Women: What are some good movies/shows for portraying women?

It seems like you keep characterzing women as all being feminine and men as all being masculine. Maybe I misunderstood, I need to look back at what you've written.

My point was more that Cyborg is extremely masculine, tough, willing to train ten times harder than most men ever would, and willing to bleed and keep on fighting. hardly fits the standard idea of a feminine woman, does it? I don't think she'd be frightened to walk down a dark alley at night. She's a pure savage!

It just seemed odd that you said it after only Deadrats and I had posted, and neither of us had made that claim.

And here I have no complaints at all, though you're describing only a certain type of women, the modern action hero. A characterization like that helps to dispose of the traditional ideas of women being feminine, but many women are very feminine.

Whew. How do I keep ending up getting stuck in threads and having to (or thinking I have to) post again and again. It's wearing me out. Damn gray matter, let me rest!!

 

I know aaaall about this. Old information. But 'til today I'm honest when I'm saying that there's no clear distinction. Perhaps since I'm a woman I'm the emotional dumpster for my male friends, but man, I have to lay it out here then that they're much more bitchy than any of my girlfriends and they get stuck and I mean stuck. For years stuck. I think that my girlfriends get stuck too but at some point man up and stop bitching about the same thing over and over again, but this is just my experience. Women obsess and live about an emotional issue quite intensely for a while, men tend to hold on to it for an extended period of time and I'm being rather forgiving upon the word "extended". I mean it. So, here's a difference. Try to implement it if you see it fruitful.

 

Lol ok, well, you're too tough for me. I'm done.

But wait (why am I saying this? Stop posting!)—I see what you mean about men holding onto emotions for a long time. But that counts as a difference.

Ok, I'm switching off my computer now before another little red number drags my tired ass back in here again. G'nite!

 

I'm sorry if I offended you. Didn't mean to. I guess I took things more seriously than it's worth... Sorry.

 

Judgemental much? Look, we're all born knowing nothing. It's more or less automatic to understand our own sex, as we have the same chemicals running around in our brains. Given that women are inherently different from men, men aren't going to automatically understand women, and vice versa. There's a lot of knowledge in the world, and a man isn't going to necessarily have all the time to investigate everything. You are being unnecessarily harsh about something a man can't necessarily help. Not to mention that the OP of this thread is a man openly asking for information. He is not being arrogant or rude. So please, don't be those things either.

 

Ok course they wont think similarly because they are two different people. Men and women are capable of the same thoughts. I have no fear walking down a dark street at night. My best mate hates it and he's a male. He avoids going out on his own late at night because of his experiences, not his sex. Do men have different tenancies to women? Maybe. But not so much that it defines them. Our lives, society and experiences shape us, not our sex.

 

One thing that's kinda fun to do, if you're truly exploring how to write a female (or male) character that isn't stereotyped, is sit down, write yourself a list of what you think stereotypical female characteristics are. Then write a list of what you think stereotypical male characteristics are.

Then construct a couple of characters and deliberately break some or all of the stereotypes. The more specific you can be, the better. And even more important, try to think of people you actually know who break these stereotypes.

Of course physical characteristics will influence a character. But they aren't the same for all women or all men either. For example, I look at women sprinters and marathon runners, and guess what? None of them have big boobs. Big boobs make running uncomfortable. (Just ask me.) Men who are tall and lean are unlikely to be successful weightlifters. However, women who are sturdy and who practice the sport can become very successful weightlifters. All women don't share the same body types. All men don't share the same body types. These kinds of things influence a character's development. Add this to their basic personality, and you see you have grounds for endless diversification of characteristics before you even start on the effects of environment, family, the character's personal history, mental ability, lucky breaks, tough pressures, etc.

Try not to limit yourself.

 

May I humbly suggest as a reality check that male writers submit their work to female beta readers, with the instruction to flag anything that the reader finds unrealistic, offensive, or just plain silly?

I guess the same thing would go for women writers and male beta readers. Although, for some reason, women seem to be better at writing male roles than the reverse. I wonder if It's because women spend more time trying to figure out men then men spend trying to figure out women. That has been true for any situation where there is one person who is subservient and another who is dominant. I refer you Hagbard Celine's observation in Illuminatus: "Communication is only possible between equals" ... because the higher-ups only tell the lower-downs what they want the lower-downs to believe, and the lower-downs only tell the higher-ups what the higher-ups want to hear.

 

I agree with that first statement, but that example is wholly inadequate. There are far too many factors that can influence that situation beyond gender.
Besides, walking through a sketchy neighborhood at night is a relatively rare example. There are differences and subtleties that come up in just a common conversation.

That's really the point I was starting with; this is about how I - or any of us - view women.

We are ALL subject to what we encounter in the world around us, whether it comes from a "real encounter" or something we see in the media.
Just because something we watch may be fictional, it still influences us. It still sways our opinions and out views. Generally not the same way as a "real life event" does, but it still impacts us.
We are creatures that are incapable of comprehending "the whole world," we can only perceive a limited view of it. As such, we have a slanted view of what the world is. This in inevitable. We only have a view of the world that is built by what we have experienced and seen. And that view includes what fictional media we ingest. Even if we understand that the events of said media are false, there is subtext behind that we subconsciously latch onto (or else distinctly reject.)

What this means is that our views of different kinds of people are in fact influenced by what we see in media. Whether you want to talk about genders, races, political parties, or a hundred different types of "those kind of people" that we don't have formal names for.
And from the perspective of genders, well, most of what I (and most men) watch are written for men. (Bechdel test, anyone?) And the portrayal of women within those works is created to appeal to men. Its effectively all just a fantasy. But even if we all know it is just a fantasy, it still influences us. It still impacts how we view the world.

And I would like to counter-act some of that influence by ingesting some media that I perhaps don't usually ingest.

And yes, the idea of talking to women has been brought up before but here's something important to consider:
That can ONLY EVER give me insight to how women act TOWARD MEN. Moreover, only to how they react toward men like me. It doesn't give insight to how women act toward other women, how women act when they are alone, how women act toward their brothers or their fathers. And the relationships I may have towards a woman are founded on just what kind of person I am and they are. Sure, I am able to have a wife and see how that woman reacts toward me; but what if I want to write about how a character {who is different than my wife} reacts toward her lover? I am capable of having a daughter and seeing how she reacts with her father; but what if I want to write about a woman {who has a much different father than I would be} and how she views her father, or how that relationship has influenced her?
I can't get those things from real life. My perception of what is realistic in those situations is based mostly on media I have ingested; shows I've watched that have dictate - for entertainment purposes - how a woman would react in that situation.

I'm not looking to magically change my understanding; I'm looking to shift my perception to a better place.

What the **** difference does it make if it's a book or a movie? The inherent flaws that make a portrayal less realistic are present in both.
If anything, I would argue that book is MORE likely to create a false impression. For one, a book is created by just a single person*, but a character's depiction in a movie will pass through multiple people. A writer creates the script, but another person has to adapt those words into a performance. The same script can become more realistic depending on the actor's ability to deliver the story in a believable fashion; an actress can make a woman character more realistic than the words alone that were written in the script. Furthermore, since reading a book demands the audience to image the scene, that imagined scene will be based on what the audience understands. If I view women in an unrealistic way, when I read a novel I'm just going to imagine the women in it in an unrealistic way, and thus just reinforce my misconceptions about women.

*Exceptions exist, we know, don't waste anyone time debating this.

NEVER!!
BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD!
SKULLS FOR THE SKULL THRONE!
MILK FOR THE KHORNE FLAKES!

Ha ha ha. I did that once. You know what happened? I got conflicting answers. Some women said it sounded realistic and other said it didn't.
It must have something to do with that whole "women are people" thing.

I would argue against that; I think men spend more time trying to figure out women than the inverse.
But rather, this is an issue with how our brains develop differently, as was mentioned and linked to a few times in this thread. A normal woman just gets an advantage in understanding social situations, just as a normal man gets an advantage in lifting heavy things.

 

Ah, but we also observe how people interact with other people. At school when you were there, on various jobs—these are especially helpful because you see the same people almost everyday through several years. But in stores, on a bus or walking through a park or whatever. Whenever you have other people around you in groups, you're observing human interactions. We all have a deep store of this kind of information to draw from.

 

Oh no, I didn't mean like that. I was just getting way too tired to be posting on such an intense thread, and well, you do come across as pretty tough. Especially in that post. I saw that and suddenly all my tiredness welled up and I knew I should have been asleep hours ago. Still friends!

 

Yes, but no matter how you try to slice it, and no matter what kind of life you live, it will still be limited.
I may see how women act toward other women at my work, but that is in a professional setting. Those women talking to customers have to act that way because, well, they are talking to customers. The women I might see chatting on the bus will be behaving differently than they would sitting at home in their living room. Etcetera, etcetera.

There is still value in (properly done) media to help expand your understanding.

I for one have posted the stupidest **** when I've posted on forums late at night and I'm tired. I've unintentionally made some enemies that way.

 

Very well said. I agree, and it's hard to articulate why, but it seems like in certain ways women are more developed than men. I'd say in the areas of interpersonal and social relationship.

I want to relate it to the idea that an older person can often understand what a younger one is going through because they've already been through it themselves. Well, let's say an adult can understand what an adolescent is going through, especially if they're similar kinds of people. You've been through those life situations and can tell them some things about it (whether they'll listen is a different matter... )

In a similar way, I think women have a broader and deeper understanding concerning relating to other people (all that white matter, connectivity and whole-brain stuff). In those particular areas most men are underdeveloped*. But of course, keep my usual caveat in mind here—when we're talking about men and women we're really talking about masculinity and femininity, which doesn't divide up neatly across the gender divide.

* No, not underdeveloped. Men are developed exactly as much as men need to be in those areas. Saying they're 'underdeveloped' is like saying women are underdeveloped when it comes to upper body strength and physical aggression. I should say that when it comes to interpersonal and social relations, men are less developed than women (in general, with caveat in mind. Whew!)

 

Of course, and that's equally true for everybody.

Oops, I accidentally deleted another part I wanted to respond to. You said you only see women in a professional environment. When you were a kid, you saw boys and girls all around you, as well as teachers, your friends' parents, etc. As a teen, you saw teens. You saw your parents, your relatives, strangers. Tap into your entire lifetime of memories.

 

@Lazaares I think I understand what happened. If your posts on this thread were aimed against the ideas that men and women are the same or that everybody is completely different, then I can see why you kept presenting stereotypical depictions of men and women (walking in a dark alley at night etc). But now I see that you don't limit men and women to those stereotypes, it was just for demonstration purposes. My bad.

 

I think our society largely limits us and makes us more gender aware or aware of our gender. I think the idea has been put into our heads that women shouldn't walk alone at night. But a man got mugged around our way. So the danger is, is some ways, just as present for men. There does seem to be some extreme difference. Like most serial killers are male, yes, there is a handful of women, but it's mostly men. But we're getting way off base with the actually question so I'll go back to that.

Movies seldom show women and men in their true light and with all their colours. Real life is what to look to. I know we're limited at the moment, but you must have known women in your life that you can look back on. I write male characters as a character, not as a male. And no one has ever commented that he felt unnatural and I've only known two men in my life to the depth that I could draw from them. My Dad and my Step-dad. It's hard to draw from teachers because you see the teacher, not the human. They are in an authority role and never tended to give much of anything personal away.

 

I like that a lot. ASK. Then LISTEN. And take on board what the responses are.

Writers have to learn about 'the other' every time they write a story that isn't about them directly. They research what they can, and use their imaginations to put themselves in 'the other's' shoes. It's like being an actor. Good actors can 'become' anybody they choose.

 

^ But keep in mind that people have little understanding of their own motivations. Often others can much more clearly see a person than they can themselves, partly because we have difficulty admitting negatives about ourselves, and we romanticize our own behavior.

I would recommend asking them not just about themselves, but also about how other women behave and think. Then you'll get a much more balanced view. But by the same token, men will have a yet different understanding of the behavior and motivations of women, from a viewpoint that women can't access or understand as well, just as women can see things about men that even other men might not realize. So take in the full spectrum. Talk to young and old, they'll be able to give different perspectives as well.

 

Alright, so I believe the way to go about separating the boys and the girls is not about personality, but their place and treatment within society. For instance, I've written a collection of transgender books where the cis male character is suddenly transformed into a woman. The biggest changes are how other people treat them and how they feel about other characters. Their personality stays the same, but their identity within society/social circles/close relationships is what is altered along with what society thinks is appropriate and normal activities (for instance makeup, dress up, etc is normal and accepted instead of strange and wrong--which doesn't mean all my characters enjoy makeup but it is now something they can consider without holding back).

Which is a weird situation but shows you how I write the genders. The gendered traits are superficial to the core personality. Whether male or female I consider upbringing, life experience, and skills when it comes to personality. I consider gender and sexual orientation when it comes to interactions. Can ones upbringing, skills, and life experience be affected by gender? Sure, but as I writer I don't think about that too much because that is just averages and I'm writing individuals, not averages.

As far as the neurobiological differences between genders...I think what you reference is a more subtle difference than you think. You can't make broad stroke assessments about how people think and live simply by the amount of gray or white matter they have. Plus, other factors affect gray and white matter, not just gender.

The only theoretical assumption you can make is that they may process base information differently--and I mean information in the most basic of ways. Some think faster, some think deeper (the differences between googling five things or reading a full page on one thing). It a simply a processing thing and doesn't mean we have different ideas or thoughts.

 

Forgive me for possibly misunderstanding you, but If the only women you've ever interacted with are your wife and your daughter, that would be a valid point. But in real life, you are exposed to a lot of women ... women you know in person, women who write about their experiences, women who write plays and screenplays. A writer is obliged to osmose as much as he or she can of these viewpoints. That is our job.

I think you're right about that, assuming that the actress is given the chance to do that. She often doesn't, though.

Not my experience. I maintain that a person in any subservient position has studied the people in a dominant position far more than the reverse. This is because the subservient one has a lot more to gain or lose. When women were in a position in society where they were utterly dependent on men for social position, for property, and for advancement, and their lives depended on how well they'd figured out what men want, you can bet your bottom dollar that they were paying more attention. It's the same dynamic with race relations, with prisoner/guard relations, child/adult relations, and military ranks.

I quote from Kurt Vonnegut's Mother Night about what children really learn in school:

That sounds about right to me. It seems that, at least in some areas we are moving away from that dichotomy, but we have a long, long way to go.

 

I think you might be; there is one point I want to try to reiterate.
If someone ONLY writes according the experiences they have personally had, they will have a limited view in their writing.
I'm not saying that real-world interactions aren't of value, but I AM saying that they can only go so far. There will ALWAYS be points and matters within a work of fiction that I don't have experience with, and a writer needs to look beyond their personal experiences to be able to fill in those gaps.

There is value to real-world experiences, but there is also value in looking beyond our personal experiences.
Besides, I don't think anyone wants to read my stories if the women in it never do anything other than say "Ew stop looking at me!" and "I'm gonna call the cops!"

Which comes down to the particular show. Most shows I've seen are going to be explicitly catering to male consumption, and with certainty that means the directors/producers are going to make the female portrayals such that they appeal to their male audience.
To take this to an extreme example, I'll bring up (shall we say) "adult films." Many women may look at the way the women act and declare that it is not a realistic depiction of how a woman would respond or behave. Well duh, it's low-level entertainment targeted at eliciting a specific reaction from a target demographic. It's not trying to be realistic, it's trying to be a fantasy, a fantasy selling a very specific product.
And while it may be easy to see there, the same principle applies across the board. The big-budget action movies I watch are also presenting a fantasy to appeal to an audience, just in a more complicated way. The comedies, the drama shows, everything I watch is also presenting a fantasy to appeal to an audience. Every show is going to be filtered in some way to make some kind of appeal. And as most of the shows I've watched are made by men and for men, they are going to filter the women in some way to appeal to me.

Hence why I'm asking for recommendations.

I am looking to expand the media I ingest. I am looking to expand my view of the world. I am looking for those depictions that aren't being filtered to fit my fantasies, but that present a more honest view.
I am explicitly asking women for shows that women feel give an honest depiction of women.

 

You make it sound like the only kind of shows and media are ones made to cater to a particular gender and built only on bad stereotypes. There are plenty of movies and shows that are liked by both men and women and not offensive to either (except of course to the professional offense brigades—never listen to them!)

In fact it seems like you're oversimplifying a lot of things and pushing them out toward the extremes. If you start seeing things that way it can become an addiction.