"Men With Boobs"

[serria]

I was reading a fantasy trilogy, and was reminded about how much the genre apparently struggles with women. The first book was an impulsive purchase at the bookstore, because I liked the cover artthought the description looked interesting. And I enjoyed it, more or less - not the greatest thing I've read, but relatively entertaining. The story was about a who boy gets trained as an assassin, and his adventures thereafter. Two other characters include his somewhat dry female love interest (kind of in the ballpark of stereotypical damsel in distress, not particularly captivating character to me) and another female character who is also an assassin. This character, though has a bit of a femme fatale entrance and follows kind of an "evil badass woman" trope throughout the second book, was still kind of interesting. I enjoyed a lot of her scenes, at any rate.

Anyway, I finished the second book, and there was an interview included at the end of it. One of the questions was about the whole "strong female character" thing, and the author (who is a man) gives quite a rant. He feels, apparently, that most "strong female characters" in fantasy are really just "men with boobs" but he is very excited about the direction his female assassin character is taking in the third book. He feels his portrayal is, I guess, very true to femininity and rounds out the character, etc.

So what happens in the third book? The female assassin falls in love with the male protagonist and spends the majority of the book crying and being emotional. As, you know, women do. :P

Fantasy and science fiction are my favorite genres, but I wonder if they tend to be more sexist than other genres. For the record, I don't think a female character falling in love with a male protagonist is sexist, nor is a previously cold character suddenly becoming emotional. But juxtaposed with the mindset of the author, that any "fighting female" character who isn't emotional or in love is a "man with boobs" - I think there's a reality here with how many female characters are portrayed.

I brought this up because I am writing a fantasy story which stars a female warrior. She has a female love interest. More than that, the leading male character is the one who has to be saved. I wasn't thinking about social issues or anything when I wrote this, but that's how it turned out. It was an unintentional subversion of gender roles. Of course, I am female myself, but I wonder if my protagonist is a "man with boobs." She is certainly not demure, emotional, or romantic. This accusation, though not (yet) directed at me, bothered me because my protagonist is really not at all defined by her female gender - by fantasy genre cliches, she should just be swapped into a male character. When I started overthinking it, I was even beating myself up over having a lesbian romance - does that (unintentionally) mean that she is taking the "male" role? Does that mean she is a "butch lesbian" (she's not, she's bisexual)? Is my story suddenly about gender roles when I never wanted it to be? What if I make her love interest male, is that better or worse? What if I have no love interest - does that also make a statement about a "masculine" female character?

Blah. I hate the phrase "men with boobs." I also hate the phrase "strong female characters." Like, what do they even mean!

Comments

[ljwrites]

Everything sarillia said because word. (New member and first-time commenter by the way, hi! *waves nervously*) Additionally, I don't think the issue is about upholding or inverting gender essentialism but about how interesting the character is as her own person--as so aptly said above, a character who is female or male, not a female or male character.

Because while I do see the concern about any character being a flat stereotype of whatever gender, since the stoic action hero type with no inner life is awfully boring. However, the solution is not to make them a stereotype of the "right" gender but to let the character be their own person. Female stereotypes are no more interesting than male stereotypes and vice versa.

[inkdust]

Hi! We're so glad to have you :D And you're absolutely right. It's really about being interesting, in the end.

[ljwrites]

Thanks for the warm welcome! ^.^

[serria]

Hi there, thanks for joining the community! :D

I'd definitely agree, and hope any writer would see the wisdom of that. Characters shouldn't be defined by their genders, or even their roles (professions, etc.) Characters should be first and foremost human, and every writer's goal should be to strive to create authentic people, no matter how fantastical the circumstances you place them in. Maybe this is a common failing of the fantasy genre - authors can get so preoccupied with the magic of the world and the epic backdrop to the story that they neglect to make their characters interesting. As for me, characters are always the most interesting part of any story, and they should remain genuine no matter the setting of the story.

[splinteredstar]

I think you're right, with that being a problem of fantasy - it's more about the world than the people. Science fiction, too. (Asimov's Foundation is wonderful at sweeping social forces - utter failure with individual people.) I think that's part of why I don't like Traditional Fantasy - people are just there to move the cameras around while we stare at the world.

Basic rule: people are people, and they should act like people. Even if they're on the moon/middle earth/the bottom of the ocean.

[serria]

See, I do like traditional fantasy - the atmosphere, the worlds, the magic. And I have loved books with sub-par characters before. But to be honest, what really makes a story for me is the characters. It's like the difference between playing Elder Scrolls or Dragon Age, if you've played them - one is a silent protagonist running around a beautiful world doing missions. The other is a character drama set in a fantasy world.

I really would love to read fantasy that's written like non-genre stuff, with aims at ~real people~, but put in a fantasy world. Even out of my favorite fantasy books, I'm not sure how many of them have a full cast of three dimensional characters. There are definitely fantasy books that are better than others in that regard, though.

[ljwrites]

Another good thing about truly three-dimensional characters is that they often overcome the gender stereotype issue altogether. It's almost impossible to have a fully-fleshed character who doesn't have some characteristics from both genders, to say nothing of characters who don't fit into the gender binary.

Maybe this is a common failing of the fantasy genre - authors can get so preoccupied with the magic of the world and the epic backdrop to the story that they neglect to make their characters interesting.

You reminded me of a test presented by a Youtube review of the Star Wars movies, to describe characters independently of externals like their powers and positions. The reviewer argued that the original trilogy passed this test, while the prequels did not. Maybe applying that test is one way of making characters interesting, since it's true that the trappings of genre can prop up characters who can't stand on their own otherwise. Assuming one wants to make Dragon Age rather than Elder Scrolls of course, to use your very clever analogy. :) There's a market for both, but I personally find character drama more satisfying than a plot-driven story.

[sarillia]

Welcome! I'm glad you commented. I love to see new people. And I'm glad you appreciated my comment too.

I agree with you about worrying more about how interesting the characters are than about what statement they are making. The best way to avoid stereotypes is to remember that you're creating a bunch of individuals. So no deciding that a character is female so that means she must have x, y, and z traits. And, like you said, the same goes for male characters. They don't often get scrutinized as much but they have just as many boring or annoying stereotypes.

[ljwrites]

Thank you! It's great to be welcomed. :D Your comment was great, and touched on many of the concerns I've had that some "strong" female characters were being used as a subtle form of misogyny, as in "She may be a girl but she's manly, so she's awesome!" And even worse, "Eeeew, this guy and that girl are girly, so they're inferior/awful (especially the guy)."

It's crazy-making that female characters receive more scrutiny than male ones, as though male were the default and female characters somehow have to justify their existence. I think the author in the OP was trying to say that a boring male stereotype doesn't become any more interesting in a female form, though unfortunately he himself ended up using a boring female stereotype instead.

The best way to avoid stereotypes is to remember that you're creating a bunch of individuals. So no deciding that a character is female so that means she must have x, y, and z traits.

Quoted for truth. That's an excellent guideline for all "different" traits like race, sexual orientation, disability and so on.