Male Roles Vs. Female Roles in Fiction: Discussion/Analysis/Troperwank

Rhymeykins has told me that the show added more rape too and that some of those scenes were consensual in the books.

Edit: Wow... what a page topper.

edited 26th Aug '15 9:06:40 PM by Imca

Yeah that one scene featuring brother-sister incest-rape right next to the corpse of their son was a real barrel of laughs.

On the one hand Arya, Yara, Ygritte, and Shae. Awesome. On the other hand, Ygritte and Shae.

But Osha's my favorite. I would watch a show just about Osha.

edited 26th Aug '15 9:15:08 PM by blkwhtrbbt

Dan Olson has a video that covers some of the issues with adaptations.

That said, television and movie creation teams sometimes have really weird ideas for what characters, plot devices and themes should look like when translated from a non-visual format. One notorious example was changing the father in Silent Hill into a mother, which missed the point of why the father-daughter relationship was a major focal point in the game.

The King James Version of the Bible is probably one of the most controversial adaptations from one text to another, as many religious studies scholars conjecture that in pre-KJV texts, Eve was not all that complicit in biting the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden - that Adam was the primary culprit behind the events leading to the felix culpa.

edited 26th Aug '15 9:19:36 PM by Aprilla

Dany swindling a slave-master out of a whole fucking army was my favorite scene from the show.

Cries from awesome

There are supposedly scriptures that state Eve wasn't even the first woman, that Adam's first wife was a spirit named Lilitu, who refused to submit to Adam's man-ness and be a docile little wife. So either she fled Eden or was exiled and her offspring are all demons that kidnap the offspring of Adam's blood.

edited 26th Aug '15 9:20:59 PM by blkwhtrbbt

Will not ramble on & on & on about greek-roman mythology adaptations.

Aprilla: I'd just like to point out here that given how Bayonetta was developed as a character I rather doubt she is supposed to be satire.

Now that I think about it, that reminds me of something else.

It's true that there are a lot of people who try to run away from commenting about political stuff by writing science fiction stories, however there is another side to this.

Namely, people who write something avoiding commenting on anything but still do so in such a way that the audience thinks they are still on commenting on something.

Or worse, when they are saying one thing but the audience "hears" another.

Here is an example of what I am talking about.

edited 27th Aug '15 5:36:27 AM by SaintDeltora

Interesting. Thanks. I'd say more, but it's off-topic.

You can just PM if you really want.

Talking about creator's roles in how men and women are portrayed in fiction is on topic for the record.

RE Game of Thrones- I've always been a fairly big defender of the show, I think part because there's things about the presentation of women that rub me the wrong way in the books that are absent in the show (although the opposite is also true) and it seems like a lot of times people who hate the show for being unfaithful to the books sort of jumped on the bandwagon of criticizing problematic elements because it gave them a stick to beat it with.

Anyway though, I find the two examples brought up of "consensual in the books/rape in the show" to be iffy:

• With Danaerys and Drogo, he is very gentle on their wedding night in the books, but then he freely employees a Marital Rape Liscense (and at one point Danaerys thinks about killing herself) until Danaerys gets his love/respect by learning a few tricks from one of her handmaidens. The difference in the show is getting rid of the tender wedding night- which sort of makes sense because it doesn't really gel with how he treats her after that (prior to their falling in love).

• With the "sept scene", it's interesting for this thread given the disagreement among creators and cast as to whether it was consensual- probably says a lot that both the actor and actress seemed to think it was (says a lot in the sense that society hasn't quite caught on to thinking of instances of rape as being rape). In the books, the scene is from the POV of Jaime Lannister (the guy) and he thinks to himself that despite saying no, Cersei is interested and she's really objecting to the location, not the sex itself.

There are indications in the text of her being physically receptive (that are largely absent in the show), however, I tend to think that the scene in the books feels suspiciously like a case of "Not If They Enjoyed It" Rationalization (not just from Jaime's POV). It reminds of something like Gone With The Wind.

I think part of the issue might be that by the show changing the timeline of when Jaime returns home, the scene plays out with some more animosity than was in the books. Coupled with the fact that since we are seeing it objectively rather than through Jaime's POV, we don't have his assurances that it was consensual. Which isn't to say it wouldn't have helped to show Cersei enjoying it- but I still think the book scene is a bit dubious on consent to begin with.

Edit- I think the biggest issue with the show is a real overuse of nude Fanservice Extras. I don't think that is something unique to Game of Thrones (I recall Boardwalk Empire having a fair amount too; probably other HBO/Showtime period pieces do as well), but it might be more frequent there than otherwise.

edited 27th Aug '15 9:39:08 AM by Hodor2

Bayonetta's design reads to me like the idea of the "empowered sexual woman", I do give the creator's the benefit of the doubt there, powerful and ironically fetishized...Oh, she's gaming's Vampirella...I do have to say that I find her design cool as an action game character, even if I don't find it that sexually appealing.

The criticism of A Song of Ice and Fire's female characters always struck me as a bit odd. The complaint I usually see is over the fact that the setting is an established patriarchy where men are expected to rule and women are expected to obey. People point out that it's a fantasy series, not a historical drama (even if it's very War of the Roses flavored), so the only reason that women are systematically subjugated in that setting is because GRRM wrote it that way.

Which seems to be missing the point to me. It's not the setting that matters, it's the characters. And most of ASOIAF's female characters (especially the POV ones) are rather strong women, if in rather different ways. Catlin is defined by her family — she's a wife, a mother, a daughter, a sister, and a niece — but she's a better politician than pretty much everyone else in her family, and acts as The Heart for all of them, keeping things from falling apart even through a string of disasters. She holds herself together, too, despite her husband and children dying off one by one. It's not until her last child (so far as she knows) is betrayed and murdered that she finally breaks. Arya is a Rebellious Princess who is (slowly and painfully) evolving into an Action Hero. Sansa is a Sheltered Aristocrat who is (slowly and painfully) evolving into a Guile Hero. Daenerys is a Princess in Rags trying to join the ranks of Royals Who Actually Do Something. Brienne is a straight-up Knight in Shining Armor, and a better person than almost everyone else in the series. Ygritte is an fiercely independent Action Girl. Etc etc.

I mean, it's not perfect, but I don't really see it as being problematic as a whole.

One of the major complaints I saw about Go T was about a specific rape scene, but in that case people seemed to be more upset about it happening to an "important character" instead of a side character - "wrong" isn't a strong enough word for what I think about that sentiment. :/ Or they described it as the worst thing that happened within the series - which is also somewhat odd, considering what happened in Season 3.

Male or female, noble or commoner, living or dead life sucks of people in Go T and A So Ia F regardless of who they are.

Low fantasy settings like Go T and Warhammer tend to recreate the middle ages including the nasty bits like ludicrous mortality rates in war and plagues, how crappy life can be for everyone and how your role in society is defined at your birth whether by your gender and/or nobility.

High fantasy settings on the other hand tend to be more egalitarian, since magic and MacGuffin are very common and people can be empowered much more easily regardless of their background. It doesn't make much sense to enforce Stay On The Kitchen when the would be subjugated girl can CAST MAGIC MISSILES able to level a small village at will or can turn invisible and mug everyone under their noses.

Well, recreating is a loose word. We tend to recreate the hollywood version of what it looked like.

the issue of Values dissonace on fantasy series have become of those thing the genre have to deal with it: ether you ingore that and make gender and race non-issue(like Avatar in series or warcraft in games) or bring so it dosent look so generic and artificial.

In the case of Song of ice and fire, Martin said that he prefer to used magic or other fantastical element with care so to mesh with his desconstruction of Westero so people and avoid people using the old "is fantasy, just write as you want"

Also while Woman in his series are strong, they are not inmune to what happen: Arya is not become a action hero but a identless assasin,Sansa maybe guile hero but is thanks to Littlefinger and seven know how is going to mess with her,Catalyn can even morun his husband because of being strong,Brieene got the short end of trying to be a knight and Ygttie sometimes act like a bully to Jon.

this is refreshing becuase many author just slap badssery to female chararter and leave evetrything else, so most of the time they are just bully or sociopath(in fact, Sarah connor consider a great female chararter almost look like a desconstruction of this in how her actitued is afecting everything)

So again, how to handle values dissonace in fantasy is going to depent more about what type of series you are doing.

edited 27th Aug '15 2:38:38 PM by unknowing

That's the sign of a well-written female character. Believable, relatable.

A couple of thoughts:

I don't think anyone would dispute that the characters are well-written (well, most of them), but I feel like especially with non-Action Girl women, Martin doesn't really allow them to be cool or clever as much as he does male characters- and it seems like whereas male characters fail because of external factors, female characters are more often written as making bad decisions.

I think I have particular ire for Cersei and Arianne due to the combination of those characters protesting mistreatment but being presented as smug snakes who really should have listened to the men around them (and Cersei is like every negative female stereotype rolled into a single character).

I'd also say on the historic end that Martin presents it as if the only women with influence were action girls/have some thing (i.e. dragons) that makes people follow them in a way they wouldn't otherwise. He doesn't get the way noblewomen were "in charge of things" by virtue of having run of the household. In one recent interview, someone brought up noblewomen being involved in politics and Martin's response was basically, "Well, there was Anne Boleyn, and she of course was beheaded". And that's not getting into the absence of women (or really anyone) from the merchant class...

Sort of as a corrolary, I don't think it necessarily is deliberate (especially because bad things happen to everyone), but there's sort of a Reactionary Fantasy in having every female character who tries to lead being shut down.

" whereas male characters fail because of external factors, female characters are more often written as making bad decisions."

Well you have Tyrion who fails Because he is bitterness and pride, Twynn who never know who to shut up(in fact for something so cleaver as him, his treatmen of Tyrion border the cliche).

"I think I have particular ire for Cersei and Arianne due to the combination of those characters protesting mistreatment but being presented as smug snakes who really should have listened to the men around them (and Cersei is like every negative female stereotype rolled into a single character)."

With Cersei that was kind of the point: while she is right that men would get a free pass is clearly she wants that free pass for herself, she dosent want that privilage go away, she just want it for herlself.

On the other hand Martin sometimes go a little to far with his villians: Ramsey is pretty much a villian sue,Cersei as you said it, Twynn when Tyrion is involed and dont get even star on Ghis.

"And that's not getting into the absence of women (or really anyone) from the merchant class..."

That have to be more of the nature of his work: using the movers around medivial work is going to be royalty, because of this and his "if you arent going to move the plot, just go away" can let to some problems(like for example, Ghis being create only to give Dany her current plot)

Here's my interpretation. Female characters like Daenerys and Cersei are deeply flawed leaders because of the patriarchal systems in which they operate. Cersei in particular might have grown up to be a fair and just ruler had her family and the social system recognized and respected her talents as a leader ^note  I don't know about the books, but the show hints that Cersei could have been as book smart as Tyrion, and she'd probably be just as good of a ruler as him, if not better. Of course, Tyrion's scholarship comes from him having to compensate for being a dwarf and therefore undesirable. . Her being a woman precluded those talents from being properly channeled and nurtured, and much of the same is true for Daenerys. Daenerys has had to go from walking, breathing property to a ruler literally overnight, and it's obvious that she is ill-equipped for the task due in no small part to people treating her like an incubator/bargaining chip/sex object.

edited 27th Aug '15 6:10:06 PM by Aprilla

I think that's true of the show's presentation of Cersei (which I like), but Cersei in the books is just a "bad seed". The "moral" of her chapters seems to be that she complains about lacking power because she's a woman, but it's really because she's an idiot and the moment she gets power she screws up for the reader's amusement.

I've seen people try to argue that she's a more feminist character in the books, but IMO, if the show Cersei was presented like the book one, the show would rightly have been condemned for having a hideously sexist character.

I'm not sure Danaerys evidences anything particularly problematic on the gender front (although not the biggest fan of the character), except for the implication that a female ruler can only arise under ultra-rare/fortuitous circumstances.

It's like a guy can have followers simply by being the eldest son of a Lord. A woman needs to have dragons and an army of human Terminators.

edited 27th Aug '15 7:16:34 PM by Hodor2

Dany? maybe, Cersei? nope.

In the case of Cersei she is not much as book smart than social one, even Tyrion remark who lovely she look went smilling, this maybe be little but she put this in good skill, but her main flaw is ironily enought the same of Robert: they are good at getting power...but not enought to hold them, to trap in their own vice and when responsability star putting pressure on them they retreat into old conduct. Robert understod this too late while Cersei haven albe to get it.

Dany flaws is her draconian nature: she wants a better world but is unable to compromise anything to get it, having a somewhat childish notion of good and evil, problem is she is devolping a idea that everything can be good...by force, yeah that is not going to end well.

Also, dont get me wrong but while I understand the role the patriachy values have, I feel you are trying to tone down Cersei and Dany flaws or a least shiff the blame on something else, I have seen this villanious version of "never made self women" where there is female villian who is ruthless and evil...only for the source of her evil being men, the system of something else into the point she become a woobie, from Azula to Glados, so while Is clear that both Dany and Cersei face patriachal system, I dont think is the only(or even primary) source of their flaws

edited 27th Aug '15 7:19:43 PM by unknowing

No, I'm not. Environmental influence and personal responsibility are often part of the same feedback mechanism, and one does not necessarily negate the other.

I believe Martin intentionally uses binary character juxtapositions to drive home the above point. For example, Margery Tyrell is what Cersei could have been under much different circumstances, personality traits aside. This is true for nearly every character in the series. Podrick could have led a life closer to Robert if he had been born into a different social standing. Jamie could have ended up like Sansa if he'd been born a woman instead of a man.

Fundamentally, Game of Thrones is about people making choices and having to live with the consequences of those choices. For our purposes in this thread, it's also a show about the consequences of confined hierarchies and how men and women attempt to cope with, challenge and defend that hierarchy.

In my previous post, I was speaking hypothetically for an important reason.

edited 27th Aug '15 7:53:06 PM by Aprilla

Well, as I see it, it's that whole issue of representation. It's like it's "ok" to have an evil character from a minority group when you have other characters from the same group as a counter example. Now of course there are plenty of sympathetic female characters in the books as a counter to Cersei, but there really isn't anyone you can point to as a counterexample of "good female leader".

I'd also comment that while I kind of understand the complaint about female villains always having an excuse, it's not like that isn't done often for male villains- in fact, in ASOIAF itself, Cersei kind of stands out because several male villainous characters (i.e. Jaime, Tyrion, Stannis, Sandor) are all Not Evil, Just Misunderstood. I think the closest male equivalent to Cersei is Victarion, but he at least is presented as a badass and largely lacks Cersei's Butt-Monkey aspect.

I think what bothers me most is the fact that Cersei is written as having a huge problem with the Patriarchal system- Although I doubt this is the intent, it sort of comes off to me like saying, "Women/feminists complain about sexism and unfair treatment, but in reality, it's just that they are inferior."

edited 27th Aug '15 7:46:24 PM by Hodor2

What about Briene of Tarth?

Can kick ass as much if not more than most men in Westeros and still gets a shitstorm thrown at her for not being a lady and from being a woman doing a men's job.

She'd be the poster child for the woes women face in male dominated areas.

edited 27th Aug '15 7:54:00 PM by AngelusNox