I write several stories with female MC. And I honestly don't care what the society, especially feminist, would say. I just want to write that MC as how I want her to be. Generally, my female MCs are tough, but they have different background stories and personalities. For example, there's one female MC I have who was heavily molested and weak. There's also another one who was bullied and have a very low self-esteem. I'm sure feminist are going to spray me for that, but who cares as long as there are correct-minded people love my story.
Why would you be sure of that? Where are people getting this idea that feminists want every female character to be made of stainless steel? It's frankly fairly offensive to assume that feminists share a single not-very-bright hive mind.
People get that idea from their typical behavior seen/heard directly or indirectly. I have a friend who's agree with feminism, but in the positive way. If feminists around the world have the same concept like my friend, this thread wouldn't be here.
I very strongly suspect that you are operating based on the conservative-media stereotype of feminists, rather than actual feminists.
"I very strongly suspect that you are operating based on the conservative-media stereotype of feminists, rather than actual feminists." This is a good point (and I'm a raging conservative). If you're going to at all touch on feminism or sub-groups of feminism in your work, do your research. Asking if a trait is or isn't feminist is like asking if a trait is or is not typical of dogs...different answers depending on whether you're looking at a St. Bernard or a Chihuahua. Seriously radical forms of feminism do exist and exist in the mainstream - and if you read their own academic literature they can be far scarier than anything FoxNews can dream up. As I said earlier - that sort academic literature is something I'm actually using ot build the villain in my own story. That said - your woman-on-the-street self-described feminists (even some of the more radical ones) aren;t going to share those views. The label "feminist" as a descriptor of political views is pretty much useless at this point.
I dislike any story where the MC is silly/ overly 'empowered'/ determined to martyr themselves/ unrealistically driven/ damsel in distress/ overcompensating for the perceived inadequacies of their stereotypical gender/ a Mary Sue. Man or Woman.
"People get that idea from their typical behavior seen/heard directly or indirectly. I have a friend who's agree with feminism, but in the positive way. If feminists around the world have the same concept like my friend, this thread wouldn't be here." ^ This was my full post. Next time, read it completely. And care to tell me how the 'actual feminists' act, please?
I read it. "Indirectly" certainly sounds like you're accepting someone else's reporting of feminist points of view. The actual feminists act many different ways, almost as if they're different people with different opinions.
[my opinion] It's not about strong vs weak when it comes to portraying female characters that is the feminist issue. Rather there are some specific stereotypes that one sees repeated with the majority of females portrayed in the media, and in some but not all literature (because literature is so much more diverse than the rest of the media) that is the problem. Here is a list of typical stereotypes: http://www.healthguidance.org/entry/15910/1/List-of-Gender-Stereotypes.html Women are supposed to have "clean jobs" such as secretaries, teachers, and librarians Women are nurses, not doctors Women are not as strong as men Women are supposed to make less money than men The best women are stay at home moms Women don’t need to go to college Women don’t play sports Women are not politicians Women are quieter than men and not meant to speak out Women are supposed to be submissive and do as they are told Women are supposed to cook and do housework Women are responsible for raising children Women do not have technical skills and are not good at "hands on" projects such as car repairs Women are meant to be the damsel in distress; never the hero Women are supposed to look pretty and be looked at Women love to sing and dance Women do not play video games Women are flirts Women are never in charge If these characteristics fit the female one is writing about, it should be a purposeful choice. It shouldn't be done lazily. Your character might be a flirty nurse, I've known a few. Just be sure that is important to the character, not something that you make the character because you don't see female nurses any other way. For my own writing, I have some stereotypical females, because I knew them, from my high school, and they were catty empty-headed girls in cliques. Some of the male characters in my story are also guys I knew, jocks that were just as empty-headed. But not all my characters are like these. The female lead is not. It's a social statement that I wanted to write. I want to show her in contrast to the stereotype. She's clever and has some physical skills, but she's not macho. And the male lead would be a jock if he wasn't more interested in science. So muscular, capable men are sometimes brainy. (The web link has a list of male stereotypes.) The point is, I choose to write a character that doesn't fit the female stereotype because that's part of the story I'm writing. I want young girls to see different role models and my book will have those. I wish more people would write better female role models for young girls. But not everyone needs to do that. It's not that one need write their characters any particular way, but just do it purposefully, because that is the character, not because that is a female or a male. [/my opinion]
If you read it completely, you wouldn't have come up with that thoughts. And as mentioned by you. "Actual feminists act many different, almost as if they're different people with different opinions." So, that doesn't mean they're all positive. Like I said, my friend is one positive feminist and pretty much I agree with her. Again, if all feminist have the same concept as she does, this thread wouldn't be here. Are you feminist? Because you're so sensitive and defensive to it in a typical negative feminists way, which is the reason why people like OP are afraid getting their work sprayed on.
You're debating by stereotype. It's really not interesting. To further clarify: "I bet that you hate puppes!" "What?" "And sunsets! I bet you despise sunsets! People of your type always do!" "I..." "And butterflies! I bet you're in favor of destroying all butterflies!" "Now, wait a..." "You're just so NEGATIVE!"
@Chrysostom you don't seem to understand where ChickenFreak is coming from, it makes me cringe to see someone insinuate an insult with the words 'typical negative feminist'. You're attacking someone for holding a different opinion than yours on a subject you seem to think is solely about negative/positives outlooks and it's more offensive than you know. Feminism is not about your happy friend. Research it. And don't call me negative just because I happen to be educated on the subject. If you don't know "how actual feminists act", I suggest you bow out of the conversation.
What I got from the original post wasn't about feminism, but how everything that becomes popular eventually runs into a backlash. People still try to avoid it, though.
We're not here to discuss specific members or what their possible positive/negative attributes may or may not be, so don't direct the discussion to any member's person.
Really? With that analogy, are you trying to attack yourself? I was indirectly mention the negative feminists and you're strongly disagreed to that and pretty much talked like the first guy in your analogy up there. You're saying that there are different types of feminist. Sure, I totally agree to that. But you disagreed when I said there are Negative and Positive feminist. It seems you're trying very hard to defend it. You're like saying "Different types of feminist: 1. Positive feminist. 2. Positive feminist" I've seen different feminists in my life and I categorized them into two: Positive and Negative. You don't like it when I was talking about the Negative ones (who might spray my work and others because of their concept of feminism), because I pretty much don't have problem with how the Positive ones think? Wow, bro. WOW. Sometimes I wonder if you really fully read my post before replying. Anyway, just have fun and keep suspecting me as 'stereotypical-feminist-hater' whatever, yeah? Don't read my post and reply based on your own suspicions towards me. Good day.
Of course @ChickenFreak can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you have completely misunderstood what she was saying and you're putting words in her mouth. I think a lot of it boils down to the misuse of the word "feminist." If I'm reading the situation correctly, what you meant by "feminists" in your first post in the thread (saying feminists will probably spray you for your writing), are extremists. Sure, they can be very loud and get a lot of media attention because of their colorful views, but they represent a very small minority and it's debatable whether they are even real feminists or just misandrists pretending to be feminists. Likewise, a lot of those stereotypes you classify as "negative feminists" are perpetuated by men who make fun of feminists by portraying their arguments in an unrealistic fashion, twisting their words into extremist nonsense, taking things out of context to ridicule them etc. That's why one should be careful when talking about feminists as a collective, especially when lumping them together with the extremists/misandrists (I'm referring to your first post here) since the two are different things. Kinda like associating all Republicans with extreme right wing militant racists. That being said, accusing people based on assumptions and putting words in their mouths is not a productive line of discussion and should be avoided.
I'll have to second this! I always go back to Nabokov's Lolita. The MC/Narrator is a pedophile trying to "win" the girl... If that doesn't go against society, idk what is. Regardlss, Humbert Humbert seduces us to keep reading through his logic, his language and his charisma (primarily the last two). Case in point, it's not necessarily about the type of character you have, but how you tell their story and how you develop them as people.
Honestly, my point is as simple as "There are good and bad feminist" and people were pissing in their pants, showing heavy disagreement to that and trying to convince me there are no bad ones. Whatever. Here you go: "Heil Feminism! Feminism 4 Life!" Hope you 'feminists' are happy.
Oh, I just can not stay away from "feminist" threads. Take it from me, I'm a feminist. Do I want female characters to be "strong" and "empowered" or do I want them to be diverse and come in different kinds? Take a wild guess. I have a female character, a grown up but not strong and empowered. I'm sick of the strong and empowered because characters like that aren't real, at least not to me. I'm sick of courage-as-a-virtue. People aren't as brave as they are in fiction. The horrors of the real world and dark wizards, you can't compare them even if it's all just metaphors but I digress... Anyway, my character has a friend who is strong and empowered, 'though. Obviously, a character who is "weak" ought to learn to become "stronger", but not for feminist reasons, but because... You know, the weak character has to learn to be more assertive and less fearful to function better in life. I'm not sure where you got the idea that people only want strong and empowered female characters. I've read a lot of texts about what people look for, and people don't want the badass fighters. They want the real thing. They want diversity, not clichés.
