Why all the hate?

[shipperx]

Intersting post on i09:

Why do we hate so many female characters?

Postman,

Reading the recent online complaints about Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., one of the biggest issues with the series is one I with which greatly agree: Skye adds nothing to the show. This seems to be an ongoing problem with series of the last few years. There's Chloe on SGU, Laurel Lance on Arrow (weirdly her sister Sara and Sara's sidekick Sin are much better characters after just four episodes), or Gwen on Torchwood. They're not like Skyler White or Andrea on The Walking Dead, who are fully fleshed out characters hated for their bad decision making.

These characters are unlikeable because of a combination of poor character development and weak acting. The writers seem bored with them too, giving them stories that are disconnected from the events. The classic example for me is SGU where Chloe, while being stuck on a derelict spaceship on the other side of the universe, is worried that all her friends back home are phony bitches. Or Laurel's drinking problem. Or everything about Skye.

So what gives? I get that society has historically written women as damsels or objects meant to be rescued by the dashing hero, but the days of Season 1 Counselor Troi have passed us by. For every Major Kira or Sarah Connor there seems to be two Charlie Mathesons. Is this a gender thing, or general, poor character writing? What would you recommend to TV showrunners about giving us women characters we can care about?

There are a ton of reasons why people find certain female characters problematic. You've already hit upon two of them, which is to say poor writing and poor acting. Skye in Agents of SHIELD is a prime example of this; she doesn't really have any defining characteristics, she's completely unconvincing as a brilliant hacker, and yet somehow the team is bringing her along everywhere and she's the audience's surrogate. It's a recipe for annoyance, if not disaster. But to be fair, all the characters on Agents of SHIELD are equally poorly written — Melinda May gets away with it for being mysterious and badass, while we have a long history with Agent Coulson, but imagine Coulson's "Tahiti" mystery applied to, say Ward and think how much of a shit you would not give.

Another problem is when storytellers create female characters to be love interests and nothing else — meaning they're one-dimensional (and completely boring if their on-screen relationship isn't clicking). This is Laurel Lance's problem on Arrow. She was fine as Oliver's object of affection, while she was dating his best friend, but in season two they had to cool off the relationship. This made sense storytelling-wise, but left Laurel with nothing to do. Now, I actually liked her drinking storyline, because 1) it gave her a dimension beyond her relationship with Ollie, and 2) it seemed to be to be a very reasonable response to all the horrible shit she'd so recently been through. But compare that to Felicity and Black Canary and Ollie' mom and the Huntress and even Thea, and all the interesting facets those women have beyond their relationships with male characters.

But sometimes the problem is the fans, who are often unwilling to give female characters slack that they seemingly give to male characters. This seems to me to be a pretty recent phenomenon, and it's kind of disturbing. Skyler White from Breaking Bad and Game of Thrones' Sansa Stark are the two most prominent examples of this. These characters are largely hated, despite being well-written and well-acted and three-dimensional, and as far as I can determine they're hated because of these reasons

For instance, people seem to hate Skyler in Breaking Bad because she was "a bitch" to Walt in the beginning, then became a hypocrite for reaping the benefits of Walt's meth operation while disapproving of it (I'm only midway through season 2, so I'm using this excellent Esquire article for help here). First of all, Skyler was nagging Walt 1) when her husband was constantly and obviously hiding things from her, and 2) when she discovered her husband was running an illegal meth operation. As for the latter, why is Skyler spending Walt's meth money a bigger issue than Walt running a goddamn methlab in the first place? It seems to me that the problem people have with Skyler is that people see Walt as the protagonist, and somehow think that makes him a hero, and thus Walt's irritation with Skyler becomes the audience's, despite the fact that Walt is a goddamn monster.

Sansa is hated even more, and it just boggles me. This is a girl who was fed stories of beautiful princesses and brave knights all her life, gets told she's going to marry the prince of the whole damn country, and then had her beliefs and her entire life slowly, methodically destroyed. Who wouldn't be upset by that? What teenager wouldn't be devastated by this, male or female? People compare Sansa to Arya, who seemingly holds up "better" than Sansa, but the amount of danger Arya is in never comes close to Sansa's. Arya was never beaten in front of the court by the knights she had always been told protect people. Arya is trying survive on the run, but Sansa is the most vulnerable pawn in the Game of Thrones, which is way more dangerous than serving Tywin Lannister wine at night. I understand all of Sansa's anguish, and that she's still holding it together, playing the game and even just surviving at this point only shows her immense strength.

Two other female characters I know of who were so hated were The Walking Dead's Lori and Andrea. Now, I'd say Lori was written terribly, because I can't imagine that any decent writer would intentionally make a character that unlikeable and inconsistent. Andrea just turned really preachy. But these characters are loathed with a passion that the male characters just don't get, and I'm as guilty of that as anybody. And now I wonder why I was so passionate about hating them, along with so many other people, because Dale, Shane and even Rick were also pretty annoying, but no one hated them like they did Lori and Andrea. (In retrospect, I think Lori's turn in season three as a woman who knew she fucked up badly was pretty good, but I understand it was too little, too late for most viewers after her previous shenanigans.) It actually makes me a bit uncomfortable now.

So there are problems behind the scenes, in the scenes, and out in the audience. Writers should always refer to the Bechdel test, to make sure that their female characters are more than their romantic relationships. Audiences should try to step back and make sure they're cutting female characters the same slack as male characters. And actors… take acting lessons, or something, I guess.

All of that plus... fandom can be really sexist sometimes.

Comments

[red-satin-doll.livejournal.com]

I'm not crazy about fandoms is they are incredibly sexist and misogynistic at times, particularly (and this is weird, I know) women. For some reason there are a lot of women out there who have a deep ingrained subconscious hatred of their own gender and have weirdly worshiped the male gender as being superior. (Poor deluded fools.)

THIS cannot be said often enough, sadly; because it's true.

I think that for most girls and women the concept of being "good enough" is nonexistent or very hard-won. (This applies to boys and men as well but to a different degree. I've never met a man who says he hates his body; I've yet to meet a woman who won't tell you exactly what she thinks is wrong about her looks, her age, etc)

I think is that we are carefully trained to hate our own gender and hate ourselves (and if we dislike ourselves, how could we possibly be expected to like other women?) We absorb our mothers' anger and pain, which is passed down to us; we're bombarded by media images that tell us if ONLY we were perfect cooks and our whites were sparkling white; IF ONLY we were a few pounds thinner, a few years younger...and IF ONLY we were perfect mothers, or even wanted to be mothers (do we really or is that what's expected?), IF ONLY we gave in to the guys who wanted to sleep with us do we really or is that what's expected?) and so on....

We are not supposed to be angry, sad, imperfect, frustrated but we are; and we despise it in ourselves because deep down we're convinced it's not all right to feel that way or be that way. To be human.

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

I want to preface this anecdote with the caveat that I am not speaking of slash as a genre or slash fans as a group. It's an anecdote about one specific individual. There is not one damn thing odd in people slashing characters that they enjoy, are intrigued by, or whose interaction and/or relationship dynamic (whatever that might be) interests them. I've shipped UC and canon same gender pairings myself. This anecdote is totally not about that. This is about something... different.

This anecdote was being on a board somewhere where some girl (I'm using girl because she did come across as being terribly young) who said that she wrote m/m fanfic because the 'girlie bits' made her uncomfortable and freaked her out to the point that she found it intolerable. She totally couldn't read fiction that involved females interacting with males sexually... which was why she shipped male/male slash.

I desperately wanted to tell her that that's... well, that's an issue. There was so much loathing for the female body in her post that it was concerning. Hatred of 'girlie bits' (her words, not mine) is upsetting. No one should loathe a gender's sexuality.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Yes, I've seen this reaction as well...and it surprised me.

Like you, I've shipped UC and canon same gender pairings. And I enjoy homoerotic fiction. I'm also heterosexual.

But, there is an interesting subset of female "heterosexual" slash shippers that is a wee bit disturbing. Some don't like their bodies, others just don't like female characters nor find female characters interesting.

There is also...well the normal, anyone who gets in the way of my ship must die regardless of their sex, personality, or ethnicity or how likable or interesting they are as a character. LOL! Seriously it could be a stuffed animal and people would get upset. [This I see a lot in soap opera fandoms, mainly because soap operas adore love triangles of doom.)

[red-satin-doll.livejournal.com]

I've seen this reaction as well...and it surprised me.

I wish I could say that it surprised me, alas.

Some don't like their bodies, others just don't like female characters nor find female characters interesting.

Nail, head.

There are plenty of men who are squicked out by the very idea of m/m sex, as we know, and yet I never get the sense that it comes from a specific hatred of the male body in and of itself - that is, their own bodies - or a dislike of their own gender.

Seriously it could be a stuffed animal and people would get upset.

Ah, so that explains why there aren't more Mr Gordo shippers *rimshot*

[red-satin-doll.livejournal.com]

I want to preface this anecdote with the caveat that I am not speaking of slash as a genre or slash fans as a group.

I wouldn't have assumed that, so no worries on my account. If fandom has taught me anything, it's that "shippers" come in all stripes and never to assume the gender, orientation or age of anyone based solely on shipping preferences.

There was so much loathing for the female body in her post that it was concerning. Hatred of 'girlie bits' (her words, not mine) is upsetting. No one should loathe a gender's sexuality.

Concerning indeed. That level of self-loathing for one's own body probably reflects a rather horrible upbringing. What has this girl been taught about herself to get to that point? (I begin to wonder if she's been physically and/or verbally abused. Infants and toddlers do not hate their own bodies or themselves, until they've been taught to do so. It's not a natural state of being.

But she's not all that unusual, just extreme, I think. I've known women IRL who adore their gay male friends but lesbians make them queasy; so called "fag hags".(At least one of more of these women gave off a distinctly bisexual vibe even as they loudly proclaimed to anyone who'd listen that they were het. Right.)

I've was a fan of Margaret Cho, but my enthusiasm dropped quite a bit after hearing "jokes" in her routines about how uncomfortable she is with lesbian sex and women's body parts; she said women's private parts "smell" in a way that conveyed disgust, and I pretty much haven't wanted anything to do with her since. Janine garafalo made similar remarks in a routine. The irony to me is that both women have cultivated personas that go against the grain of "acceptable femininity" in terms of appearance, language, activism etc; and both have large gay followings. Cho is especially known for her monologues about her body image, and her support of the gay community.

And the thing is, it doesn't work that way. You don't get to partition the "gay community" into the fun, nonthreatening bits you like (as a "fag hag") and the parts you don't. And again, the notion that she would make jokes about lesbian sex and finding women's genitals loathesome - when she herself has been open about her own body image issues - displays an astonishing lack of self-awareness.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Been seeing this a lot in the reviews of romance novels online and in the daytime soap opera fandom - two cultural medium that predominately attract women.

The Romance genre is fascinating because it really does explore how women view both genders and how they deal with it more so than any other genre...mainly because the focus is on female relationships.

In so many reviews - female reviewers will slice female characters apart. Rip them to shreds. Particularly if the female character is not cast in a traditional female role.
Subversive romance novels get a lot of criticism. There's also a lot of understated and subtle misogyny and sexism in the genre -- written by women writers. Where the male lead is worshiped and the female criticized until she bows to his will and lets him take her over.

Then...there's the daytime soap opera fandom. And oh dear.
One leading actress (plays Robin on GH and has since she was well 8 years of age, now she's in her 40s) - received an email from a female fan informing her that she should look into plastic surgery for her "turkey neck". The actress has been getting ribbed for weight gain, or not looking beautiful by "female" fans. This happened in the Buffy fandom as well - female fans attacked Amber Benson, who played Tara, for being too heavy. (Not male fans, who actually liked her - female fans.) Meanwhile, Hurly on Lost, or Seth Rogan, or various heavyset male actors barely
get any criticism.

[red-satin-doll.livejournal.com]

In so many reviews - female reviewers will slice female characters apart. Rip them to shreds. Particularly if the female character is not cast in a traditional female role.

I've seen the exact same thing in buffyverse fandom. (My fandom experiences are rather limited, I'm afraid.)

A friend of mine asked "Why would somebody watch a show if they don't like the protagonist?" referring in this case to Buffy; I've asked the same thing about shippers - why ship two characters when you seem to loathe one of them? - and I'd ask the same of these romance reviewers. Why the hell are they reading these books, and what in the world are they looking for?

Subversive romance novels

Such as? I'm not familiar with romance novels enough to know what would fit in that description or what makes a romance novel subversive.

There's also a lot of understated and subtle misogyny and sexism in the genre -- written by women writers. Where the male lead is worshiped and the female criticized until she bows to his will and lets him take her over.

Every time I start to slip and say "things would be better if there were more women writers", I have to stop and bite my tongue, because it's patently untrue. Some of the biggest misogynists in the world are women (remember Phyllis Schafly?) which means they have a lot of self-hatred. Which comes out in these reviews and diatribes. And again, some of these women embody the very qualities that they loathe in these female characters. It'd be funny if it wasn't so frightful.

The actress has been getting ribbed for weight gain, or not looking beautiful by "female" fans.

Hilary Bailey Smith received some truly loathesome letters regarding her appearance from "fans" when she took over the character of Margot on ATWT, including one that said she needed to get some "kibbles and bits". (I watched that soap for a short period in my teens, and she was my favorite character at the time btw in part because she wasn't conventionally "pretty".)

female fans attacked Amber Benson, who played Tara, for being too heavy. (Not male fans, who actually liked her - female fans.)

She said in an interview that she'd been told she'd get more work if she lost 20 pounds and she said, "What am I supposed to do, cut off my head?"

Little secret: men are not into starved stick-figures. Really not. Every straight man I've ever known, including in my own family, are attracted to curves, to hips and breasts and buttocks - to women's real bodies. Even if they profess a fantasy attraction to an Angelina Jolie, she's not the "type" of woman they want to go to bed with every night.

It's back to self-hate: women are told that they are "supposed" to be thin in order to be loved and acceptable. (By who - by the men who love curvaceous figures? The math just doesn't add up.) They don't feel all right about their bodies, and yet instead of celebrating and supporting women who go against the norm they attack them, because those women imply that the entire thought paradigm re: women's bodies if fucked-up to begin with. It takes a very secure person to be ok with that, and so many girls and women are NOT secure about themselves.

Meanwhile, Hurly on Lost, or Seth Rogan, or various heavyset male actors barely get any criticism.

My sweetie and I watched the movie The Interpreter in the theaters and she asked, why do men in the movies get to be wrinkled or ugly but women have to be young and flawless? And I replied "sexism." I didn't know what else to say - it's so common as to not be questioned.

I mean, I like John C Reilly as an actor, but why does he get the most gorgeous women as his co-stars? Philip Seymour Hoffman is another example. I'd be fine with it if there were also lead actresses who looked "normal" and got to star with hot male leads. Women HAVE to be pretty.

The thing is - we know all of this, have known it for decades; the question is, how to actually change it?

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Such as? I'm not familiar with romance novels enough to know what would fit in that description or what makes a romance novel subversive.

* Usually it's going against a trope. For example? The Buffy/Spike romance would be considered subversive, since Buffy was often shown as the one in control - she was in the "traditional" male role or power role, while Spike played the whore with a heart of gold.

- Female character is a pirate, thief, or robin hood type - she's breaking societal rules, while the male character is the voice of propriety and order.

- Female character goes against convention, wears whatever she wants (historicals), and says what she wants, alpha character and the dominant, while he's the weaker one.

- Both characters are poor

-Female character falls in love with a Butler or a Servant, while she's a lady. (Often it's the Lord who falls for the servant)

- Female character is not skinny or thin, but plump and curvy. Male character wears glasses, or is not described as "buff" or a "hunk".

- Male character dresses in female garments or female character wears male garments (historical romances)

- Female character is domanintrix while male is submissive (flip of gender tropes)

- Neither is rich, or the female is rich, the male is poor and stays poor.

- Female saves herself, male is the damsel. (often in romances, the hero saves the heroine from a rape or kidnapping, etc, in a subversive romance she saves herself and possibly him and is capable of shooting a gun or finding other means of rescuing herself. Actually Buffy the Vampire Slayer was subversive for the same reasons - in the horror/slasher genre, the hero saved the little blond girl not the other way around.) Examples of subversive romance novels that fall under this category include: 50 Shades of Grey by EL JAmes (the heroine kicks her rapist in the balls and escapes - that never happens, and she later shoots him when he kidnaps the hero's sister - again rarely happens), Privilege of the Sword (the heroine even fights a duel for her lady love, although this book is not really a romance novel so may not count and the homosexual romance genre is a separate category entirely from the heterosexual one, although it does have similar cliches, archetypes and tropes.) and Connie Brockaway's All Through the Night (she saves herself).

-Female is older than the male character - and they fall in love. (usually in romance novel's the male character is 10 years older than the female, a subversion of the trope is when she is 5-10 years older than he is.) Eloisa James - Pleasure for Pleasure features an older woman/younger man in historical times, as does Sherry Thomas' Not Quite a Husband.

-They decide not to have children (rare - and hard to find)

That's just a few examples. Subversive is going against the established trope or accepted archetype - and usually pisses people off.

The field is broad and varied, as varied as other genres, but it gets a lot of criticism - granted some is well deserved, but not all.