the story that does not rely on the presence of a man, explicit or implied, to function. There is at least a part of the fictional world that wouldn't collapse on itself if all the male characters were removed.

In other words, I thought the Bechdel Test was about the narrative, not the characters.

I'm beginning to think I've been doin' it rong this whole time.

The reason I haven't waded in yet is because I was thinking the same thing and figured I was doing it wrong, too.
 

Bookewyrme

Imagined half of it.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
4,859
Reaction score
408
Location
Home Sweet Home
Website
bookewyrme.straydreamers.com
That said, I can't dismiss the social boundaries. A woman growing up in today's Western society provbably won't consider handling rocket launchers part of her womanly ways. Also, carreers are still inhibited by gender expectations and demand either a deviation from the female gender role or a different way of approaching them. But that doesn't mean it won't happen.

We can't ignore sex and gender. As far as we've come in the 21st century, and as far as we may go in the future, sex and gender will always be there. Ignoring gender/sex won't due us any favors. My personality--my basic make-up--would be the same, but I'd be a different person if I were male.

It's especially hard to do this if you aren't writing in the modern day, because gender/sex was a major issue in, say, the mid 19th century. That's the setting of my current WIP. Talk about repressive! I have a love-hate relationship with the Victorians. Let's just say that ancien regime French were much more liberal about gender roles and sex (to state it mildly).
The above is absolutely true...for Contemporary and Historical genres of narrative.

But the problem is, so many people seem to assume it must therefore be a natural law or something, and therefore any narrative which flouts this "natural law" even one taking place in an entirely fictional society, is therefore unrealistic. I'm thinking here of SF/F where there are whole societies, unrelated in any way to modern or historical societies, which the author made up. And yet the author still uses the same inter-personal social cues of our Earth societies.

The actual physical, biological differences between men and women are very very small. The variations and differences between individuals (discounting culture) are actually much greater.
I heard about this story (about the fMRI Salmon) a week or so ago, and it's been making me think. We know so very little about the way the human brain works (objectively), and a lot of what we think we know is misinformation based on inadequate technology and cultural bias. This is particularly true when making statements about "male" vs "female" mental traits. (I wish I could find the original article I read, which was a critique of the "male brain vs female brain" thing based on this study).
 

LeslieB

Geek Unique
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 9, 2006
Messages
507
Reaction score
95
Location
Florida - A sunny place for shady people
However, if a movie (or book, or whatever) passes the Bechdel test, it doesn't necessarily mean the female characters involved in the conversation aren't horrible stereotypical cardboard cutouts. It doesn't necessarily mean their dialogue is poignant or well-written. What it does mean, however, is that there is at least one scene in the story that does not rely on the presence of a man, explicit or implied, to function. There is at least a part of the fictional world that wouldn't collapse on itself if all the male characters were removed.

As I said earlier, I've seen a number of porn movies that would pass. They start with two or three women having some little chat about how nice the wine they were drinking was, or wow, can I have that cookie recipe, and then the doorbell rings and it's "Oh, let's invite my hunky neighbor in!" So movies like that 'pass', and a lot great movies with great women characters don't.
 

maybegenius

might be a giant
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 16, 2011
Messages
667
Reaction score
160
Location
Northern California
Website
maybegenius.blogspot.com
The Bechdel Test is actually specifically intended to show the lack of diverse female representation in the media (film, originally). It's not intended to define the "strength" of the female characters at all.

The fact that the statistics are so staggeringly against films that pass the Bechdel Test speaks volumes by itself, let alone topping it with which of those female representations are some ambiguous kind of "strong." Similar tests can be performed for persons of color, people who aren't straight, etc.

It's a representation test. It's supposed to show how hugely film (and other media) is skewed in favor of straight white men who have a variety of roles to fill.

The Bechdel Test, Bechdel-Wallace Test, or the Mo Movie Measure, is a sort of litmus test for female presence in fictional media.
 

Chasing the Horizon

Blowing in the Wind
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
4,288
Reaction score
561
Location
Pennsylvania
But the problem is, so many people seem to assume it must therefore be a natural law or something, and therefore any narrative which flouts this "natural law" even one taking place in an entirely fictional society, is therefore unrealistic. I'm thinking here of SF/F where there are whole societies, unrelated in any way to modern or historical societies, which the author made up. And yet the author still uses the same inter-personal social cues of our Earth societies.
This x1,000. Being able to play with the roles and expectations of society is the main reason I write speculative fiction. I can think of a few other (mostly sci-fi) authors who create the intricately different types of social interaction like I do. But only a few.

There should be tons of fantasy societies out there with totally different gender roles and interactions, but there aren't. People just can't think that far outside the box, I guess.
 

Lexxie

Avid reader and lover of fiction
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 29, 2012
Messages
134
Reaction score
12
Location
Europe
Website
unconventionalbookviews.com
This is particularly true when making statements about "male" vs "female" mental traits. (I wish I could find the original article I read, which was a critique of the "male brain vs female brain" thing based on this study).

I agree with your whole post, but I wanted to reply to this part only. I did a pseudo-scientific test once, I can't remember all that was in it, but the test was supposed to determine whether the person taking the test was male or female... It told me I was a man. The questions were about reactions in different situations, logic and math questions, nurture/caring etc. I thought it was very interesting, because I got some of my friends to take it as well, and it was wrong almost half the time.
 

BunnyMaz

Ruining your porn since 1984
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
2,295
Reaction score
412
Age
40
I agree with your whole post, but I wanted to reply to this part only. I did a pseudo-scientific test once, I can't remember all that was in it, but the test was supposed to determine whether the person taking the test was male or female... It told me I was a man. The questions were about reactions in different situations, logic and math questions, nurture/caring etc. I thought it was very interesting, because I got some of my friends to take it as well, and it was wrong almost half the time.

I've taken tests like that, too! I think the BBC website had a test that was as much about intellect as anything else, but also measured for stats like differences between finger length etc that tend to be different in males and females. What I really liked about that test was that the results were shown on a spectrum with a blue extreme and a pink extreme, and also showed the range in which test takers fell. You could see that while male test takers clustered closer to the blue end and visa versa, there was a lot of overlap.

Whenever I take these tests I always end up pretty much smack in the middle :D
 

Cramp

Pain in the writing wrist
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 5, 2012
Messages
688
Reaction score
72
Location
UK
Love how this thread always keeps slipping back into "strength = masculine traits".

Sigh.

I thought the point of this thread was to show that the idea of 'masculine traits' and 'feminine traits' is itself outdated.
 

Kittens Starburst

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 6, 2013
Messages
117
Reaction score
11
Location
Scotland
The above is absolutely true...for Contemporary and Historical genres of narrative.

But the problem is, so many people seem to assume it must therefore be a natural law or something, and therefore any narrative which flouts this "natural law" even one taking place in an entirely fictional society, is therefore unrealistic. I'm thinking here of SF/F where there are whole societies, unrelated in any way to modern or historical societies, which the author made up. And yet the author still uses the same inter-personal social cues of our Earth societies.

The actual physical, biological differences between men and women are very very small. The variations and differences between individuals (discounting culture) are actually much greater.

Damn, can't seem to add a rep point via my iphone, but yes, yes, yes, yes and yes! And yes again!
 

Kricket

Chirp! Chirp!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 30, 2010
Messages
4,409
Reaction score
733
Location
Colorado
So I read the first page and this last page and before I bring anything up I was just wondering if y'all covered sex in here yet? As in, a woman's strength being shown by her sexiness/how much sex she's had.

I ask because I don't want to bring up something y'all have already covered. :)
 

Max Vaehling

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
1,133
Reaction score
75
Location
Bremen, Germany
Website
www.dreadfulgate.de
I'm almost afraid to wade into this again, but this is where my confusion is coming from.

I read the comic back in college, and I really enjoyed it. But I'm beginning to think I misinterpreted it, because what I got out of it is this: fiction, and specifically in this case movies, have been artificially constructed to revolve around men. This construction is so rigid that authors are constructing stories to revolve around men even when no men are present, and they're doing it by showing female characters wondering where the men are, obsessing over what the men are doing, and defining themselves by their relationships to the men.

However, if a movie (or book, or whatever) passes the Bechdel test, it doesn't necessarily mean the female characters involved in the conversation aren't horrible stereotypical cardboard cutouts. It doesn't necessarily mean their dialogue is poignant or well-written. What it does mean, however, is that there is at least one scene in the story that does not rely on the presence of a man, explicit or implied, to function. There is at least a part of the fictional world that wouldn't collapse on itself if all the male characters were removed.

You got that right, basically. But the thing is, in a mainstream movie with a male lead every scene will more or less reflect his actions, status etc. Same for movies about male love interests, i.e. most mainstream movies wioth a female lead, I'm afraid. The problem is not so much that the writer couldn't get the male perspective out of his/her (heh) head, but that ... demographics are against it. The key to passing the Bechdel test (rather than just writing a token scene that'll do) is to create more and better-defined female characters, including protagonists. More for demographics, and better-defined to give them something to talk about. You don't need Strong Female Leads to pass the test, but why not go all the way wile you're at it?
 

ios

Weirdo.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 17, 2009
Messages
396
Reaction score
22
Location
Missouri
Website
chiaroscurohouse.com
This thread made me think on strong vs weak female characters. I recently decided to merge one female character with a male character after re-reading a combining roles exercise (by Maass). It made so much more sense. It wasn't that she was weak before, but she was so very minor. Before she was mostly a mediator between a dominating older brother and the MC (another brother). And she was involved a little in a secret organization.

Now she has taken the place of the dominating brother in the story, but she was a mediator until the real dominating brother died. Now she is actively pursuing a function in the secret organization (because of her brother's "cause"-related death galvanized her and sealed her beliefs). But in pursuing that function, she has extra hurdles because of gender roles and expectations in the setting.

These changes opened up interesting dimensions to her character, and I think that most of all--depth--is what made her strong.

So that made me wonder. If there are few strong major female characters, then maybe the weak or so-so ones just lack depth? Meaning histories and motivations and goals and plots of their own?

Jodi
 

OJCade

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
605
Reaction score
48
Location
New Zealand
Wow, this is a really interesting thread - have read the entire thing!

Personally, I find the Bechdel test more useful when applied to groups instead of individuals. As many have pointed out, it fails on some individual cases. Looking at a population of stories, however, (and what would be that plural?) it's a valuable tool for seeing both how much gender imbalance there is and how gender is presented in literature.

What I haven't seen mentioned - and why I'm bumping this thread after a few days - is the Female Character Flowchart. (Click on the graphic to get it to a bigger size.)

Like Bechdel, there's going to be some individual exceptions, and I don't always agree with all of it (Ripley again) but I find it useful to check my female characters from time to time, just to check that I'm not being lazy and falling too far into tropes. That and the tongue in cheek amuses me. I enjoy snark, and that chart is chock full of it.
 
Last edited:

Kricket

Chirp! Chirp!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 30, 2010
Messages
4,409
Reaction score
733
Location
Colorado
The chart is funny and sometimes true. But I'd have a hard time being honest with my own characters. I know I think they're 3D, but others might not. Either way, it's a decent test. :)
 

thebloodfiend

Cory
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
3,771
Reaction score
630
Age
30
Location
New York
Website
www.thebooklantern.com
What I haven't seen mentioned - and why I'm bumping this thread after a few days - is the Female Character Flowchart. (Click on the graphic to get it to a bigger size.)

Like Bechdel, there's going to be some individual exceptions, and I don't always agree with all of it (Ripley again) but I find it useful to check my female characters from time to time, just to check that I'm not being lazy and falling too far into tropes. That and the tongue in cheek amuses me. I enjoy snark, and that chart is chock full of it.
There's always been something about that chart that bothers me. Maybe it's the author's contradicting opinion on "SFC" or just the lack of well defined sarcasm. I really can't tell when they're being serious or not.

Maybe it's because it doesn't really point anything out? Other than list almost every single female character in existence and label them with a trope? Which is the entire purpose of TVTropes and could be easily done with male characters as well?

I don't know, I'd like a deeper analysis of the tropes and the problematic elements behind them, rather than just a list. Reading their SFC article just left me further confused on the purpose of the chart (especially the subjectivity of it), when other writers on the site refer to it either very seriously or sarcastically. Their tone is hard to get.
 

Kricket

Chirp! Chirp!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 30, 2010
Messages
4,409
Reaction score
733
Location
Colorado
The other thing I noticed about the chart was the "Do they want a baby" question. There is no "Nope" option. It's either they have one, want one, or "not right now". It assumes that every woman* will want a baby, eventually. I know one of my main female characters doesn't want kids, period.


*and I have kids
 

thebloodfiend

Cory
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
3,771
Reaction score
630
Age
30
Location
New York
Website
www.thebooklantern.com
The other thing I noticed about the chart was the "Do they want a baby" question. There is no "Nope" option. It's either they have one, want one, or "not right now". It assumes that every woman* will want a baby, eventually. I know one of my main female characters doesn't want kids, period.


*and I have kids
That is one of the reasons I don't know if I'm supposed to take it seriously or not. They treat it with such seriousness, but when it was created, it looks like the artist was just in it for fun.
 

Rhoda Nightingale

Vampire Junkie
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
4,470
Reaction score
658
I've seen that flowchart before, and it's pretty funny/interesting, although I feel like that's a new/updated/different version of it than I've seen before. I thought there was a "Michelle Rodriguez" category in there somewhere, in some sub-heading of "action girl" or "Vasquez Always Dies."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.