Multiple POV story - Lack of female leads

[Steerpike]

.

These things are not hard to see when being honest. The females i mentioned had personalities, backround stories and dialoge that fit their fictional world well. Meaning, you can tell they were not tacked on, or added for diversity, but deeper characters who were probably created along with the world they inhabit than Tauriel.

Your claim was to the thought process of the authors or filmmakers in addition to the fan reception, and T.Allen.Smith is correct, you don't know that, you are simply making an assumption. An erroneous one, I suspect, because this sort of thing always has to be a conscious choice at some level. The insinuation that you're able to see things clearly because you're honest and others aren't is conveniently self-serving, but I think it weakens your argument further than it already is on its face, because it demonstrates a closed-minded mentality. In other words, you're operating under a preconceived idea, and any information that comes to you is taken in or discarded not on its merits, but on whether or not it reinforces what you already think. Information that is lacking is assumed to conform. It's not a logical approach to the issue.

 

[Nimue]

If you're adding in a female character after the bulk of story-writing has taken place, and not giving her the same weight of thought and planning that you've given the other characters, then of course she'll be a bad character.

If you're reluctantly, resentfully adding a female character because a producer or publisher requires it to hit demographic quotas, then of course she'll be a bad character.

It's easy to see how that could go wrong, but with what logic does that mean that adding a female character is always going to turn out badly? Do it thoughtfully, do it with good intentions, and do it not only because you think it will improve your story or sell more, but also because you want to.

It's odd to go around insisting that this always ends badly without really addressing the OP's story or perspective, and using only Hollywood movies, which are aggressively marketed and committee'd, as examples...

 

[Tom]

The females i mentioned had personalities, backround stories and dialoge that fit their fictional world well.

A little off-topic, but please don't call them females. They are female humans, so therefore they're referred to as women. I don't know...referring to other human beings as 'males' or 'females' has always bugged me. It sounds like something you'd call an animal.

 

[Devor]

My issue with these conversations has always been that they create a sense of pressure on authors to do something with their works without acknowledging the many challenges that come with it. That's why I've come to love Tauriel - she's such a clear example, she always comes up and forces people to talk about those challenges.

I need to write a short story about two characters. The first is the MC, a male character that I want to write about for a while. The second is a mentor, who will probably have to die, but I have very little else decided about the character. My goal for the day is actually to figure this character out.

I'm leaning on making the character a woman. But we're not talking about a Gandalf-type mentor. The character would be more of a swashbuckler. Given that she and the MC would develop a close relationship, and are near-enough in age, making the character a woman means I would have to find some way to address the romantic attraction. But she'll die horribly, like mentors do, to motivate the male MC.

People who know these conversations probably understand that I have a fridging problem to work out. And it's genuinely what I'm supposed to be figuring out today. Any advice?

 

[Svrtnsse]

People who know these conversations probably understand that I have a fridging problem to work out. And it's genuinely what I'm supposed to be figuring out today. Any advice?

How about shifting some nuances a little. Instead of being just a mentor, she's also the MCs good friend since many years and someone he looks up to and respects. He still has a lot to learn from her, but she also has a lot to learn from him - about other things.
The romantic tension can be addressed in a few different ways:
- Either of the two is fresh out of a longer relationship and isn't ready to commit to anything new.
- As above, but instead of not wanting to commit they're rebounding like crazy and latching on to whoever is available.
- Either of the characters is gay.
- They're just friends - like, seriously, actually, just really good friends and not in a "let's just be friends" kind of way.
- They've already had their relationship. It didn't work out, but they're still on speaking terms.
- Either of them is just not interested in the other one in that way - "let's just be friends"

I only just recently learned about fridging, but couldn't you bypass it by letting the victim have some other meaningful impact on the story before putting them in the fridge?

 

[Devor]

How about shifting some nuances a little. Instead of being just a mentor, she's also the MCs good friend since many years and someone he looks up to and respects. He still has a lot to learn from her, but she also has a lot to learn from him - about other things.

It's a Jay-and-Kay relationship. This is the character recruiting him into the organization, so there isn't much room for history between them.

I only just recently learned about fridging, but couldn't you bypass it by letting the victim have some other meaningful impact on the story before putting them in the fridge?

I've already decided that if I make the character a woman, I'll push her death back to give her a greater role and a chance at agency in the big conflict. My other option is to make her a traitor. I'm not sure if either of those solve the problem.

The romantic tension can be addressed in a few different ways:
- Either of the two is fresh out of a longer relationship and isn't ready to commit to anything new.
- As above, but instead of not wanting to commit they're rebounding like crazy and latching on to whoever is available.
- Either of the characters is gay.
- They're just friends - like, seriously, actually, just really good friends and not in a "let's just be friends" kind of way.
- They've already had their relationship. It didn't work out, but they're still on speaking terms.
- Either of them is just not interested in the other one in that way - "let's just be friends"

This is really what I'm looking at. I want to figure out their relationship in a way that isn't he-likes-her-but-whoops. But I also have a very tight word count constraint on this story. I don't have room for some of these.

 

[Steerpike]

I find the Tauriel argument to be a bad one.

Bad writing is bad writing. Good writers are going to develop characters in such a way as to make them rounded and complex and fit into the story. The idea that a good writer suddenly loses all of those skills because they've decided to add a character based on considerations of race, gender, sex, sexual orientation &c., is a bad argument, and one that has no logic or evidence to support it.

Fyle bolsters it only by circular reasoning. His argument is basically:

1) constructing characters because of diversity considerations results in bad characters;

2) any characters I think are good can't have been constructed as a result of diversity considerations because see #1.

It's a terrible argument, and one that doesn't hold up to scrutiny. That's why T.Allen.Smith's comments, above, were on point. Fyle doesn't know what considerations went into development of the good characters he mentioned, he just makes the assumption that supports his prejudices.

 

[Svrtnsse]

This is really what I'm looking at. I want to figure out their relationship in a way that isn't he-likes-her-but-whoops. But I also have a very tight word count constraint on this story. I don't have room for some of these.

If word-count is an issue then I'd say making either of the characters gay would solve the issue quickest. You could fit that into just a few words where either of them mentions a past or current partner and then moves on.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

lThe females i mentioned had personalities, backround stories and dialoge that fit their fictional world well. Meaning, you can tell they were not tacked on, or added for diversity, but deeper characters who were probably created along with the world they inhabit than Tauriel.

I understand what you're saying. My only point is that's it's impossible for you to say how character creation developed for another author unless they've divulged details.

For all we know, Trinity may have been a character where a decision was made to have a female character be a bad ass. Maybe the crew was too male-dominated and the Wachowskis wanted broader appeal, maybe they desired a love interest after the original draft. Maybe they just thought a female as Neo's fighting partner was just more interesting. You saw a product that went through drafting, revision, editing, & filmmaking. You didn't see the steps along the way.

Who knows when a character choice like gender may have happened, or how?

The Wachowskis.

 

[Devor]

If word-count is an issue then I'd say making either of the characters gay would solve the issue quickest. You could fit that into just a few words where either of them mentions a past or current partner and then moves on.

The MC is kind of set. I'm not sure if I want to go that way with the mentor. I think it'd be better to make her damaged or different somehow, so that the question of attraction isn't as presumed to come up. I'm also second guessing whether she needs to die, or if there's some other way to let the MC rise to her level.

 

[Svrtnsse]

The MC is kind of set. I'm not sure if I want to go that way with the mentor. I think it'd be better to make her damaged or different somehow, so that the question of attraction isn't as presumed to come up. I'm also second guessing whether she needs to die, or if there's some other way to let the MC rise to her level.

Maybe he really dislikes her and wants to do everything he can to show he's better? Or maybe he really likes her and thinks that by rising to her level he can help her out?

 

[Legendary Sidekick]

My issue with these conversations has always been that they create a sense of pressure on authors to do something with their works without acknowledging the many challenges that come with it.

This is where I see adding "diversity" as a potential problem.

Bringing up Tauriel is not (or shouldn't be), "It's been done badly by Peter Jackson; therefore, you'll screw it up."

It's more like, "It's been done badly by Peter Jackson, so consider how female Tauriel could have been done well."



I like to write strong women, and I think I do well with what I limit myself to. I don't write a woman as I would write a man, but I don't trap any character into gender-based generalizations either. As I said earlier, my huntress is definitely perceived a certain way because of her gender. But her gender doesn't define her, nor does it affect her performance in action scenes.

Always created a "Like a Girl" video that best expresses the perception vs. reality. It's interesting because even some women and girls go along with the negative connotation of the phrase "like a girl." The goal of Always, of course, is for the phrase to have a positive connotation and ditch the implication: "unlike a boy, who can do it better."

On a side note, I made a decision last night regarding what 25 characters I'd draw for Roll 20. I was going to go with a Heroine Pack, but then realized I'm ignoring all of the players who want male characters.

(So, ironically, I'm adding males or switching gender to male to increase potential sales. Still, mine will have more female representation than any other character pack on the site.)

So I looked up what game is most popular: Pathfinder, and decided to base the characters I draw on that. I looked up classes. There are 25 of them. Some are described "he" and some "she." So that's how I decided which gender will represent each class, figuring that would result in a fairly even male-female spread.

I ended up with 13 female characters and 12 male characters!

 

[Jabrosky]

When did it suddenly become bad to add or alter characters "for diversity's sake"? I'm sorry, but I can't understand what's inherently wrong with that. You're just trying to improve your story by making it more interesting/realistic/relatable to a wider range of readers. So yeah, I change characters just for the sake of diversity, and I think my writing is a lot better for it (otherwise my book would be populated entirely by straight white men, which is boring and dumb).

I may not care for activists who pester writers and artists to write or draw more characters from this or that under-represented group, but I'm all for writers diversifying their casts if that's what they genuinely want to do themselves. That said, Devor has raised a good point that fiddling with certain characters' identities can send ripple effects through the whole story. If a writer were to make Guinevere from Arthurian legend a Yoruba lady from Nigeria, how are they going to get her within the proximity of Arthur and his Celtic tribesmen? Are they going to have Arthur and his warriors rowing over to Nigeria in search of the Grail, maybe picking up Excalibur from the river goddess Oshun, so he can meet her? It might make for an appealing story in my opinion, but it would have changed so much from the original source material that it might as well be a wholly different, albeit still derivative, story. The original change you had in mind might seem cosmetic at first, but integrating it snugly into the larger story isn't always as easy as you might hope.

 

[Trick]

The MC is kind of set. I'm not sure if I want to go that way with the mentor. I think it'd be better to make her damaged or different somehow, so that the question of attraction isn't as presumed to come up. I'm also second guessing whether she needs to die, or if there's some other way to let the MC rise to her level.

I honestly think that if you don't address it at all, simply having the characters behave as friends but within the mentor-student hierarchy, you would pull it off well. If I had never read anything you have written, I might not say that but, in your case, I think you could do it. It's about not cheapening her death, or if you decide she lives, giving the MC another reason to rise above being a student. Is there anything else in the story already, other than her death, that would do that?

 

[Devor]

I honestly think that if you don't address it at all, simply having the characters behave as friends but within the mentor-student hierarchy, you would pull it off well. If I had never read anything you have written, I might not say that but, in your case, I think you could do it. It's about not cheapening her death, or if you decide she lives, giving the MC another reason to rise above being a student. Is there anything else in the story already, other than her death, that would do that?

Thank you for the vote of confidence. Considering the length, I probably could just ignore it and get away with it.

I think I'm settling in on what I want to do with her, plotwise. At the moment, she's going to survive, and the MC will have to "rise" as an equal when they split up to accomplish separate tasks. There's plenty of room for her to contribute with the conflicts, and then the finale would remain about the MC.

It's just the relationship dynamic I still need to figure out. I think I will take your advice and just ignore it for the first section that I'm working on next and figure it out later.

Sorry to hijack the thread!

 

[Devor]

So I looked up what game is most popular: Pathfinder, and decided to base the characters I draw on that. I looked up classes. There are 25 of them. Some are described "he" and some "she." So that's how I decided which gender will represent each class, figuring that would result in a fairly even male-female spread.

I ended up with 13 female characters and 12 male characters!

That's probably a good idea. Maybe if there's a next batch you could gender swap the classes to get the full set? But I don't know, I thought there was something unique and fun about your heroine pack. But I didn't know there had to be 25 of them - that is a lot.

 

[Legendary Sidekick]

Hmm... now you're making me second guess. Maybe I'll work on female characters first so I can consider this.

But my thought is to just have one pack for the good guys. "Bloodrager" (M) can pass for "Barbarian" (F), and a "Fighter" (M) can wear full armor like a "Paladin" (F). It happens that I get a good spread for the typical archetypes.

(...except pixies. But I can always add a pixie pack later, with mermaids and other such beings.)



EDIT - You know what? You're right. Heroine pack it is. I can sell the male characters another day.

 

[Fyle]

I find the Tauriel argument to be a bad one.

Bad writing is bad writing. Good writers are going to develop characters in such a way as to make them rounded and complex and fit into the story. The idea that a good writer suddenly loses all of those skills because they've decided to add a character based on considerations of race, gender, sex, sexual orientation &c., is a bad argument, and one that has no logic or evidence to support it.

Fyle bolsters it only by circular reasoning. His argument is basically:

1) constructing characters because of diversity considerations results in bad characters;

2) any characters I think are good can't have been constructed as a result of diversity considerations because see #1.

It's a terrible argument, and one that doesn't hold up to scrutiny. That's why T.Allen.Smith's comments, above, were on point. Fyle doesn't know what considerations went into development of the good characters he mentioned, he just makes the assumption that supports his prejudices.

My first and foremost argument is follow your gut as a writer and do not let outside influences effect you to the point of changing the sex of your character.

You are grossly oversimplifying things, i stated quite a few times I am not against diversity and why on this thread and others.

My argument about the addition of character is less about male/female and more like I mentioned before about "Jar Jar Binks."

If you have fans who are familiar (very familiar in the case of LOTR) with a universe you create, and you make a poor addition to that universe, it sticks out like a sore thumb and it is not that hard to recognize. In the same way Star Wars fans can go into the thethre and say "wait a minute? what was Jar Jar Binks doing in that movie?" Hobbit fans / LOTR fans can go in and say "wait a minute? what was Tauriel doing in that movie?"

You cannot walk into the Matrix or any of the other I mentioned and ask the same thing, it makes no sense, they are originally intended for the story.

Its hardly an argument, its just how the industry works. People back projects with money and additions are made to reach a wider audience and sell a certain amount. This, is where Tauriel falls into a category that the other female characters don't.


The truth is this : diversity will usually reach a wider audience and sells more. Diversity is also necessary for telling a story which is more realistic and interesting. Diversity is a good way to challange yourself as a writer, diversity is variety, which is the spice of life.

But...

Diversity is not the key that automatically makes every story great. There is no reason not to play devil's advocate and question whether your story needs it if the story is already strong.

 

[Fyle]

A little off-topic, but please don't call them females. They are female humans, so therefore they're referred to as women. I don't know...referring to other human beings as 'males' or 'females' has always bugged me. It sounds like something you'd call an animal.

So, this below is okay Tom?

You should agree with me it is not. So, please let Gryphos know as well.

And besides, anyone who thinks that the media's tendency to focus on straight, white males almost exclusively hasn't already been 'forced', needs to take their head of the sand.

 

[Nimue]

False equivalency, dude. "Females" is used in derogatory ways a lot, lot more than "males" is. And I really think you know that already. Nevertheless, I think it's best to refer to "men" and "women" always, if only because separating biological sex and gender is a good idea.