Are female protagonists over done or just difficult to write?

Look at Ripley from Aliens Trilogy. She was a well written strong female character, and still retained some of the femininity (damn that word is a tongue twister) to not come off like a man.

Point is society/media likes to dictate how each sex is suppose to be, instead of letting us be individuals. Screw all that media/societal expectations crap, when it comes to men and women. I like to see just how to make good female characters, that are strong and independent. As well as giving them personalities that aren't one dimensional. Point is write the people you would like to read about, even if they go against the grain.

 

I don't understand your point. Science is all about statistics, As long as I'm talking about science, I'm talking about statistics. On a larger point, when someone reads a book, a character needs to be believable. A character who is a collection of rare traits isn't going to seem realistic. (Unless, of course, the story is about being a collection of rare traits.) How many stories do you know of where the hero is an albino, hermaphroditic, left-handed, polyglot little person with Tourette's? I know of none. I'll leave that book for you to write, but you're gonna have trouble selling it. Readers like characters which feel realistic.

 

To clear up any confusion, I'm not suggesting that we write stories in which all the women have scales and eat their young. I and my three brothers were raised by a deaf and blind mother who had to deal with my schizophrenic dad as well. I know women can be tough and I write them that way. But, voice is different because women aren't men (or vice versa).

Its even rarer to hear a narrative that speaks of men as the people to whom things are done. It shocked me when I learned that men are more likely to be raped than women are. source Even in this age where our entertainment is full of the likes of Katniss Everdeen, Ripley, Wonder Woman, Lara Croft, Xena, Buffy, Willow, Winifred Burkle, etc., it is rare and far between that we see anything about male rape victims.

I think, in the US, some of that is due to female soldiers being held to a lower standard and, therefore, being soldiers only if we modify "soldier". I believe you don't see this in countries in which male and female soldiers are held to the same standard

 

>_____>

(goes to revise his notes on a race in his fantasy story)

 

If I wanted to attract a young female audience (because it's lucrative) I would absolutely make a teenage girl who was feminine and tough enough to beat up demons. What's the issue?

 

13-year-old Link the Writer
Oh wow! Give it to me! I must read it! C'moooon! D: LIKE GIVE IT TO MEEEE!!!!

I'd read it. And I'm a guy.

 

Joss Whedon has given us many such characters. I'd love to have Whedon's money.

 

Fiction isn't.

My point is that you haven't even offered us any evidence that the anatomical differences that you describe produce behavioral differences, even on a statistical level. If you proved that, then you would have to move on and prove that the statistical differences are relevant to individuals--that a lot of things that are perfectly normal for a man are quite abnormal for a woman, or vice versa. Then you would have to convince us that fiction must be about statistically normal people, and that a person with unusual or interesting characteristics has no place in fiction.

That's a whole lot of proving to do.

A stereotypically male behavior engaged in by a woman, or a stereotypically female behavior engaged in by a man, is unlikely to be as, well, unlikely, as even the "left-handed" part of your example. How often have you heard someone say, "A character in this book is left handed? LEFT HANDED?! Only ten percent of the population is left-handed! This is totally unrealistic! I just can't read this book any longer."[/QUOTE]

 

I think the question of how to "handle" a female protagonist stems from the extensive history of having a male point of view, whether as the protagonist, as the narrator, or simply from the male author's perceptions and projections into the world. For some time, the dominant point of view about the world and society was through male eyes, and largely still is. And it was uncontended for decades. Now male writers tend to have to consider the believability of their female characters because as a society, we've acknowledged the female presence as unique and equal to that of males.

To expand on this, I'll throw myself into a hypothetical situation here. I am a man - a young man, fresh from boyhood, but a man nonethe less. As such, I've grown up mostly free to act as I choose, with the exception being reminders that Men shouldn't hit a woman, men should have a firm handshake and look each other in the eye, gentlemen hold doors and tables for women, real men don't back down from bullies, and things like that. Otherwise, my perceptions have been relatively unimpeded and uncolored. If I want to do or be something, I've essentially had unquestioned support because everything has been in the realm of possibility and likely will be within my foreseeable future (if I work hard enough and make the right friends).

My sister, on the other hand, has grown up with continual indoctrinating comments and corrections about being a lady, and what women don't do, and how women should be have and how they should address a man, and how they should dress, and even what kinds of challenges and biases they face by virtue of being women and the opportunities they may not have. It goes even deeper considering she is also a black woman.

Even if the two of us grew up thoroughly supported, awarded, free in thought and action, it is also true that as a man, my world view may be colored by a privilege I didn't even know about because I didn't have to think about it. Beyond this, we must look at some of the biological differences. While emotional responses, to situations may be fairly similar throughout humanity, and may yet vary from person to person, it is generally accepted as true that men and women tend to exhibit/experience different chemical responses to physical stimuli, which may also impact the thought process. Look at teenagers in puberty... Although it maybe true that most, if not all, teenagers scarcely know what to do with themselves in this phase, it can be observed even further in times of stress or social interaction.

Now, with all this being said, male and female characters must be taken in context as well. People are products and actuators of their societies. If the views of gender roles and gender identity are different in your world than they are in the real world, that must be taken into consideration because it will influence the voices the characters take.

I think another exacerbater of this issue is the discussion of gender identity and acceptable norms and behaviors. These days it is not uncommon to find a man who is culturally effeminate in voice, thought, and build, just as it is not uncommon to find culturally masculine women. (This has little to do with sexual-orientation, I might add.) As our conceptions are challenged and gradually changed,we become more aware of our unique differences and strive to capture and respect them more authentically in this age than before.

Now practically, this can all be considered a lot of hogwash and big talk that amounts to nothing. For many, it all comes down to setting and characterization. If you have a realistic setting, you'll want to consider your character as a product of a realistic society and think about the through the eyes of someone in their shoes in the real world. Most people don't think about all the indoctrinating they've been through growing up. It's largely subconscious. But there are times when certain things may present a challenge, like a teenage girl who wants to ask out her crush but "knows" it's wrong for the girl to approach the guy.

If I were to write a female lead in a realistic setting, I figure the most useful thing I could do is step out of my own mind and get to know women today. Hang out with and/or observe the demographic I want to depict and then just be authentic. The same issue presents itself when a writer wants to portray a character of a different race or ethnicity. It is about context and research and mindfulness. A Hispanic boy raised in a white neighborhood in white schools, may not be very different from his white classmates. On the other hand, depending on what he is experiencing from his parents and peers, his pov and voice may be very different.

 

That's like me saying that steel is stronger than wood and you replying that I haven't proven that a bridge made out of steel is stronger than one made out of wood.

 

For you, I'd be better off making video games.

 

And having said all of that, there is nothing wrong with relying on and utilising a few stereotypes. Stereotypes are not inherently bad, we all do it as a form of mental classification. It is oneway in which our brains store and recall information particularly about groups of people or things. They are generalizations that, if treated as such and not as universal constants, can help readers quickly grasp a concept. It's like a form of subtext, more is contained in the idea than the idea by itself.

Even so, there is positive and negative stereotyping (of which I'm sure we are all guilty to an extent), that is inherent in the subconscious (and sometimes conscious) processes of "otherizing" a person or group. It may be to your advantage to use the stereotype of Hispanic and Latino people having strong family values. It may also be to your detriment to depict all the blond characters as ditsy...

 

...? A well-designed wooden bridge certainly could be stronger than a poorly-designed steel bridge. However, I don't see how that's relevant to the discussion.

 

Or, testosterone levels really do make a difference in levels of aggression.

 

I don't know where you live, but I know many places where if you said, "I need to find a wife who will be a full-time bread winner so that I can be a stay-at-home dad," you'd get a lot of grief.

In my country, men must sign up for the military draft, but women don't.

If a man is sitting watching children play on the swings at a public park, he is much more likely to be suspected of being a pedophile than a woman in the same situation is.

 

Then I guess I don't understand your question.

 

I don't have a question. My point is that the anatomical differences between men and women mean essentially nothing when it comes to writing male and female characters. It's not as if an author can look at a brain scan and say, "Ah, this person is conflict-averse, socially inept, and enjoys Cheetos." A person's nature is not primarily determined by whether they are biologically male or female, and neither is a character's nature.

 

I assure you that modern social science doesn't believe in a mind/body split. It is dishonest to just ignore all sexual dimorphism in the brain.

 

Well, yeah, in most places you'd be right. I'd likely not have gotten the same support for that one, but at the same time, some family members I have are open-minded. But that hardly contradicts my point because what I'm getting at is that I still never really grew up with much of a concept of what couldn't be done or accomplished due to being a man. There are many men who grow up with ideas and pressures of what they must do and must be, but that only serves my point that men face socialization that differs from women.

As for your last comment. I won't say you're wrong, I just don't see you're point unless you mean to supplement my case.

 

And? How do you use those architectural differences to come to a prediction of purely biologically-based differences in male and female behavior? You talked about gray matter, white matter, etc. And? Can you tell us, precisely and in detail, how those differences produce exact, specific behaviors in males versus females? Can you tell us exactly which behaviors come from biology and which come from society and upbringing? Can you start with the gray matter difference and take us directly to a character description of a male and a female character?

 

Okay, I totally agree with that point. For example, how boys and girls learn to deal with bullies is different.

 

Bingo!

... oh wait... I don't have a dog...

 

I don't know. I think the busty, scantily clad warrior woman isn't realistic whereas I've actually seen shirtless bulging-muscled men who could no doubt kick ass. The women on WWE don't meet my criteria of realistic.

 

If you read back, you'll find that I mentioned cultural differences as well. So, no. I can't derive a character based only on physical differences. But, physical differences do exist.

White matter is all the connective tissue that lets you free associate and approach problem solving more holistically. Grey matter is task-oriented (for example, when we talk about the part of the brain that does x, that part is grey matter). When men can get absorbed in a task more easily and ignore what is going on around them. Women can shift between tasks more easily. I have done math in my head while reading something else and having a discussion on a third topic. But, that requires concentration on three different things at the same time. Women can jump from one topic to another to another (or back to the first) more rapidly than men (such as getting a kindergartner ready for school while taking care of another little kid who is sick and vomiting, while trying to get someone to babysit the sick kid while she is getting ready for work).

Men tend to use different strategies to release stress. They produce less of the bonding chemical oxytocin. Again, just read what transsexuals have to say about changes in estrogen and testosterone.

Females have a larger hippocampus (memory). They are more likely to remember the song that was playing the first time you saw each other. They are better able to put their feelings into words because they have more diverse language areas. Females will often linger on an emotional memory. Men recall the memory, analyze it, and move on.