Must all girls be Action Girl?

This is why I seem to spit out characters that has elements of femininity: Justin, Kevin, Finn, a few others...Bryan even makes better sense as female, if you consider his relationship with Finn.

To tie this in with the main topic, you could have female character rejecting feminine traits, but not male characters rejecting masculine traits without raising a bunch of eyebrows. All the characters I listed (except Bryan) are outcasts of some degree—they're also all submissive (at least at first), as contrast to an Action Girl.

So, if a man can be weak, a girl can be also strong.

...it can also be vice-versia.

edited 13th Nov '11 6:43:37 PM by chihuahua0

As do I, really.

Even the manliest character I have acts kind of like somebody's kooky aunt who makes some damn good leek soup.

edited 13th Nov '11 6:49:17 PM by annebeeche

I mean where I'm really lost is the idea that a girl not wearing a skirt or a blouse becomes an action girl. I mean you have things like Battle Ballgown and the majority of high school or college girls don't do a lot of physical fighting. Combat is considered masculine, but it is by no means the only masculine trait, just as how avoiding physical confrontation is by no means the only feminine trait there is.

Thread Hop from page one, because I'm a lazy bastard.

There are many things I'd attribute to Hermionie, but I'm not sure Action Girl is one of them. She's just too bookish, even if she does have her moments. Ginny would probably be a closer fit personality wise, even if we don't get to see her much in action.

I do agree that people are missing the point if an otherwise competent female character needs to be saved sometimes and is getting hit for it. Mind you, sometimes scenes like that break down into Damsel in Distress cliches despite whatever skills the girl has, which can be really irritating, but the fact that someone needs help isn't a good enough reason on its own.

I don't think that's only a girl thing, since literally everyone has turned to blue-jeans casual in the last decade or two. I think it's more obvious with the girls since they used to have such markedly different styles from guys, but you don't see guys in leather jackets much, ether. They're basically all wearing the same material in different cuts.

But anyways, yes, there does seem to be a large culture shift in the gender roles, at least in the US. Oddly enough though, I'm not sure if it's in the direction of Action Girls, but with jobs and home life. There are definitely a lot more two job families now, and an upsurge in stay-at-home dads.

There are also a lot less instances where people are told they should act like they're boys/girls, or at least a whole lot less backlash if they step out of their roles. There are things like girls=makeup, sure, but I honestly think that has to do with body insecurity instead of people getting frowned at for not acting like women. Things may be different on the male side, but I don't think I've ever been called out for my lack of femininity.

Also (as you've probably come to find, I'm sure) there is a lot of backlash against there being gender roles or inequalities, wether they're there or not. It reminds me oddly of the whole anti-racism shift, in that we're so desperate to push down the problem that we silence many discussions about the actual problem.

I vaguely remember this one time, a politician from Mexico or somewhere in Central America was talking about racial relations in the area, and comparing it to the disparity between whites and blacks in the US. The US pretty much responded with "Bitch, you crazy — we ain't racist!" and the outcry made the guy back off of his actual point. I think we're getting to a similar situation with the whole sexism thing, and while it might be better than rallies and protests, I'm not sure if it's a net positive, ether.

edited 27th Nov '11 7:17:15 AM by Dec

I agree that Hermione isn't an Action Heroine. An Action Girl (in the sense that she is a female badass) is true though, in the sense that she's a Badass Bookworm. I wouldn't even call Harry an Action Hero, actually. Truthfully no one in the entire book is.

The problem with most female Action Girls in fiction these days is they aren't people. They are caricatures, and female characters often have this problem in fiction. Alice, isn't Alice, she's tough, militaristic butch-girl. Carol isn't Carol, she's female love interest who needs to be saved all the time. Danielle isn't Danielle, she's hot chick in stripper-wear who carries a gun. A male Badass gets to be a character. A female anything often has to settle with a cardboard cutout of her respective role, whatever that might be, whether its traditionally masculine or feminine. It annoys me a great deal that creators seem to think they can make a girl punch someone in the face and that all of a sudden makes them a strong character. I think we need to change that phrase entirely. What makes a female a strong character isn't physical strength, it's strong characterization. It's really the way you write whatever character it is, not their actual personality, whatever it might be, that makes them a good character.

Quote for truth.

I live in Canada, so I can't say much about the States. However, over here, we have a lot of men and women in my college and I wouldn't say gender roles exist unless someone is exploiting them (like say using Double Standard tropes to their advantage).

A lot of women do wear jeans and stuff, but they often do wear dresses on things like pub nights or wear revealing outfits when they are flirting more often.

In terms of Action Girl in Real Life, I would say in Canada, it's not expected as much as Action Hero is of guys; but not too much emphasis is placed on either anyways (except in the military as women cannot go the front lines, ...Or So I Heard).

As a side-note, I notice most guys I know definitely follow No Guy Wants an Amazon and those same ones tend to be the ones who believe in Wouldn't Hit a Girl. Guys I know who are trained in fighting styles seem to more enjoy the Hot Amazon type and often Would Hit a Girl (at least in sparring or self-defense, with one exception I know).

Oh, and in terms of eliminating gender roles in conversations, I found in a class recently that apparently it is okay to talk about problems women face; but not to talk about problems men face as Men Are the Expendable Gender, men should only be helping women and men never have problems (according to a misogynistic classmate, see the irony?). Ah well, maybe one day I'll have better success at playing devil's advocate. But this is going off-topic, so I'll shut up :P

edited 28th Nov '11 4:56:57 AM by darkclaw

It seems that in every female belongs to at least one of these categories:

• Action Girl
• Badass Bystander
• Badass Damsel
• Badass Pacifist
• Heroic Bystander
• Lady of Black Magic
• Lady of War
• Little Miss Badass

It's not so much that I think all girls should be badass but because I want every character in my series to be badass to some degree.

Also, in my verse, there's no such thing as "Man shouldn't hit girl." thing and in fact, some of the most powerful characters are females, like the main character's mom, who is frequently referred as the Princess of Calamity.

Did I mention that female characters have higher death rates than males?

@ dRoy It seems you are making a World of Badass. But why do your female characters die more? I hope you aren't trying to gender invert Men Are the Expendable Gender, as it will have a lot of cries of Unfortunate Implications, just saying.

@dark-It's not THAT higher though; so far I have planned 12 deaths and five deaths are males while seven are females.

@ dRoy

I apologize for the assumption then.

@dark-Eh, can't blame you.

EDIT:

Not that I'm doing this, but what do you mean by this?

edited 28th Nov '11 5:26:10 AM by dRoy

Regarding the whole idea of making characters who subvert gender stereotypes to a degree, I'd like to point a finger at The Wonderful Wizard of Oz. I've always been really impressed with the film and the book, and the characters it creates, because they can be considered characters first and genders second.

The Scarecrow wishes to pursue knowledge, and isn't all that strong or action-y in any sense, preferring to use his understanding of the world around him to twist things to match his intended outcome. He is effective and useful without being violent. The Tin Man wants a heart, is quite emotional, cries at least three times in the film, and is all-in-all quite a feminine character, who also happens to be a woodman, and carries around a melee weapon at all times. The Cowardly Lion puts himself up on a pedestal, since the Lion is "supposed" to be the King of Beasts. And yet, he is often afraid, cries in fear, tries to run away from danger... except when his friends are in danger, then he goes full on Determinator and willingly volunteers to fight for his friends.

And Dorothy? She is pretty feminine; she wants a home, makes friends along the way, and serves as the superglue that brought the other characters together in the first place. All very feminine ideals from an American perspective. She also slaps a lion that's about to bite her dog, saves the Scarecrow and the Tin Man from remaining immobile, and kills the Wicked Witch (both under different circumstances; in the book, she was angry that the Witch had tricked her out of one of her Silver Shoes, while in the movie, she was saving the life of her friend who was on fire). She gets her heroic moments, as do the rest of the characters, and they are all defined more by their attributes than by their gender and how they react to it.

What I'm trying to get at here is that you don't have to be an Action Girl in order to be a 'strong female character' (put in quotes because that phrase has been used so often I'm not even sure it's all that credible anymore). Dorothy was quite feminine and isn't all that physically powerful, yet she carries the entire story and never gives up. The Scarecrow relied more on manipulating his environment than punching anything. The Tin Man would only hurt someone or something if he thought they deserved it, and throughout the movie the only thing he ever hit with that ax was a door. The Cowardly Lion would only actively fight back when he was protecting something he cared about.

Characerization does not always have to rely on what gender they are. Girls can be feminine and strong and important at the same time. Guys can be strong and sensitive and important as well. Aim for characters who are people first and genders second, and you should be good to go.

This is a wonderful post.

You deserve five gold stars and a plate of fresh homemade cookies.

Like I said, I advocate using the phrase "female with strong characterization" rather than "strong female character".

From my view, inverting Men Are the Expendable Gender will have all the Unfortunate Implications that Men Are the Expendable Gender itself has, without the social flaws that allow most people to ignore those implications in the original trope.

Social flaws? What do you mean by that? I'm just curious.

I mean that I think the fact that Men Are the Expendable Gender is a tolerated trope, in the way the opposite would not be, is a symptom of flaws in the way society sees gender roles.

Hmm... I think I get it.