Is this an Unfortunate Implication?

Okay, so in a writing project I'm working on, I have a quartet of villains thematically based on the Horsemen of the Apocalypse. The problem being that I would like one of said villains to be female. Since a female version of War has already been done and I want Death's gender to remain ambiguous, that leaves either Famine or Conquest/Pestilence.

What I'm afraid of is that if I make Famine the female, people will think I'm referencing the stereotype that girls are more susceptible to having anorexia and other eating disorders.

So what do you guys think? Is it a bad idea or am I just being paranoid? Personally I'm leaning towards the former, but I just want to see how others would react.

And keeping war/conquest male goes with the stereotype that all men are violent and warlike, yes?

I say paranoia.

Unless you characterize Famine as being obsessed with her looks, and what else have you.

Yes. Famine is actually a horrible horrible thing. Yes, Anorexia is also horrible, but it's very different from famine. As long as the character stays the personification of famine, it should be fine.

edited 24th Oct '11 6:53:12 PM by ohsointocats

Yes, it's kinda paranoid. Besides, people will find Unfortunate Implications in anything. If you were to make Conquest a woman, you can bet people would be complaining about how attractive women use sex to get into positions of power.

Yeah, my main fear was just that people would draw the conclusion that Famine = lack of food = people starving = ZOMG ANOREXIA, but in hindsight it seems pretty silly.

As for Conquest, if I do use that version of the Horseman (I still haven't decided whether to use Conquest or Pestilence) s/he'd probably be less of a brute/seductress and more of a cunning military strategist type, regardless of gender.

edited 24th Oct '11 7:02:34 PM by Qmarkthe2nd

just keep her skeletal, not supermodel

It can also be interpreted as a reference to women carrying and feeding babies.

Besides, I don't see a lot of options here.

Actually, I was thinking of basing her on the Fuchiyuku Fuhikuu Those girls with the second mouth on the backs of their heads from Japanese mythology. You know, because the myths involve them eating large quantities of food and whatnot. Speaking of which, I also planned on making her a Big Eater who causes "famine" by stealing food from others.

edited 24th Oct '11 7:08:10 PM by Qmarkthe2nd

Do you know that a psychological problem some people who used to starve have, is hoarding food?

Unfortunately once the book leaves your hands, you cannot tell how a reader will interpet it. Fridge Logic is going to happen no matter what.

edited 25th Oct '11 5:19:42 AM by TheEmeraldDragon

That's what my dad says.

I'd call anyone who call that an UI a case of Fan Wank.

How about having both Famine and Pestilence female? You avoid the Smurfette Principle and people are less likely to complain about female being associated with one bad thing. Sure, if you want death to be ambiguous you won’t get a fair 50-50 split, but who said you can't have more females than males.

Make them all females!

Or make them all skeletons so you don't have to worry about male or female connotation.

I think it's good that you're considering possible implications here as a lot of people don't. But in this case I think you're fine.

Sidewinder makes a good point though, I'm sick of smurfettes and avoid them in my own writing whenever possible. But since there's only 3 gendered characters in the group to begin with I'm sure any combination is fine, as long as you don't write them offensively.

Everything is an unfortunate implication when viewed correctly, much like everything is sexual when viewed correctly.

I agree with Sidewinder as well.

The thing about most ambigiously gendered characters is that many readers are going to automatically assume they're male. Also, using the fact that a female version of War has been done before in a few works to not even consider making this War female is pretty bad justification when eight trillion other works have had a male War. That right there would be Unfortunate Implications.

That I did not consider.

I think my best bet at this point is Sidewinder's idea.

For the record, I have said on a number of times that possibly the greatest source of Unfortunate Implications is tokenism - if you only have one female character, then it's much more likely that aspects of her personality might be seen as reflecting your beliefs about women in general then if you have 20.

I assume you have more characters as a whole then just the Four Horse-Persons, but still, something to keep in mind.

Here's a fun idea: Make War a giant, intelligent, non-humanoid war machine! Everywhere it goes it causes destruction and pointlessly killing everything in its wake! That's what I'd personally like to see more of.

By the by, who are the heroes of this story? Were they going to work on the Smurfette Principle as well leading to a Designated Girl Fight? **twitch** Were there even going to be heroes? If so, who's the focal point character? Please let it be a snarky sportscar!

edited 25th Oct '11 6:46:22 PM by SandJosieph

Edit: Oops, misread.

edited 25th Oct '11 6:50:50 PM by nrjxll

Well, it's more of an ensemble work with Loads And Loads Of Characters, so I was hoping to have the main protagonist role alternate between them. The heroes of the story actually have several females on their side, including the Big Good herself (and when I say "Big Good" I don't mean some idealistic goddess-like figure like Palutena or Gaia; She's a corporate executive who's had to fend off so many assassination attempts that she now keeps a shotgun under her desk.)

Also, there's a third faction of morally-ambiguous saboteurs led by a woman who's manipulating the other two sides (using actual strategy and cunning, NOT sex appeal) and her Dragon also happens to be her equally-clever granddaughter.

As for the Designated Girl Fight, I plan on averting that particular trope as much as I can. Does that give you an idea of what I have planned?

edited 25th Oct '11 6:59:21 PM by Qmarkthe2nd

It should be fine as long as she's portrayed as skeletal and unpleasant, not sexy. She shouldn't have much in the way of breasts or other attractive features, being the embodiment of malnourishment.

If people want to find some way to make what you write sexist, they will.