Yet another female characters thread

Started by a female character (though admittedly, not a strong one)

Yeah...there was this thread on a writing site (mostly comics/superhero novels) about which female characters and types are beloved and which are reviled by different people.

That thread already has some tropers in it, but you can never have enough genre savvy, so have at it, tropers.

This seems to be pretty much made up of what most people say about female characters and how they should be written. Nothing really unique, to be honest.

Yeah most of that is correct. If you're gonna write a Damsel in Distress scenario, DON'T MAKE THAT THE CHARACTER'S SOLE REASON TO EXIST.

Nor should it be the dual reason to exist with "Love interest"

edited 13th Jul '11 1:57:19 AM by deuxhero

My two cents on the matter.

Leigh, I have a handful of female characters I'd like you to critique if I provide a summation. I'm curious to know how you'd respond to them.

I guess I'm not sure what qualifies a female character as a man in a dress. Is it just being a Ladette? Is it being nerdy and estranged from society? I can only think of one female character I've written who wasn't at least somewhat "masculine."

I can answer that one. A number of years back, someone actually gave me this exact criticism.

It's not a "Ladette". A Ladette is an archetype. She's one of the boys. She's not like other women, and that makes her appealing. However, a Ladette can still be distinctly feminine because her attitude is a dichotomy of two different genre roles.

When you're writing a "guy in a dress", it's basically the same thing we were talking about in the male character thread. Women who don't do anything a typical woman would do. While the Ladette may kick ass, drink, and love to bowl, she can still have shades of femininity. Perhaps she's preoccupied with self-image or she's crushing on a guy and waiting for him to make a move. The "guy in a dress" won't do any of that. She's rather comfortable with her looks and any guy she's remotely interested in, she'll just walk right up to and ask out. She doesn't have any intimate attachment to any of her friends, and has little to no nuturing instinct. In every way that matters, she is a guy.

I was told that 90% of my female characters were that way until roughly 2005. I've specifically tried to make more feminine characters specifically because of that.

What is this nurturing instinct you speak of?

I have no interest in strength anyway except if its an actions eries, even then I am confused. I mean what is strength? Or what makes a strength character?

Zeal: That's incredibly stereotypical, you realize that, yes?

By "nurturing instinct", I mean the compulsion to empathize and protect, mostly through compassion. Though to be honest, it's hard to define.

And "strength" has a lot of meaning. For the most part, men tend to mean strength as the ability to conquer. Most "tough guys" have the desire to conquer their problems—that is, to crush them so thoroughly that they will never be a problem again. For example, if a guy hits on your woman, the "tough guy" response would be to kick his ass, reclaim your "property" and establish your complete dominance.

This is a conversation about generalizations, is it not?

edited 13th Jul '11 3:34:58 PM by KingZeal

Leigh, on the one hand Captain Obvious, on the other hand Some Anvils Need to Be Dropped. That is an excellent list.

I ain't that creative. I take female characters from my favourite shows and tack on bells and whistles to make them fit my World and plot.

Scars: N is a runaway slave and has whip scars; H's male cousin has awesome duelling scars, so she wants to join the duelling club; A fought in the Revolution to abolish the Slave Trade and wears an eye patch.

Vilya is my only original character and she is fat. —> High on the Hill stood the Lonely cat Herd —> A beautiful maid though a trifle fat heard —> She yodelled back to the Lonely cat Herd. —> Lady oh lady oh lo.

As it happens both Harmony the obscenely rich aristo brat and Naomi the Cloud Cuckoo Lander runaway Slave are both engineers. I never thought of Together they fight Treason trope for them.

edited 13th Jul '11 4:39:23 PM by Trotzky

Glad to know that, in every way that matters, I'm a guy.

If we're going strictly by the criteria I listed, so is my ladyfriend/FWB.

However, I didn't touch everything. No real person on earth fits a label exactly.

Seriously, I'm offending people left and right in these topics when I'm trying to make it very clear that these are generalizations. Describing "masculinity" and "femininity" is basically like describing a Mary Sue. It's a litmus test of criteria that, by the time you've completed 90% of it, you've gotten to the point of parody.

edited 13th Jul '11 4:23:25 PM by KingZeal

And that's why they aren't very useful.

And you've got a bad case of Men Are Generic, Women Are Special. A female character is basically a dude until you load her up with femmy characteristics? Seriously?

My system of adding bells and whistles to female characters from shows I like seems better and better.

No. That's what you heard, not what I said.

The issue we're talking about here is steps at broader writing. If your female characters are indistinguishable from your male characters, most women might find it hard to empathize. If your male characters carry too many feminine characteristics (subjective), it can break immersion for the male audience. For the billionth time, I'm talking about painting in broad strokes, depending on what you want to convey with your writing.

If you want your female character to fit every criteria I listed above, then go for it. If you want men who are extremely sensitive and subvert gender roles, that's your choice. I'm not telling you what characters are better than others, and I'm not saying what a man/woman is or isn't. I did say "a character could be a man in every way that matters", but why the hell is that bad thing? Seriously, if that makes you comfortable, then who gives a shit?

edited 13th Jul '11 4:42:57 PM by KingZeal

Why can't characters just be people. I've never understood the big deal about gender...Granted I don't understand the average male or female either, and consider myself more gender-neutral than anything.

Treating characters as people before genders works a lot better at making believable characters than the reverse.

Yes.

The problem is that gender does matter, due to society. People are affected by nurture. Most people expect men to do this, and women to do that, and a lot of people follow that. Ignoring the Double Standard in non-futuristic or some fantasy settings would be unrealistic.

But even though I usually think of gender right away before my characters have a name, their amount of femininity or masculinity varies. For example, Bryan's more masculine than Finn. Bryan's girlfriend has some traits of the Girl Next Door, and the Yaoi Fangirl is slightly tom-boyish yet eccentric as Luna Lovegood.

edited 13th Jul '11 4:53:54 PM by chihuahua0

You don't have to disregard gender, but you also don't have to write a character who's personality revolves their sex, either.

Yay! I've got a Luna Lovegood expy too. Mathilda is a sweep, spying on the Five-Man Band in the hope of getting an exclusive for the Quibbler.

I didn't say ignore gender, just that it should come second to a character being a person. Also societies gender roles can effect people - even of the same gender - differently. Some fall into them without realizing it, some purposely fit themselves into it because that's "how they're supposed to be", some rebel against it, some just don't care, and many switch their reaction throughout their lives.

Example: Character X is a Hot-Blooded fighter, who enjoys gardening as a hobby. X can be male or female without really changing the character, though it would effect how other characters and the audience see X.

edited 13th Jul '11 5:09:04 PM by MurkyMuse

Of course not. The Escapist's Extra Credits did a few videos about sexual orientation, minorities and gender in regards to how they shape characters. Basically, what they said (and I pretty much agree with) is that all these things are basically interesting dynamics with which to flesh out a character. If your male character is Straight Gay and eschews the Camp Gay archetype, there's a lot you can do with that in order to give him depth. You absolutely do NOT base the entire character around this one single trait, but you recognize that said trait is part of the tapestry that makes them who they are. Likewise with a black character. Being black shouldn't completely dominate who they are, but it can play a part.

I usually write by "making the character first and worry about their demographic later", but it usually doesn't work to treat every one of your characters as a completely blank slate where race, gender, nationality, whatever, doesn't affect them at ALL.