# The Female Power Fantasy?



## Logos&Eidos (Mar 13, 2014)

What is it exactly, does anyone know? If so would they be willing to share that information, especially for the sake of men(like myself) who are going to be writing female characters and eventually a female protagonist. Much has been said about the male power fantasy and it's rarely good. In fact I've seen that phrases used as a condemnation and almost at times swearword. So what exactly is the male power fantasy, it's essence can be distilled in to a simple sentence"over coming adversity and being rewarded for having done so ". Everything associated with the male power fantasy,gaining wealth,influence,mates!,power unlimited power!, is just the logical extension of the concept. 

After hearing so much about the male power fantasy, good bad or indifferent, I got to thinking their logically must be a female power fantasy aswell. So what is it and what does it entail?


----------



## Guy (Mar 13, 2014)

Irrelevant. Write the character based on what that individual would do, not their sex.


----------



## Devor (Mar 13, 2014)

That's a pretty loaded question, following a pretty loaded statement.

If you want a "Female Power Fantasy" that compares to a "Male Power Fantasy," well, there isn't one.  "Male Power Fantasy" is a fairly sexist and condescending term, but the equivalent condescending statement would be along the lines of "Women are interested in something besides Power . . . .", whatever that might be.

But I would suggest, as Guy said, to just drop that line of thought as completely irrelevant to anything but some controversial meta-cultural literature.  People read what they want to read, for whatever reason they want to read it.  Just leave it at that.

If you want to know what women like to read, then go read books by women about women.  And if you like to use labels, find some that are actually useful in writing a book that reaches your audience.


----------



## A. E. Lowan (Mar 13, 2014)

I've heard it said that feminism is the outrageous belief that women are people.

Try that approach.


----------



## Ophiucha (Mar 13, 2014)

Power fantasies are kind of dreadful, regardless of what gender they're for. Speaking as a woman, I don't think the two are particularly different. Power (both physical/magical and political), good looks, money, an attractive/interesting lover. Aside from the fact that female power fantasies are usually less misogynistic, the two are basically identical. We're all people, we want the same things.


----------



## Svrtnsse (Mar 13, 2014)

Guy said:


> Irrelevant. Write the character based on what that individual would do, not their sex.



This is a good start.
If you're writing a character you need to make it an individual - a person. Basing a character's motivations on what is commonly accepted to be the norm for people belonging to the same group as the character might work for characters that aren't very important to the story. Side characters that appear for a scene or two can be done like that - then you're just playing on the reader's prejudices and that might work out just fine.

If you're writing a character you'll have to get to know them and figure out what drives this specific member of the group the character belongs to. You'll have to consider special circumstances and exceptions as well as mental and physical traits and attributes. Basically, it'll get messy.

I've spent a fair bit of time thinking about how to portray female characters - as it's important to me to try to get them "right". My current theory lines up with what Guy says, but with one important addition: _the opinions of everyone else_.

If you're creating the character in a vacuum their gender won't matter. They will have a personality and they will have motivations and fears but in the big picture, their gender is irrelevant. It's not until you put the character in a social situation, where they interact with the people in the world around them that their gender, or skin color, or sexual preference, starts to matter.

A person's gender will have some impact on their personality, but probably not that much compared to everything else that impacts their personality. Where gender is important is when it comes to how society views people of that gender - and that is something that can have a huge impact on a person.

I'll try and sum it up.
Gender does not define who we are, but gender defines how the world treats us, and that defines who we are.

(yeah, I'm probably oversimplifying it)


----------



## Noma Galway (Mar 13, 2014)

Svrtnsse said:


> Gender does not define who we are, but gender defines how the world treats us, and that defines who we are.


That. 

Gender is one of the major things that affects social interaction (imagine for a moment a world where nobody knew anybody's gender!). This is the nature vs. nurture debate. At their core, humans want the same basic things. Gender determines how they react to each other trying to get those basic things. When other people react to a person, that person will adjust his/her behavior accordingly (typically). So...back to Svrt's.


----------



## Jabrosky (Mar 13, 2014)

I guess that "power fantasy", whatever the gender themes, has something to do with writers basing their heroes on themselves. Honestly I don't know if that's always a bad thing. What's important is that your character is capable of experiencing tension and conflict even if they do certain things you would love to do yourself.

I also question whether gender has to influence social interactions within a fantasy society to the same extent it does in our world. Some might think it "realistic" or culturally faithful to portray a superficially medieval society as the stereotypical patriarchy, but that would only matter if you care about sticking to the realities of history. In that case why not stick to historical fiction?


----------



## Mindfire (Mar 14, 2014)

If you really want to see what a "female power fantasy" looks like... (I can't believe I'm about to say this) read fan-fiction.


----------



## buyjupiter (Mar 14, 2014)

Personally? I can't give an answer to the question that isn't kind of silly. What does a woman's power fantasy look like to me? 

-I come home to an empty sink because the dishes are done, without having to ask.

-Coming home to the kids' homework being done (for those that have children), again without having to ask.

-Finding out the shower works properly or the doorknob isn't going to fall off in my hand because the around the house stuff that I'm physically capable of doing, but cannot do within the confines of a relationship because that would somehow make a man less of a man, is done without having to ask.

Honestly, to me, power looks a lot like respect...and who doesn't need respect in their life? 

I think the better question(s) to be asking are about what power is or isn't. Is it an individual thing, wherein one person can decide they have power and therefore act like they actually have power or is it an outside societal observation and power is in how other people view/treat a person?

If you can answer whether or not power is an internal vs. external thing the following questions become much easier to answer: Is money power? Is class power? Is religion power? Is belief power? Is knowledge power? Is sex power? Are there cases where these aren't true?


----------



## Trick (Mar 14, 2014)

Upon reading the OP I immediately thought of The Black Jewels Trilogy. I don't have much of an opinion on the books, some things I like, some things I don't, but it might be a good one for the OP to read. Lot's of "role reversal" though even that term is somewhat indelicate. I wouldn't necessarily call it a "Female Power Fantasy" but it is fantasy and there is a lot of female power in it. Not that it's lacking in 'Male Power.' I guess it's hard to describe exactly what the book does with the female/male interaction that made me think of it. Be warned though, it's R rated and I know some people avoid that kind of thing, and I don't want anyone offended by me suggesting it.


----------



## Legendary Sidekick (Mar 14, 2014)

I thought the female power fantasy was, "I'm cute so he'll do whatever I want."

Before I'm labeled sexist, I should mention that all three of my kids are girls. If I had a son, he might know I'm an easy mark. Anyway, that's how daughters see a dad. I guess that's more like the Female Power Reality.



Serious answer: I've written male MCs and am now working with female MCs. The gender matters, but only in the way that other traits matter. I feel like man vs. beast/nature and woman vs. beast/nature wouldn't be different. When there are other people in the story, then the MC's gender matters in the sense of how other characters perceive her.

My goal with a female MC is no different than my goal with a male MC: make the character likable and believable* and fun in the hopes that the reader roots for her.

*…though my stories are full of BS


----------



## Logos&Eidos (Mar 17, 2014)

Legendary Sidekick said:


> I thought the female power fantasy was, "I'm cute so he'll do whatever I want."
> 
> Before I'm labeled sexist, I should mention that all three of my kids are girls. If I had a son, he might know I'm an easy mark. Anyway, that's how daughters see a dad. I guess that's more like the Female Power Reality.
> 
> ...



Legendary Sidekick. Just because something is offensives doesn't mean that it can't be true;the truth hurts as the saying goes.



I have read several  works written/co-written by women.

Mageworlds,Debra Doyle.

Star of The Gaurdians, Margaret Weis

Full Metal Alchemist, Hiromu Arakawa

Supirior, Ichtys( Is a pen name,I don't know what  her real name is.) 

Witch Craft Works, Ryu Mizunagi

Sekirei, Sakurako Gokurakuin.

I have noticed a recurrent idea in their writing. While the characters in their works act for the same reasons and move towards the same goals as do those in stories written by men. There is a difference in what aspects of the characters motivations are emphasized. All of these very different women have put the emphasis on their characters relationships to others as the motivating factor in their lives. Where as all the male writer that I know seem to give their characters a bit more abstract motivations. Here's an example. A  man loses his family and seeks revenge!  A woman seeks revenge because she lost her family!  If the Hero and Heroine  are successful at the end of their quests the bad people die horribly! Same story but the execution is going to differ in a subtle but noticeable way.  

I have read a number of articles that talked about the differences between male and female authors. Men tend to emphasize events where as tend Women emphasize feelings. There is a degree of difference between men and women, subtle in someways overt in others;and most of the differences are really just different expression of the same basic traits and characteristics. It's the difference in that expression that I am interested. Again I say, since there is a "male power fantasy" there must be a "female power fantasy".

At it's heart the often maligned "male power fantasy" is not about power or domination, at least not directly. It's about over coming adversity then being reward for having done so; In my not so humble opinion. To over come adversity one requires strength, and after overcoming some great ordeal is it wrong to want something in return? Like say,wealth,mates,authority.


I already have something of answer as to what the female power fantasy might be and entail. I even have something of an example. In fact I came here because I found that answer insufficient.

Her Name is Bayonetta. Don't look at me like that. Yes I know she seems to seems to embody the concept of Ms.Fanservice, it's true she is not only a Ms. Fanservice, she's both president spokeswoman for that entire organization!

However there are quite a few people that see Bayonetta(Bayo-chan as the developers call her) as a female power fantasy. While googling to try and find information on the elusive female power fantasy, I started coming across pages that described her as one; you can find them by googling, Bayonetta female power fantasy.

If they are right and Bayo-chan is indicative of the female power fantasy;even if only in part.  Then I am afraid,very very afraid. Why, because when I thought about it I realized that Bayo-chan's defining characteristic wasn't her rocking bod; which dose rock extremely hard by the way. It was her freedom or perhaps better termed her lack of accountability. 

Bayo-chan is a Witch one of the last left in the world. She is answerable to no mortal man, and would likely shoot any controlling immortal men in the face; then feed what's left of them to demons she summons with her hair! The only other remaining and or active witch at the time of the first game is Jeanne an equal. Being that their coven is gone, their are no older more power witches that Bayo-chan has to answer. Bayo-chan motivations are selfish, recovery of her memories and survival. She winds up saving the world solely by virtue of those goals just happening to align with keeping earth spinning. Luka the closet thing to a man in Bayonetta's life she treats like a pet; well he kinda qualifies as one to be honest. he's a normal human while she punches out angels.


Bayonetta is an anti-heroine at best and a Heroic sociopath at worst. Motivated entirely by selfish goals. Who's defining characteristic is a near complete lack of accountability to anyone!


----------



## Feo Takahari (Mar 17, 2014)

I often see Bayonetta mentioned as a woman who's sexualized as an active and powerful figure in a way that's more commonly associated with male characters like Kratos. (The other character who tends to come up is Aeon Flux.)


----------



## Solusandra (Mar 25, 2019)

Sorry for the Necro, Logos&Eidos but you're more or less correct on your use of Bayonetta, but I would have used a rather long series of chickflick movies from the last decade instead. If you want to emphasize the Truth Hurts statement you made, here's a documentary (youtube com/watch?v=x5KlGljHT8g) on it you might be interested in. 

Particularly, watch the movies "How to be Single" and "The Other Woman".
If you prefer to read instead...Well, there's literally millions of female author Romance Novels which portray it perfectly. The general slang for them is "bodice rippers" and "harlequin". 
If you prefer video games, other than Bayonetta, Try "The Sims". You as the player are playing out the female power fantasy in all it's positive, negative and neutral lights.   

Simply stated though:
The male power fantasy is to be the Hero. Find a problem. Solve the problem. Get the girl. Have the respect of those you aided. With the anti-hero male power fantasy, add an element of redemption in there, for the former failed hero or former villain. 
The female power fantasy is to avoid accountability for your actions and receive the benefits of being the hero. Regardless of whether they're genuinely the hero or the thinly veiled villain. 

I expect you've already written your piece, given this thread is 2 years old, but my suggestion for other browsers is to ignore the female power fantasy and do what Buffy The Vampire Slayer or Black Widow did. Write a male power fantasy with a likable *feminine* female character as the lead. Guys with boobs like captain marvel's recent runs repel both men and women.


----------



## Annoyingkid (Mar 26, 2019)

Write a power fantasy for a female character and she'll be called a Mary Sue or SJW propaganda or "man with boobs". Write her as a male fantasy and she gets called an object of male gaze and misogynist.

If your character isn't Ripley or Sarah Connor (the only two good female characters ever according to the internet) then you'll be criticized whatever you write. So just don't even worry about it and write whatever YOU want to see, forget writing to a specific audience's "fantasy", because not for nothing, if they want a pure power fantasy, an RPG game is a better medium for it.

That and audiences aren't writers. They only vaguely know what they want. In the abstract.


----------



## Mythopoet (Mar 26, 2019)

Honestly, in this world, just having power is a dream for the vast majority of women.


----------



## Solusandra (Mar 26, 2019)

Annoyingkid Bwahahahahaha.... sorta, kinda, not entirely? There's also Buffy.
Mythopoet If you wana go that simple, that's the fantasy of the a great many men too. But the subject line was the Power Fantasy, which is a pretty well defined thing.


----------



## Annoyingkid (Mar 26, 2019)

Solusandra said:


> There's also Buffy.



Yeah but I've never seen men say Buffy. It's always James Cameron's Sarah Connor and Ellen Ripley. Thats their two, in every debate. Basically the same characters in the same genre written by the same man. Both traumatized women who are stalked by a horror and who spend most the time running and hiding from said horror and who learn to appreciate their maternal role. Ripley with Newt and Connor with John.


----------



## pmmg (Mar 26, 2019)

Okay, Buffy, there you go.  And I could make some criticisms of Ripley and Sarah if I liked.

Isn't the answer to this always, write them as people?

This is like 2014, original poster is gone. I don't know, I don't think I set out to write male or female power anything, It just rings too untrue to me.


----------



## valiant12 (Mar 26, 2019)

*Logos&Eidos*, If you want to write a power fantasy book for a female audience I suggest you should read about marketing products to women. 
I personally always wanted my books to be popular both with men and women, but unfortunately most of my writing is  very dude-centric.


----------



## Solusandra (Mar 26, 2019)

Annoyingkid said:


> Yeah but I've never seen men say Buffy.


In that case you and I have very different experiences. I hear Buffy, Skully, Sarah Jane (doctor who) and Susan Ivanova (B5) alot. Those at the scyfy conventions. Comicon its always Black Widow, Diana Prince, and (insert X - girl here)


Annoyingkid said:


> It's always James Cameron's Sarah Connor and Ellen Ripley. Thats their two, in every debate. Basically the same characters in the same genre written by the same man. Both traumatized women who are stalked by a horror and who spend most the time running and hiding from said horror and who learn to appreciate their maternal role. Ripley with Newt and Connor with John.


Not sure why either points are bad ones. If you're worried about the horror genre thing, both women survived shit alot of professional badasses did, and neither broke suspension of disbelief nor pissed off their own fan market.


pmmg said:


> Isn't the answer to this always, write them as people?


If you're a sane rational person, yes. But then, you're probably not writing a power fantasy or are diluting it liberally with something else. Several somethings else that aren't lampshades.


pmmg said:


> This is like 2014, original poster is gone.


I considered that, thus my initial disclaimer. Still... while the OP was in 2014, the last major post by the OP was late 2017


----------



## Annoyingkid (Mar 26, 2019)

Solusandra said:


> Not sure why either points are bad ones. If you're worried about the horror genre thing, both women survived shit alot of professional badasses did, and neither broke suspension of disbelief nor pissed off their own fan market.



It's bad because they're saying there hasn't been a good female character since 1984 and because neither character challenges the masculine. Which is why they never "pissed off" the male fan market. Sarah Connor plays a supportive role to Kyle Reese and the Terminator respectively, and Ripley played a backseat to the rest of the crew and the space marines respectively, saving what heroics she did for the end. In the first one as a plot twist, as the last survivor, and the second she was out of the action for almost all of it due to trauma. Neither character took a lead with the action. A female character that does take the lead in action as the main character tends to get a very different response. That's the problem.


----------



## Solusandra (Mar 26, 2019)

Annoyingkid said:


> because neither character challenges the masculine. Which is why they never "pissed off" the male fan market.


.....I feel sorry for you and your range of experience.
No. What pisses off the fan market is the self centered, entitled, condescending, shallow characters who are shoved in our face for "girl power" rather than being a compelling character on their own.


Annoyingkid said:


> Sarah Connor plays a supportive role to Kyle Reese and the Terminator respectively, and Ripley played a backseat to the rest of the crew and the space marines respectively, saving what heroics she did for the end. In the first one as a plot twist, as the last survivor, and the second she was out of the action for almost all of it due to trauma. Neither character took a lead with the action. A female character that does take the lead in action as the main character tends to get a very different response. That's the problem.


Buffy. Wonder Woman. Laura Croft. Nikita. Alice. Kill Bill. And those are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head. Every last one of them flat out contradicts your entire point.

There's alot of other well received female leads, but feminine action leads...


----------



## pmmg (Mar 26, 2019)

Who is they?

I suppose its bad if the goal is to challenge the masculine, but I am not why that is a worthy challenge, or why it is a more worthy challenge than any other. I suppose, if in my efforts to write them as people, the character I write goes on to challenge some male notions, then that will be okay, it will ring true for the character, and if I've done my job well, ring true for the other characters as well (and maybe resonate past to the very whole of the world itself).

I fear I would not agree with you on Ripley and Sarah, I do think they took agresive and leadership roles. But...I dont wish to talk about them. As you have already said, they have been played.

We have been down this road before. I dont think your issue is one of no good female characters, I think it is one of believability, and wanting something to win acceptance that is a tough sell. I assert that it is a tough sell becuase it cuts against many things that appear (to me anyway) to be true, but I have seen others succeed at it. Its not an impossible one. Course, I have also seen it fail.

IMO, I would prefer we did not bring in outside considerations into a story, and just told the story that is deep inside of us waiting to come out. If for you that is one that challenges males up and down the scale, then I hope you have much success. And where it rings true, I will happily say so.


----------



## Gray-Hand (Mar 26, 2019)

I spoke spect that Sarah Connor and Ellen Ripley don’t really fill the same psychological niche for women that male action heroes do for men.  They might have a number of admirable traits, but I don’t think they are objects of female fantasy.

A female power fantasy figure is probably less focussed on the type of power that is derived from physical prowess and more directed to the type of power that is more appealing to women.

Several of Jane Austen’s characters that appeal to women are able to influence the world around them through their intelligence, bravery and strength of character.

Leslie Knope from Parks & Recreation is able to achieve her goals and generally make the world a better place through her enthusiasm, selflessness, general competence and personal integrity.


----------



## Annoyingkid (Mar 27, 2019)

Solusandra said:


> .....I feel sorry for you and your range of experience.
> No. What pisses off the fan market is the self centered, entitled, condescending, shallow characters who are shoved in our face for "girl power" rather than being a compelling character on their own.



Except there are male characters who are just like that and they don't piss off male audiences as much do they. Anakin from the Phantom Menace never had men calling him Gary Stu in droves, yet they call Rey that in her first movie. Even though she was older and accomplished less in comparison.

The reason "girl power" is a thing and used in a derogatory manner as you just did, is the same reason "boy power" isn't a thing. It's normalized and assumed that boys will be in power. Whereas a girl who upsets that by not playing to standards of femininity is derided as shoved in people's faces for "girl power". This is because it upsets people's conditioned, internalized paradigm that forms as a result of living in a society that pushes the message that  male characters that can defeat trolls, dragons, all manner or monsters believably with a badass one liner, but a woman who can outfight men is a "Man with boobs" and unrealistic and "Girl power propaganda". I've seen that double standard over and over in debates. The fact that people use it without any self awareness is in itself a problem. The fact that people immediately go on the defensive instead of self reflecting and  considering internalized sexism, is a problem.

If a movie came out tommorow with the top 2 greatest fighters as women - the fact that that this would be considered girl power sjw propaganda, is the problem. Female power fantasies are not viewed with the fairness of male power fantasies.



> Buffy. Wonder Woman. Laura Croft. Nikita. Alice. Kill Bill. And those are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head. Every last one of them flat out contradicts your entire point.
> 
> There's alot of other well received female leads, but feminine action leads...



You are strawmaning my position. Re-read my argument. At no point did I argue about well received by the general tv or moviegoing audience. I said Sarah Connor and Ripley are the only two that ever gets mentioned in debates with  *men* as good examples of female characters done right. And I've been in *many* such debates. They all, down to the last one, have that exact same pattern. Even on this forum.To which I gave the reason. You haven't contradicted that point at all.

The dudebro argument in every single debate: "Female characters today suck and are Mary Sues/obnoxious not because of my sexist bias, but because they've all been written badly. Female action characters that have been written well are Sarah Connor and Ellen Ripley. Two characters from the mid eighties in the same genre, with similar arcs, written by the same man. "


----------



## Futhark (Mar 27, 2019)

Annoyingkid said:


> The reason "girl power" is a thing and used in a derogatory manner as you just did, is the same reason "boy power" isn't a thing. It's normalized and assumed that boys will be in power. Whereas a girl who upsets that by not playing to standards of femininity is derided as shoved in people's faces for "girl power". This is because it upsets people's conditioned, internalized paradigm that forms as a result of living in a society that pushes the message that male characters that can defeat trolls, dragons, all manner or monsters believably with a badass one liner, but a woman who can outfight men is a "Man with boobs" and unrealistic and "Girl power propaganda". I've seen that double standard over and over in debates. The fact that people use it without any self awareness is in itself a problem. The fact that people immediately go on the defensive instead of self reflecting and considering internalized sexism, is a problem.



Yes, this is it exactly.  There is so much social and cultural conditioning that has accrued over the centuries that even though we, as an individual, may be ‘enlightened’ and strive for equality, there are also standards that we unwittingly still apply.

Ray Sonne writes -
This is, of course, because personhood with all its flaws, mistakes, and ugliness is still something often not applied to _real_ women in our society, along with female representation in all media. If women are mean, they’re bitches. If they show sexual cravings, they’re sluts. If they slip up, they’re incompetent.

Wildcats, Superheroes and the True Female Power Fantasy

When I was a kid I read comics.  Sometimes I was told that they were just juvenile power fantasies.  Were they?  Yes.  I was weak and weird.  I fantasised about being powerful.  The people who often told me this *acted out* their power fantasies on the sports field.  Did that make them more powerful than me?  No, it made them delusional because they thought that this fleeting power translated to the real world (and then sometimes I’d have to explain what delusional meant).

As I see it, a power fantasy, whether male or female, is not a bad thing.  The current negative connotations associated with it seem to stem from examples of this trope that rather than empower a social demographic, they objectify, denigrate, humiliate or oppress others.  For this reason, most of the power fantasies that *aren’t *remarked on have somewhat two-dimensional or unsympathetic villains (think mindless aliens, faceless governments, heartless corporations, etc.)

Another possible reason for it’s unpopularity is that these heroes are supposed to do great things and _get away with it_ as Ray says.  I would suggest that some writers confuse this with _not being accountable, _so you end up with heroes that are psychopaths (which is fine if that’s what your aiming for, not so good if it’s some Freudian nightmare).

So what, if anything, is the ‘female power fantasy’?  Is it dressing in tights because she likes how she looks in them, sticking to walls and beating up the evil Dr. Squidface?  Sure, why not?  Is it rescuing the children, ensuring they don’t starve and finding freedom?  Okay.  Maybe a Chinese prostitute/madame that becomes the most successful pirate captain in history with over 300 ships and 20,000 to 40,000 pirates?  No, wait, that really happened (search Ching Shih).


----------



## TheKillerBs (Mar 27, 2019)

Annoyingkid said:


> ¿Anakin from the Phantom Menace never had men calling him Gary Stu in droves, yet they call Rey that in her first movie. Even though she was older and accomplished less in comparison.


That's because despite that being true, Anakin is not a Gary Stu while Rey is a Mary Sue. Competency is not the defining trait of a Sue/Stu character, it's the way the other characters react to them and make everything about them. The defining moment for Rey is (SPOILER ALERT) when Leia, after Han Solo dies, goes to seek mutual comfort with Rey rather than Chewie. Anakin has no such moment. Actually, despite being a child, who are notorious for hogging the spotlight by default, and an annoying one at that, Annakin is overshadowed by Jar-Jar Binks in that movie. Also, this isn't really an apples to apples comparison because Annakin was already a defined character when we first see him in The Phantom Menace. We already knew him as Darth Vader, the beloved villain introduced in the first movie, and in a certain sense, whom we first saw in Return of the Jedi. Rey was not, and she upstaged established, beloved characters. This is what makes people see her as a Sue. Not that she is hypercompetent, but that the other characters seem to only exist in function of her.


----------



## Annoyingkid (Mar 27, 2019)

TheKillerBs said:


> Anakin has no such moment



Yes he does. Qui Gon breaking story logic by bringing him - a child - to a warzone so said child could save the day when none of the experienced pilots could.


----------



## TheKillerBs (Mar 27, 2019)

Annoyingkid said:


> Yes he does. Qui Gon breaking story logic by bringing him - a child - to a warzone so said child could save the day when none of the experienced pilots could.


Not just any child. Anakin had been established by then as not only future Darth Vader, but also some sort of Chosen One with a virgin birth, and he upstaged a bunch of extras no one cares about in a scene that was played for laughs as much as it was serious. Rey, whose deal we (or at least I) still don't know about, upstaged fan favourite Han Solo in his home turf. It's not even close to the same.


----------



## skip.knox (Mar 27, 2019)

Are there no examples of well-written female characters in modern (say, post 2010) fantasy? I find examples of things done well to be more helpful to me as a writer than examples of things done badly.


----------



## pmmg (Mar 27, 2019)

Unfortunately, looking at my current reading list, I don't think any of them were written after 2010.... I think the recent wonder woman movie won a lot of acclaim, and would qualify. Atomic Blonde...she was pretty rough, and I bought it. Anita Battle Angel just came out...oops, same guy. A lot of good female characters, but I assume were are just looking for power fantasy types. The girl in firefly was pretty formidable too, was that after 2010? I might put Harley Quinn from Suicide Squad there. Would Moana qualify? Probably. The girl from the newest Mad Max movie...Oh yeah, and Mrs. Katnis. Anyway, sure there are others, just a small list.


----------



## Darkfantasy (Mar 27, 2019)

Interesting, I never have planned my characters on their sex. What they do is all about their psyche to me. Also, I think about my audiences age but not their gender. I'm unfamiliar with "female/male power" stuff so maybe that's why?


----------



## ascanius (Mar 27, 2019)

Annoyingkid said:


> It's bad because they're saying there hasn't been a good female character since 1984 and because neither character challenges the masculine. Which is why they never "pissed off" the male fan market. Sarah Connor plays a supportive role to Kyle Reese and the Terminator respectively, and Ripley played a backseat to the rest of the crew and the space marines respectively, saving what heroics she did for the end. In the first one as a plot twist, as the last survivor, and the second she was out of the action for almost all of it due to trauma. Neither character took a lead with the action. A female character that does take the lead in action as the main character tends to get a very different response. That's the problem.



I'm getting the impression that you believe the only way a female character can be good is if they act all macho badass and are the female version of Rambo charging into a physical confrontation.  However something like that would just 'piss off the male fan market?'  You do realize that women are part of the so called 'male fan market.'   Your making it sound like only men watch movies which we know is untrue.



Annoyingkid said:


> Except there are male characters who are just like that and they don't piss off male audiences as much do they. Anakin from the Phantom Menace never had men calling him Gary Stu in droves, yet they call Rey that in her first movie. Even though she was older and accomplished less in comparison.



Lets see she defeates Kylo (who trained all his whole life in the force and with the lightsaber) with a lightsaber.  How is that not a mary sue.



Annoyingkid said:


> The reason "girl power" is a thing and used in a derogatory manner as you just did, is the same reason "boy power" isn't a thing. It's normalized and assumed that boys will be in power. Whereas a girl who upsets that by not playing to standards of femininity is derided as shoved in people's faces for "girl power". This is because it upsets people's conditioned, internalized paradigm that forms as a result of living in a society that pushes the message that  male characters that can defeat trolls, dragons, all manner or monsters believably with a badass one liner, but a woman who can outfight men is a "Man with boobs" and unrealistic and "Girl power propaganda". I've seen that double standard over and over in debates. The fact that people use it without any self awareness is in itself a problem. The fact that people immediately go on the defensive instead of self reflecting and  considering internalized sexism, is a problem.



Or maybe its because people are not stupid and realize that the sexes are in fact different and it rings false when one dons the mask of another.  Simply because people question your argument does not mean they have internalized sexism.

Seriously if you can take said badass female character switch the sex and there be no difference, it is for all intents and purposes a 'man with boobs.'  At that point why not just make the character male?  It makes more logical sense and feels less like the reader is having social propaganda shoved down their throat.  It is getting really annoying, no one cares about the authors/directors identity politics.  That is why 'the "male" fan market' gets pissed off.  Badass female character. check.   Minority character as a lead. check  identity politics check.  all it is is ticking check boxes and trying to be as woke as possible while leaving story and character by the way side.  It rings hollow to the audience who can see through the crap.  
example:  'Cleopatra should be played by a black actor – but not just for historical accuracy'
This line quote.  "The casting should be informed by the racial and social dynamics of today."    It's a brave new world of woke power fantasy.  I can understand historical accuracy but this come on.....



Annoyingkid said:


> If a movie came out tommorow with the top 2 greatest fighters as women - the fact that that this would be considered girl power sjw propaganda, is the problem. Female power fantasies are not viewed with the fairness of male power fantasies.



Depends a lot on the setting.  But if it's not superheros or some explanation that makes relative sense yea it would be.  Without magic or super powers it makes no sense.  People can see the physical difference every day they go outside.  No matter how much sjws want to tell everyone that male and female are the same it does not erase the reality that they are different.




Annoyingkid said:


> The dudebro argument in every single debate: "Female characters today suck and are Mary Sues/obnoxious not because of my sexist bias, but because they've all been written badly. Female action characters that have been written well are Sarah Connor and Ellen Ripley. Two characters from the mid eighties in the same genre, with similar arcs, written by the same man. "



wow.  so because they have a different opinion they are sexist and biased, funny.  Anyway I cann't really agree that every female character sucks, a lot do especially in film and tv but not all. 




Futhark said:


> Yes, this is it exactly.  There is so much social and cultural conditioning that has accrued over the centuries that even though we, as an individual, may be ‘enlightened’ and strive for equality, there are also standards that we unwittingly still apply.
> 
> Ray Sonne writes -
> This is, of course, because personhood with all its flaws, mistakes, and ugliness is still something often not applied to _real_ women in our society, along with female representation in all media. If women are mean, they’re bitches. If they show sexual cravings, they’re sluts. If they slip up, they’re incompetent.



Does that mean it applies to fake women?  what the hell does that even mean 'real women'  this is just wow.  The same also applies to men,  mean man ass***** , bas**** , sexual cravings a pig, ass***,etc..  if they slip incompetent.  In what world does the author if this drivel live where if a man makes a mistake they are not castigated or fired.  FFS this is just ridiculous.



Futhark said:


> As I see it, a power fantasy, whether male or female, is not a bad thing.  The current negative connotations associated with it seem to stem from examples of this trope that rather than empower a social demographic, they objectify, denigrate, humiliate or oppress others.  For this reason, most of the power fantasies that *aren’t *remarked on have somewhat two-dimensional or unsympathetic villains (think mindless aliens, faceless governments, heartless corporations, etc.)



Depends on how we define power fantasy and how it plays out. based off Power Fantasy - TV Tropes it seems like power fantasy is simply power for the sake of righting perceived wrongs, to put others in their place simply because one now has power.  I can see why it has the connotation, it is little different that having power for the sake of power, or power for vengeance.  Carrie is basically this idea.  There are also ones where the character arrives at forgiveness instead of vengeance.


----------



## pmmg (Mar 27, 2019)

Annoyingkid said:


> The reason "girl power" is a thing and used in a derogatory manner as you just did, is the same reason "boy power" isn't a thing. It's normalized and assumed that boys will be in power. Whereas a girl who upsets that by not playing to standards of femininity is derided as shoved in people's faces for "girl power". This is because it upsets people's conditioned, internalized paradigm that forms as a result of living in a society that pushes the message that male characters that can defeat trolls, dragons, all manner or monsters believably with a badass one liner, but a woman who can outfight men is a "Man with boobs" and unrealistic and "Girl power propaganda". I've seen that double standard over and over in debates. The fact that people use it without any self awareness is in itself a problem. The fact that people immediately go on the defensive instead of self reflecting and considering internalized sexism, is a problem.





Futhark said:


> Yes, this is it exactly. There is so much social and cultural conditioning that has accrued over the centuries that even though we, as an individual, may be ‘enlightened’ and strive for equality, there are also standards that we unwittingly still apply.



These two seem to go hand in hand, so I would like to address them together.

The problem I have with this is the underlying assumption that the way things have developed is not the way they would have developed if we had much earlier on had a more enlightened view of equality. That if we could take the box and shake it and let all the debris settle again, that it would not come out the same, and if we added a bit of more 'women in power roles' to earlier models, there would be very different attitudes today.

I reject the notion that what we have is the result purely of cultural conditioning, and would assert that our cultural conditioning is equally influenced by the difference in the genders that have played out over a long period of time. I think it is false that if I shook the box and let it settle again, I would get very different results, because I think those results are the natural outcome when one gender is kind of wedge shaped and the other is hourglass, when one bares children and the other provides, and that when it comes to what is required to raise children, that the division of labor would not seem obvious. I think, save for some rare examples, this plays out in every culture, and in every era, and will continue to do so most likely till there are just no more humans left. I think it is true that some forms of modern technology have been able to help overcome the differences, and to that regard we have modern attitudes to go along with them. Perhaps in time, they will be a good reason why the differences have diminished and some roles have changed, but I think the jury is still out on how that plays for a long span of years. IMO, I don't think the primitive notions of gender roles will ever wholly disappear.

I further reject the notion that women have not been equals. I think the genders are equally balanced and a good compliment to each other. In every interaction, power balances are at play, and sometimes one wins over the other, but the same man who may use his male power to push girls around and thump his chest, can also be totally wrapped around the finger of another.

I totally get the argument that if a man can be shown to beat a giant, which no way he has the power to do, why is it so bothersome if woman is shown to do the same? Seems reasonable, and it is just fantasy.

Well, I do find it dubious the man would prevail. I just look for what I think is true, and often I think, um...No! No one gets up from that. But that aside, if a woman pulls off the feat...well... I am not saying it cannot happen. Anyone who gets a lucky shot to the jugular of a giant kills it right? Could a woman hit a giant hard enough to cut into the jugular? Well, sure...provided something about it is not impossible. But it is far more likely the male would engage it, the male would fight it to the death, and the male could hit it harder. He just might be able to cut it deeper than a woman of similar conditioning.

I think the reason why 'girl power' comes into the light more than 'boy power' is because 'Girl Power' typically is pronounced after a girl has done something more in the realm of a male gender role, which is more prominently at the fore front given modern attitudes about slights in the distribution of historical power. Usually it is meant to be 'in your face, male!' I suppose if I was to do something more in the female gender role side of the equation, such as give birth, I might exclaim 'Boy Power' as a way of saying in your face women... But there is a lie behind it. The lie is that one set off example makes the rule. It does not. And if a giant is coming over the hill, and there is a choice as to who fights it, almost all of the time, a male is a better choice. He has the wedge shaped body, and all of the advantages that has brought, from greater upper body strength, to different psychological mindset, to different social and cultural conditioning.




Annoyingkid said:


> If a movie came out tomorrow with the top 2 greatest fighters as women - the fact that that this would be considered girl power sjw propaganda, is the problem. Female power fantasies are not viewed with the fairness of male power fantasies.



Didn't this already kind of happen with Thanos's two daughters? I was okay with it.

But yes, generally, I would have a problem with it, because I would have to assume everything else about what I know about men and women was true for them as it was for us here on earth. So...unless it is shown that men are smaller and weaker, or the genders are somehow biologically different, I would find it very unlikely that it would ever happen. So I would be asking questions and likely arrive at...'um...no. That would never happen.' Course, I might be sold on it. Did not question Thanos's daughters. Give me a reason.


----------



## Futhark (Mar 27, 2019)

ascanius said:


> Does that mean it applies to fake women? what the hell does that even mean 'real women' this is just wow. The same also applies to men, mean man ass***** , bas**** , sexual cravings a pig, ass***,etc.. if they slip incompetent. In what world does the author if this drivel live where if a man makes a mistake they are not castigated or fired. FFS this is just ridiculous.



You totally misconstrued this.  A ‘real’ women refers to an actual, living, breathing person.  Therefor it cannot apply to fake women as they don’t exist.  But yes, it does apply to men.  Examples: real men don’t cry; if you care about your woman’s feelings you’re ‘whipped’; if you admire and are aroused by the female form then you’re a misogynistic pig.  The author never claims that if a man makes a mistake they are not castigated or fired.  What she is saying is that “personhood..(is not)... often not applied to _real_ women in our society, along with female representation in all media.”  This is to say that the stereotypes in our society, when translated to a fictional medium, suffer from double standards.  This is not just true for the male/female roles, that’s just what we’re discussing now.



ascanius said:


> Or maybe its because people are not stupid and realize that the sexes are in fact different and it rings false when one dons the mask of another. Simply because people question your argument does not mean they have internalized sexism.
> 
> Seriously if you can take said badass female character switch the sex and there be no difference, it is for all intents and purposes a 'man with boobs.' At that point why not just make the character male? It makes more logical sense and feels less like the reader is having social propaganda shoved down their throat. It is getting really annoying, no one cares about the authors/directors identity politics. That is why 'the "male" fan market' gets pissed off. Badass female character. check. Minority character as a lead. check identity politics check. all it is is ticking check boxes and trying to be as woke as possible while leaving story and character by the way side. It rings hollow to the audience who can see through the crap.
> example: 'Cleopatra should be played by a black actor – but not just for historical accuracy'
> This line quote. "The casting should be informed by the racial and social dynamics of today." It's a brave new world of woke power fantasy. I can understand historical accuracy but this come on.....



This I agree with this completely, except that Cleopatra was essentially Greek.



pmmg said:


> The problem I have with this is the underlying assumption that the way things have developed is not the way they would have developed if we had much earlier on had a more enlightened view of equality. That if we could take the box and shake it and let all the debris settle again, that it would not come out the same, and if we added a bit of more 'women in power roles' to earlier models, there would be very different attitudes today.
> 
> I reject the notion that what we have is the result purely of cultural conditioning, and would assert that our cultural conditioning is equally influenced by the difference in the genders that have played out over a long period of time. I think it is false that if I shook the box and let it settle again, I would get very different results, because I think those results are the natural outcome when one gender is kind of wedge shaped and the other is hourglass, when one bares children and the other provides, and that when it comes to what is required to raise children, that the division of labor would not seem obvious. I think, save for some rare examples, this plays out in every culture, and in every era, and will continue to do so most likely till there are just no more humans left. I think it is true that some forms of modern technology have been able to help overcome the differences, and to that regard we have modern attitudes to go along with them. Perhaps in time, they will be a good reason why the differences have diminished and some roles have changed, but I think the jury is still out on how that plays for a long span of years. IMO, I don't think the primitive notions of gender roles will ever wholly disappear.
> 
> I further reject the notion that women have not been equals. I think the genders are equally balanced and a good compliment to each other. In every interaction, power balances are at play, and sometimes one wins over the other, but the same man who may use his male power to push girls around and thump his chest, can also be totally wrapped around the finger of another.



First paragraph - if you add a different variable (more women in power), reset the paradigm, then Chaos Theory dictates that there will be different results.  If you take a look at pre-Christian Viking and Celtic societies, the common woman had more rights and freedoms than their later medieval counterparts.  This is not to say that there were no women in power in medieval times, just that the ‘average’ woman had less.  This could very easily have gone down differently in history, and we would have a thousand years of equal rights for men and women.

Second paragraph - yes absolutely.  Different genders have (in general) different preferences, priorities, biological drives, and thinking patterns.  Hence the whole Gender Pay Gap propaganda.  The report is a statistical compilation of which gender works in what profession, how many hours they work, how many years etc.  Men and women don’t get paid differently for doing the same job, it’s against the law (here anyway).  These Social Justice W#nkers (as opposed to SJW who actually *do* good things) are saying that it needs to be 50/50, which is not social freedom, it’s Totalitarianism.

Third paragraph - yes and no.  Ok yes there is often a measure of balance.  You know, the man is the head of the family, but the women is the neck, and she turns the head anyway she wants to.  But socially or politically it’s very often a no.  Equality to me is the inherent right to have the same freedoms and opportunities as each other, something rarely seen even 50 or 60 years ago.

To give an example of what I would arguably call a ‘female power fantasy ‘, that I enjoyed, thought was done well, didn’t see her as a ‘man with boobs’, and didn’t have any of ‘I’m just a girl in a man’s world, but I can do it too’ (looking at you Captain Marvel), is Jessica Jones on Netflix.


----------



## pmmg (Mar 27, 2019)

Futhark said:


> First paragraph - if you add a different variable (more women in power), reset the paradigm, then Chaos Theory dictates that there will be different results. If you take a look at pre-Christian Viking and Celtic societies, the common woman had more rights and freedoms than their later medieval counterparts. This is not to say that there were no women in power in medieval times, just that the ‘average’ woman had less. This could very easily have gone down differently in history, and we would have a thousand years of equal rights for men and women.



I say chaos theory does not apply. If I go back to the beginning and change those attitudes and let it ride, we still see a world that shapes itself in hierarchical structures, and the same forces that shaped it then, will shape it again. We will see few instances of women in roles typically held by men and vice versa. The only variable I suspect would make a difference is if we could go back to primitive man with todays technology, which would not be very primitive. But unless we change the fundamental difference, the wedge shaped man, the hour glass woman, the child birth process, and relative roles that would naturally spring up from them, chaos theory never gets off the ground.

Course, that is no reason not to write the fantasy fiction you desire. If you have the next awesome female power type, go for it.

I will confess, I am lost as to which paragraph is which but... I will say I missed Jessica Jones. No interest. Maybe I should.


----------



## Futhark (Mar 27, 2019)

pmmg said:


> If I go back to the beginning and change those attitudes and let it ride, we still see a world that shapes itself in hierarchical structures, and the same forces that shaped it then, will shape it again. We will see few instances of women in roles typically held by men and vice versa.



I get what your saying.  Lightning will always earth itself along the path of least resistance.  Water will always flow according to the laws of gravity.  And I agree that we would probably see little difference in the roles held by men and women.  My argument is that with just a few minor variables we could have had a culture that valued gender equality for much longer.

When I say gender equality I mean freedoms and opportunity.  Things like access to justice, the right to vote, do what job they want.  If a girl wants to be a boilermaker she should have been able to without judgement (they do now I know).  Back in the day (couldn’t be bothered researching actual dates, sorry) women couldn’t become doctors, they could only be nurses.

That is not equality.  Would there be more male doctors than female?  Probably, but the women who wanted to would have had the opportunity.

But gender equality does not mean gender sameness.  We are different (technically males are mutant females).  Gender equality means* valuing *those differences and recognising that we all have inherent rights.


----------



## TheKillerBs (Mar 27, 2019)

Futhark said:


> I get what your saying.  Lightning will always earth itself along the path of least resistance.  Water will always flow according to the laws of gravity.  And I agree that we would probably see little difference in the roles held by men and women.  My argument is that with just a few minor variables we could have had a culture that valued gender equality for much longer.


I don't think this is the case. At all. I don't think there weren't a significant number of cultures that valued gender equality or women over men in the past. If you look at traditional societies, societies that live largely the same as their ancestors did for millennia - hunter-gatherers and nomads, not social conservatives - you'll find they don't seem to favour one paradigm over the other. It isn't until the advent of agriculture that you start seeing a bias towards patriarchy. I have thoughts as to what pressures would shape that (namely, that since most warriors are men, the more warlike a culture is, the more likely it is to be patriarchal because the warriors will either have the power to begin with or take it for themselves, and when a more warlike patriarchal culture meets a less warlike culture that tends towards matriarchy, the more patriarchal culture wins out) but I would hesitate to state them categorically.


----------



## Futhark (Mar 27, 2019)

TheKillerBs 

But that’s exactly what I am saying.  They had different roles to be sure, but all roles were valued equally; and because of this power was more equally distributed.  But the men still tended to be the hunters or warriors.  Today there are more male boilermakers than female.  That, in my opinion, is more a result of biological preferences rather than gender.  It has nothing to do with gender equality.

My previous examples of pre-Christian Viking and Celtic societies highlights that.  Both were patriarchal and warlike but they seemed to value gender equality more than the last few centuries of Western culture.  What if there was no Renaissance?  What if the Catholic Church had fallen?  Sure agriculture appears to favour the formation of patriarchies, but patriarchies and gender equality are not mutually exclusive.  The point is that Western culture could have had far a more socially equatable attitude towards gender, and we wouldn’t be discussing topics like this now, in the present day, with people on the other side of the world at the speed of light.


----------



## TheKillerBs (Mar 27, 2019)

How did the pre-Christian Norse societies value gender equality more than their Christian successors if they did not see rape as a personal crime? They saw it as a crime against the household - vandalism against the father or husband, and not* violence against the woman herself. It wasn't until the Christian period that this changed, and it was recognised that it was the woman who was the victim. I'm sorry, but that does not seem like they valued gender equality any more than did their successors.


----------



## skip.knox (Mar 27, 2019)

FTR, I was thinking specifically of books. Movies and comic books are their own genre, with their own histories and particular challenges. 

Doesn't have to be 2010; I just picked a date. call it 2000 or even 1990. When you're as old as I am, "modern" spans other people's entire lifetimes!


----------



## skip.knox (Mar 27, 2019)

To the folks arguing historical gender issues:  this is an enormously complex and subtle topic. There are scads of books, some of which are very good. People are free to argue based on whatever knowledge they happen to have at hand, of course. It's a free country and an open bar.

But for those who are following along, please be aware there's a very careful and thoroughly researched conversation about this topic, and there's *still* a range of (good) interpretations of the evidence. I'm speaking specifically of ancient and medieval. After about 1700 I lose interest and can't speak to the literature.


----------



## Futhark (Mar 28, 2019)

skip.knox said:


> FTR, I was thinking specifically of books. Movies and comic books are their own genre, with their own histories and particular challenges.
> 
> Doesn't have to be 2010; I just picked a date. call it 2000 or even 1990. When you're as old as I am, "modern" spans other people's entire lifetimes!


Couldn’t think of any but the werewolf thread reminded me that Talulla Demetriou is the heroine in the second book.  Don’t know if you would call it ‘female power fantasy’ though.  Talulla Rising, by Glen Duncan, 2012.

TheKillerBs 
Well, yes.  I am sure there were inequalities.  Idk, maybe I’m misremembering some things or I just provided a poor example.
I have no facts (something I’m not overly comfortable with), just conjecture and supposition.  I _feel_ (ugh, that was hard) that gender equality is an issue that could have been resolved long ago, and since the value of the roles we take on would be acknowledged and validated, then the whole debate of how they are represented in media wouldn’t even come up.


----------



## Annoyingkid (Mar 28, 2019)

pmmg said:


> These two seem to go hand in hand, so I would like to address them together.
> 
> But yes, generally, I would have a problem with it, because I would have to assume everything else about what I know about men and women was true for them as it was for us here on earth. So...unless it is shown that men are smaller and weaker, or the genders are somehow biologically different, I would find it very unlikely that it would ever happen. So I would be asking questions and likely arrive at...'um...no. That would never happen.' Course, I might be sold on it. Did not question Thanos's daughters. Give me a reason.



Theyre shown to be more skilled, so have more skill. Reason enough. Asking for standards of realism that aren't present in male fantasies is problematic.

Fact is, there's negative tropes that exist to denigrate a female power fantasy that do not exist for male. If it's romanced based, it gets dismissed as "Chick flick" or "Twilight crap". If it's action based, they have that covered with "Man with boobs", "Strong Female Character" and "Mary Sue". Some of which are applied in combinaton. Do writers all of a sudden lose their skills when they write a female character? No. The answer is the bias of the "critic." And I say that in quotes, because these tropes are insults, not critique. They are not made in a good faith attempt to improve the work, but made to defame it and police femininity.


----------



## FifthView (Mar 28, 2019)

Way too many topics floating around in this thread, heh, but I do find the question in the old OP to be intriguing.

First, why write a "power fantasy," and do most readers actually look for this? I suspect this itself is something of a very minor sub-genre approach. True, as readers we want the main protagonist in our novels to succeed—to overcome and succeed. This requires some kind of power. (A vague word in this context.) But to have the novel be an expression of "power fantasy"? I think that's maybe something different?

Second, for that particular sub-genre, I do suspect that men and women—_very_ generally speaking—have different "fantasies" of what "power" may mean, or at least in how it is expressed and acquired. I doubt we can reasonably claim the vast majority of men or women will share said fantasy respectively. But suppose for sake of argument we could identify a power fantasy for each group. I suspect the fantasies would diverge between the two groups, even if we might say, again very generally speaking, that they share the feature of general dominance within a milieu or within a social context.

Third, although I've not carefully followed the entire preceding discussion, I'm fascinated by the examples already given, for this reason:  the "powerful women" are said to be powerful because they have physical prowess, whether via their use of their bodies or through physical expressions of power like guns and the exo suit Ripley wore or both. In other words, this is mere donning of what might represent part of the power fantasy for men. Surely some women might have a strong fantasy of possessing physical powers like those men are thought to possess—but is this the "power fantasy" for most women? I very much doubt it; having no proof however, I'm going out on a limb.

Fourth, what is the male power fantasy? Do I know? Heh. I do suspect physical prowess, particularly strength but perhaps not strength alone, is a part of it.  Even if the body is not of Arnold Schwarzenegger proportions, skill in martial arts and/or weaponry and/or stealth give physical prowess. This is for both, offense and defense. Defense is of particular importance, because there are other males out there, heh. So even if the best defense is a good offense...well. Flowing from this strength are two things: Rewards/recognition and reaching the top of the hierarchy. Hierarchy in this case may simply be within a particular context, for instance business in a particular industry or the top of a thieving guild if not the whole world. "Top of his game." I think there have been studies regarding men and hierarchical organization, so I'm cribbing a bit. Again, I'm assuming a small sub-genre, or a story meant to hit all the major buttons of a male power fantasy.

Fifth, what is the female power fantasy? I don't know. I would need to ask women what they want to read vis-a-vis a good power fantasy—and I'd need a good, large sampling. I am not a woman. Were I to guess (really out on a long, thin limb) I'd default to something I've already written. The end goal of either a male or a female power fantasy might be "general dominance within a milieu or within a social context," but the methods of reaching that point might diverge in "how it is expressed and acquired." Forgive me for my male gaze, but I only have my own viewing experiences to mine for clues. What first came to mind were various legal dramas like _Damages_ and _The Good Wife_ which feature women using their intelligence, wits, education, and so forth to dominate a field.  Brawn won't suffice; nor will social hierarchy, not quite. Sometimes included in this expression of power is their ability to subvert male expectations and blind spots. Another example might be in product advertisements targeted at women which feature bumbling men and the women who are insightful and clever in comparison. Should I take these examples as a clue, given how product advertisements have a very real material consequence and so are probably targeting that way for a reason? I don't know, but think I might be on to something. In the high school dramas, the female hero is often _not_ at the top of the social hierarchy but is quite intelligent, resourceful, and has a grounded personality unlike the head cheerleaders and student council members—and what's more, is often able to play various elements of the school's hierarchy and social groups like a fiddle. These types of stories may or may not result in the character reaching the top of some established, publicly acknowledged hierarchy, but if not, the character has carved a good niche and is left free to operate according to her will.

Sixth—I don't often go beyond the fifth view, heh—a caveat. Or two. I think our field of speculative fiction throws a wrench into things, because both magic and advanced technology blur the lines between what is physical strength and what is some other kind of prowess. A male power fantasy might feature an expert hacker, maybe something like the show _Mr. Robot, _who never comes out of the shadows, has thin reward and recognition.   Or extreme powers of divination like Paul Muad'Dib that lead to both reward and recognition. Well but so might a female power fantasy? Is offensive magic a physical power or the mind's ability to suss out and manipulate the milieu, playing others like a fiddle? Are examples of these things power fantasies for either sex or gender, or just...fantasies, stories, and not in the sub-genre of power fantasy? Keeping in mind, most of the preceding five points are just food for thought for me, not absolute certainties, heh.

Seventh, at the end of the day, if our goal is to write _a book_, we probably shouldn't worry overmuch about hitting all the right notes for all potential audience members. We shouldn't worry overmuch about turning this or that audience member away. If you have a power fantasy of your own, and you want to write a power fantasy, there are sure to be others out there who share it and others out there who don't. A lot of these questions and concerns about what constitutes a power fantasy are...not germane?


----------



## FifthView (Mar 28, 2019)

Eighth, a point I forgot to include but might as well now. IF the goal is to write a power fantasy for men or for women who are alive now, then I'd suppose that looking at current social contexts, memes, ideas about power probably would be more germane than trying to look at historical contexts alone. I mean, if you want to hit buttons, make sure the buttons aren't buried under centuries of rubble.  This would make determining what the actual history was like, the relations of men to women 1200 years ago, rather pointless to the pursuit or at least not as important as looking at relations now. Dunno. I don't wish to invalidate historical realism from novels, obviously, nor how a historical view might deepen our world building.


----------



## Svrtnsse (Mar 28, 2019)

What IS even a power fantasy?

Is there such a thing as a universal male/female power fantasy?
I don't think so.

The first time I came across the term power fantasy was when watching a talk about game design, and the developers tried to identify what the power fantasy was for the barbarian class in their game. I think it's probably easier to identify a power fantasy for something if you narrow down the scope a lot. 

The power fantasy for _barbarian warrior_ is a lot easier to identify than the power fantasy for _person_.
It may not necessarily be easy, but it's definitely easier.

From the game dev talk, the focus went on to expectations, and how that shaped the power fantasy.
When you play a barbarian warrior in a video game, you expect to be playing a big muscular brute, dressed in furs, and armed with close combat weapons. They're loud and aggressive and they plow into hordes of enemies without fear.

Can we apply anything like that to writing a character that's meant to be the power fantasy of a person?
I don't think so.

Can you apply it to a person who's a bullied orphan, and who discovers they have superior magical powers that they have to keep hidden?
Yes, I think so.


----------



## Annoyingkid (Mar 30, 2019)

FifthView said:


> Third, although I've not carefully followed the entire preceding discussion, I'm fascinated by the examples already given, for this reason: the "powerful women" are said to be powerful because they have physical prowess, whether via their use of their bodies or through physical expressions of power like guns and the exo suit Ripley wore or both. In other words, this is mere donning of what might represent part of the power fantasy for men. Surely some women might have a strong fantasy of possessing physical powers like those men are thought to possess—but is this the "power fantasy" for most women?



The answers yes. I mean what woman wouldn't want sexual assault or physical assault to no longer be a concern. 

Another would be their words taken much more seriously by men. 
The ability to be highly competent without threatening dude's masculinity.
Another would be the ability to be attractive and express beauty without receiving creepiness back.

I could go on. Basically just look at the issues that affect women today, and you'll get a clear idea of what women want to see in a power fantasy. 

To me, the previous discussion had nothing to do with female characters with physical prowess only. No one was discussing characters who are physically strong but low on wits. 

As an aside, I really want to see an end to the use of the "Man with Boobs" trope, as it's transphobic. There are real life men with breasts who are real people, not tropes, or insults who truly identify as men and who do not want to be considered women. So using that term to label gender non conforming women, is a problem, as it is saying in a mocking way that trans men = masculine women. That's misgendering.


----------



## valiant12 (Mar 30, 2019)

Annoyingkid said:


> Another would be the ability to be attractive and express beauty without receiving creepiness back.


Calling people creepy is rude/bulling. 
I don’t think you understand the average fantasy reader/fan. Most of us are either weird nerdy kids or nerdy grownups who were weird nerds as kids. Shaming people for their social skills is generally something that fantasy writers should never do.


----------



## Svrtnsse (Mar 30, 2019)

valiant12 said:


> Calling people creepy is rude/bulling.


I don't think the comment was aimed at fantasy readers as such, but at people of the world in general.


----------



## A. E. Lowan (Mar 30, 2019)

valiant12 said:


> Calling people creepy is rude/bulling.


Not respecting boundaries is creepy. Objectifying people is creepy. Reducing women in particular to the sum of their sexualized parts is creepy. I think we can agree about this. Calling out these behaviors and others like them is not bullying, it's standing up.

I think we can also agree, given the statements in this thread, that a woman's basic "power fantasy" is being recognized as a whole person with agency and not a sexy lamp. Women are also people, individuals with their own desires and hopes and dreams. Women are not a monolith.


----------



## FifthView (Mar 30, 2019)

Annoyingkid said:


> The answers yes. I mean what woman wouldn't want sexual assault or physical assault to no longer be a concern.



I agree, but I'm not sure that physical fighting ability, or masterful fighting ability, is the defense that comes to mind first. Maybe yes, maybe no. As mentioned, our particular niche of speculative fiction enables all sorts of magical and/or technological mechanisms that would enable this surefire defense against such attacks, and I'm ambivalent on whether these can be characterized as analogues to physical fighting ability.

In two different threads recently I've mentioned the term "offensive magic," and I've cringed every time, heh. Magic is potentially so varied, I'm not altogether sure if the term says much, given what might pop into mind. Is it shooting fireballs? Or is it telekinetic powers? Or is it being able to summon poisonous spiders? Or is it ... casting a curse? Having a spirit companion that can freeze an opponent's muscles? Having magical hypnotizing powers, or secretions that cause an opponent to run in fear when he grabs her? I can see all of these playing a role in establishing a character who embodies a female power fantasy, but I'm not sure they can all be characterized as being, essentially, a reimagined type of physical prowess.  (Keeping in mind also Svrtnsse's observation, "Is there such a thing as a universal male/female power fantasy? I don't think so."  I've posted some thoughts about this topic, exploring the possibility of a _Yes_, but I'm doubtful.)



Annoyingkid said:


> To me, the previous discussion had nothing to do with female characters with physical prowess only. No one was discussing characters who are physically strong but low on wits.


 
I was addressing that short interlude when people were discussing Sarah Conner and Ripley. And Buffy. Buffy's an interesting case because she's a Chosen One who received her powers thanks to a magical source; but that magic translated into physical prowess.

Also, I was not implying that any of these, nor male characters who trigger a male power fantasy for that matter, are low on wits while being strong physically.  I do question the assumption—in certain stories—that wit alone will not be enough to overcome antagonists. Wit is great to have, and readers or viewers will like intelligent, mentally resourceful characters most, regardless of the story. But then why did Buffy need to be able to kick ass?  Well, perhaps some antagonists can't be defeated in other ways; so maybe the action genre requires that? But is the action genre the one most women seek to read when they desire a power fantasy? (Again: It's possibly pointless to try characterizing a whole group this way, except as part of a mental exercise?)

As a side note, I'm curious about the continuum of  wit-physical prowess, when these are applied to story resolution. James Bond is extremely clever, but he seems to rely most on physical ability for getting through the toughest spots.


----------



## FifthView (Mar 30, 2019)

A. E. Lowan said:


> I think we can also agree, given the statements in this thread, that a woman's basic "power fantasy" is being recognized as a whole person with agency and not a sexy lamp.



_Agency._ Yes. 

How is it expressed in the story? How is it validated in the story—via the character's efforts and actions and the results of those?

I think you have a great nutshell summary here. But as is the case, thinking of these things in terms of the real world is problematic if we don't also move to the literary realm, i.e., how to embody these things within a particular story.


----------



## Annoyingkid (Apr 1, 2019)

In fantasy, how can a weak character be smart, if it's not smart to be weak.


----------



## Chessie2 (Apr 1, 2019)

Maybe I'm the only woman on here that doesn't mind being sexually objectified. Sex is power. Beauty is power. Beauty + brains is amazing power. My books have beautiful heroines who also have smarts, wits, and are willing to reflect on their own personality defects. The females in the fantasy books I have written (yes, I've written those, lol) tend to have power via magic. It's their magnetic beauty and intelligence that makes them feared. But why do I write them beautiful? Typically because I also write romance and physical attraction is huge in that plot line. But they aren't hoes, they aren't seen as such. The characters who take advantage/try to abuse them usually end up scarred physically somehow, often dead. Honestly, female power fantasy comes down to what the author believes that to be, imo.


----------



## skip.knox (Apr 1, 2019)

It feels wrong to be talking about "female power fantasy" as if there was only one such fantasy, shared by all females. Same goes for men, but we aren't talking about us, for once.

Historically, one could make the case that there never has been a female power fantasy, at least not one culture-wide and openly expressed. It's sort of a modern invention. And if it is an invention, I'd very much like to see something like "top twenty female power fantasies" or the like. That is, plenty of different ideas about what constitutes power among women. Let a thousand flowers bloom.


----------



## pmmg (Apr 1, 2019)

A. E. Lowan said:


> I think we can also agree, given the statements in this thread, that a woman's basic "power fantasy" is being recognized as a whole person with agency and not a sexy lamp.



So...we have reduced female power fantasy down to this? Just sayin...that's not what I see when I see female power fantasy. I am not sure I even want to read that story. Power fantasy, to me, at least suggests some type of action hero aspect, and sexy is not a bad thing to be. Maybe that is more along the lines of how women (readers?) want to feel in general, but there are so many types of different people and so many types of characters, none of them would be every 100% of anything. And some of them are powerful because they are sexy.

I feel it is important to attack the notion of equality, because things are not equal. Men have wedged shaped bodies and women don’t. They will never be equal. They have different gifts, and different things which can make them powerful. For some it is physical might. For others it is other traits. I think everyone has to capability to rise to the top of something, but I also think the trend would always be to favor males gaining advantage and more often rising to the top of hierarchical systems.

But that does not make women weaker. It just means that system is not one they excel at, but the skills and gifts they have would apply more strongly in other arenas. Write stories about that, and the women will be more in their element, and look more powerful.

We can assume some more recent notions of equality. The law looking at people equally, per se, and say wouldn't that society be great if we could just achieve it, but I feel we are just cutting against the grain with all of this. Equal between the genders does not really mean equal. If I could make a law system that maximized male concerns and empowered them to the top of their capabilities, and do the same for women, I would have two different law systems. We imperfect types can try to create a fair system, and correct for inequities, but we can never really achieve it.

I am not sure it matters that agriculture did this, or some other factor did. I cannot imagine that a new world with similar genders passing through time would not eventually arrive at agriculture, so I stand by the comment the same factors that shaped it once, will shape it again. I am not sure that agriculture makes a lot of difference; I think gender roles would show up long before that. Maybe there is evidence I am unaware of that would have me rethink that.


Annoying Kid, you and I are too far apart, I feel, to every pull the other one back in, but I do appreciate how studied and well-presented your positions are. I think you are too close to extremes for me though.



Annoyingkid said:


> In fantasy, how can a weak character be smart, if it's not smart to be weak.



Mr. Glass seemed pretty weak and quite smart at the same time. One can be smart enough to know their weakness is a limitation and still be unable to overcome it.



skip.knox said:


> It feels wrong to be talking about "female power fantasy" as if there was only one such fantasy, shared by all females. Same goes for men, but we aren't talking about us, for once.
> 
> Historically, one could make the case that there never has been a female power fantasy, at least not one culture-wide and openly expressed. It's sort of a modern invention. And if it is an invention, I'd very much like to see something like "top twenty female power fantasies" or the like. That is, plenty of different ideas about what constitutes power among women. Let a thousand flowers bloom.



Well, of course, there will never be a one size fits all. But there are some that come closer to the bill than others. I think Conan was pretty close to an epitome of a male power fantasy. Was Red Sonja (FPF side of things)? I think she was too. Course she also has the chainmail bikini, so...she'll draw some ire. I think Mrs. Marvel is supposed to be one, but I am not sure if she achieves it.

Alita Battle Angel more seems to fit the bill on most recent examples.

I suppose I would make this argument, it seems that power fantasy type character should be in an action hero type role. Women in those roles, tend to have to shift roles a little and take on male qualities to perform well in them. These are not roles women tend to excel at, and so the dis-believability rises higher. Better would be to see women doing well and having more success in things that would be more along the lines of female roles, and play more to skills that they uniquely have. These would less likely be action roles, but how can you have an action hero, and thereby a power fantasy character, without it? Women are in conundrum for that. I can be sold, and I can choose to just go with it, but the very nature of the beast is just going to make it a harder sell. Just cause something is hard is not a reason not to try, so.... I intend to enjoy some power fantasy women in the future. But I also expect there will be more than a few who don’t quite sell.

For me, I think if I wanted to write a good Female Power Fantasy (and of course I do), I would look to have a good action hero, a reason to explain them that is plausible, and try to hold on to as many female qualities as I could, and avoid the male ones. (I think Wonder Woman did that well in her standalone movie, just as an aside.) But ya know...sometimes there are just women who are bad ass. Looking at you Vasquez.  So...We’ll just have to try and see.


----------



## Devor (Apr 1, 2019)

Yeah, the "Power Fantasy" usually plays out like a 90s Schwarzenegger action flick, with the tough guy being awesome, shooting up the bad guys, capping the villain with some badass line, and getting the girl.  It's not supposed to be deep, or make a statement, just tick off all those "masculine" impulses and suppressed inner desires.

Just the notion behind it is going to tick people off (is this really what guys feel like they want?  Which guys?).  It's not surprising to me that looking at a "Female Power Fantasy" is going to annoy people.  If you just swap the genders and portray the "super-strong woman" with the badass lines, there's a real question if that would be expected to hit the deep emotional impulses of what many woman want, and if you try to speculate about what would, that's extremely shaky territory.

For myself, I love a good superhero power fantasy movie (a little different than the Schwarzenegger stuff), but I look for something deeper and more personal in my reading. A review of a book as a "power fantasy" is a big turn off to me.


----------



## skip.knox (Apr 1, 2019)

>there will never be a one size fits all. But there are some that come closer to the bill than others.
pmmg, this was precisely my point. When we speak of "the bill" we are in fact saying there is an ideal. A single ideal. That's what I have heard voiced elsewhere and have seen somewhat on this thread--that there is such a thing as "the" female power fantasy, and discussions of specific works are all about how close or far that work hit from the mark.

I submit this does an injustice to us all. I prefer the notion--a foolish one, perhaps, but I cling to it--that human beings are marvelously diverse, that despite cultural commonalities we somehow manage each to be unique, even if the differences can be hard to spot. More to the point, when all or most of are spoken of as if we were identical, we miss the unique, and it's the unique and the unusual that I most value.

I am quite sure I don't have any male power fantasies. The very notion seems silly to me--and only for me, I hasten to add. Someone mentioned Conan, but I've always viewed Conan as an archetypical critic of civilization, and specifically of the decadence of the civilized. This is how Howard wrote him, of course, but it's also how I read him (I was introduced via the great comic run in the 1970s, all kudos to Roy Thomas). I'd go so far as to say that Conan as a male power fantasy is in fact someone else's fantasy about what constitutes male fantasy. A stereotype, in other words. 

It's dreadfully easy to fall into those types. I have done it myself, many times, going all the way back to the Marlboro Man serving as a stereotype for what I imagined a certain type of male to be. It let me be dismissive and superior. It turns out there are lots of different kinds of cowboys, and lots of different kinds of people who admire them. So, I'm not putting anyone down here or, if I am, I'm right there with you.

Which makes me wonder: what is the difference between a [gender] power fantasy (I note in passing that no one is talking about a power fantasy for anyone on the LBGTQ rainbow) and a [gender] ideal. Can't there be ideals to fantasize about other than power?


----------



## TheKillerBs (Apr 1, 2019)

Annoyingkid said:


> In fantasy, how can a weak character be smart, if it's not smart to be weak.


That's the same logic the rich use to take advantage of the poor. "Oh well if they weren't stupid and/or lazy they wouldn't be poor."


----------



## FifthView (Apr 1, 2019)

pmmg said:


> These would less likely be action roles, but how can you have an action hero, and thereby a power fantasy character, without it?



I'm not at all certain that "power fantasy" is an idea restricted to action roles in action stories, although it seems to have been sequestered there.

Isn't that restriction also potentially a male gaze defining power fantasy? I don't know, but this rings an alarm bell for me.

In fact, I think this would apply to male power fantasy as well. I see the potential of "manipulation" by whatever non-physical means to be a potential power fantasy for some. I'd mentioned _Mr. Robot_, and I'd add the potential example of Frank Underwood from _House of Cards_—before the real life scandal arose around that actor. You mentioned Mr. Glass. I haven't watched the new movie, but the original seemed to me to be less of an action movie than a mystery-thriller and played the "super" physical traits of David Dunn in a way that almost parodied the ideal of the He-Man sort of power fantasy. Mr. Glass relied on manipulation. I also think it's interesting that super manipulators in stories are often regulated to the role of villain; I wonder whether this, too, is something that has arisen from a male gaze. Superman must have his most dangerous foe, Lex Luthor, who is bad for what he wants to do, in part, but also bad because he uses his nerdy brain, heh.

_Death Note_, the anime, used manipulators on both sides. The ultimately villainous Light used a magical notebook to kill at a distance and manipulate the world's political, legal, social systems, but he was stopped by the combo L and N who were master detectives. For that matter, does Sherlock in his various iterations hit the power fantasy button for some viewers and readers? What about  Veronica Mars, for women? Nancy Drew?


----------



## Devor (Apr 1, 2019)

FifthView said:


> _Death Note_, the anime, used manipulators on both sides. The ultimately villainous Light used a magical notebook to kill at a distance and manipulate the world's political, legal, social systems, but he was stopped by the combo L and N who were master detectives. For that matter, does Sherlock in his various iterations hit the power fantasy button for some viewers and readers? What about  Veronica Mars, for women? Nancy Drew?



No?

Death Note and Veronica Mars are both top ten shows for me.  But neither of them are power fantasies.  Death Note is a battle of wits, and Veronica Mars is typical detective mystery show.  Death Note could easily have been kind of a sick power fantasy if Light just started crossing off anyone who ticked him off, but that's not the way it plays out.

A pure power fantasy is about having power and just letting it rip.  Usually it's more about the end of the story - after everything I had to endure, in the end I punched my boss and stole the money and ran off with the girl.  That kind of thing.


----------



## FifthView (Apr 1, 2019)

skip.knox said:


> Which makes me wonder: what is the difference between a [gender] power fantasy (I note in passing that no one is talking about a power fantasy for anyone on the LBGTQ rainbow) and a [gender] ideal.



I have wondered about this, but my thoughts have been too scattered to address it. I'm gay. I've wondered if my own outlook on the present topic has been colored by that fact.

Gay men and women are still men and women. I don't speak for all, of course, but for me the fact of being a man is still a strong fact in my life. Whatever biases I inherited having been raised from boy to man in the real world milieu have probably affected my outlook on this topic. I do think I've questioned these issues from very young, too, so...that's probably affected my outlook as well.

I can't speak for anyone who is trans or non-binary or...(long list here?) I do suspect that this simultaneous nature vs nurture effect has led to similar questioning and exploration of the issues.


----------



## FifthView (Apr 1, 2019)

Devor said:


> No?
> 
> Death Note and Veronica Mars are both top ten shows for me.  But neither of them are power fantasies.  Death Note is a battle of wits, and Veronica Mars is typical detective mystery show.  Death Note could easily have been kind of a sick power fantasy if Light just started crossing off anyone who ticked him off, but that's not the way it plays out.
> 
> A pure power fantasy is about having power and just letting it rip.  Usually it's more about the end of the story - after everything I had to endure, in the end I punched my boss and stole the money and ran off with the girl.  That kind of thing.



They're favorites of mine as well. I used them as examples of non-action heroes and their powers to point at potential different types of power fantasy. I'm not sure that letting it rip is a defining characteristic of a power fantasy. That said, I do think that Light and L are exuberant in their use of their genius level minds, take great pleasure in the use of their intellects, and that seems like a power trip to me. Whether any given viewer will identify with that and feel some of the same exuberance, I don't know; but I do think this sort of transference between character and reader/viewer probably does point at "power fantasy."

Edit: On second thought, perhaps for the story itself to be a power fantasy, one key feature is...success?  In which case, Light and L both lost. Nonetheless, the potential to turn the story into a power fantasy existed. I was thinking that manipulation (via whatever means) to control a situation might be a different sort of power to physical prowess that could be exploited for creating a power fantasy.

Edit #2: The manipulative power of the detective is the detective's ability to uncover and expose the truth. A different sort of manipulation but manipulation of the contexts within the story. Sherlock is a super-detective, i.e. amped up, but Veronica Mars is super merely in relation to whatever or whoever else falls within that milieu. I actually don't remember specifics of the shows in that series well; her named popped into mind as a type of archetype.


----------



## Devor (Apr 1, 2019)

FifthView, maybe if you consider a good heist film, where the schemes all come together in the end with a big power trip, there may definitely be a power fantasy in play.  And I'm sure specific episodes of Death Note or Veronica Mars play into the power fantasy in a similar way, although on a more micro/nuanced way.  I think we're getting more diluted with the term here though.  There can be "elements of" without being a "pure and simple" power fantasy.  I wouldn't put them on a list of power fantasies.

To me, though, I feel like the term has some baggage, and implies kind of a simple "I just want to p'wn these guys and score with the chicks" selfishness that makes me hesitant to carry it forward this way.  That might be unfair of me, or maybe it warrants a jargon shift, but the more I think about it I do see the point you're making.


----------



## FifthView (Apr 1, 2019)

Devor I've realized that for most of this discussion, I've been thinking in terms of characters—which characters might embody a "power fantasy" for readers/viewers. I somewhat neglected to consider fully whether it's the story that is labeled a power fantasy. Obviously, it could be both. Maybe my approach to the topic has been confusing for this reason.

I do wonder whether dilution of the term has occurred, heh. We've ranged between Yes, a simple definition might exist for either sex and No, such a definition is likely to miss the great variety of persons who are potential readers and viewers. I've trended more to the latter in my mind—even while taking a stab in earlier comments at defining a potential simple Yes dichotomy, as a mental exercise.

Crossing back and forth but landing on No might naturally lead to some dilution. 

I'm not ready to throw out the idea that "power fantasy" has some use as a guiding, thought provoking term. Mostly, I wonder whether the varieties, rather than necessarily diluting the notion, might suggest different avenues for creating power fantasies. We writers might "let it rip," and let our characters do that, while creating something others will want to read for the same reasons we wanted to write it.  But if the term is too loaded with baggage, maybe it will be too distracting after all.


----------



## Futhark (Apr 2, 2019)

It seems to me that the term ‘power fantasy’ is generally more useful for games, and perhaps in some instances comics and cartoons/anime.  The term suggests to me that there is some *power trip [*– (slang) a self-aggrandizing action undertaken simply for the pleasure of exercising control over other people. Power trip: Synonyms in English -*] *at play.  It allows the player/reader to experience, vicariously, a level of strength, security, invulnerability, or some other agency, that they lack in life.

For a more serious body of work I for one would be hesitant to label it as a power fantasy, or that alone.  Even looking at the basic plots of novels I notice that there are elements of a Hero’s Journey, maybe some Horror, almost always some Mystery, Overcoming the Monster, etc.

However, that’s just the association I have for the term.  Food for thought.

By the way, I read that slang is slang for slang.  Weird huh?


----------



## Devor (Apr 2, 2019)

Your typical Schwarzenegger / Rambo -type power fantasy film isn't that heavy on the power, does a good job hitting the right story beats of an action flick, and often has a lot of other redeeming qualities like elements of sci fi and humor.  You can absolutely have that kind of an action flick with a female lead.  They tend to still target guys, though, because "action," and I'm not sure they would really be a female "power fantasy," though I'm not really the right person to make that call.

This, to me, is kind of the egregious example of what I think of when I hear "power fantasy," especially if you slap the world "Male" in front of it. I'm sorry in advance for making you watch this.






But looking at the above Beowulf clip as kind of a _pure_ power fantasy, I wouldn't dare try and speculate about a "female" power fantasy with this crap in mind.


----------



## skip.knox (Apr 2, 2019)

Hondshew Screaming is a pretty good name for a band.


----------



## pmmg (Apr 2, 2019)

skip.knox said:


> pmmg, this was precisely my point. When we speak of "the bill" we are in fact saying there is an ideal. A single ideal. That's what I have heard voiced elsewhere and have seen somewhat on this thread--that there is such a thing as "the" female power fantasy, and discussions of specific works are all about how close or far that work hit from the mark.
> 
> I submit this does an injustice to us all. I prefer the notion--a foolish one, perhaps, but I cling to it--that human beings are marvelously diverse, that despite cultural commonalities we somehow manage each to be unique, even if the differences can be hard to spot. More to the point, when all or most of are spoken of as if we were identical, we miss the unique, and it's the unique and the unusual that I most value.



Sorry Skip, I beleive you are arguing that there is no such thing as a female power fantasy (or actualy any gender power fantasy), and yeah, I suppose if I take any defined term, and undefine it, and ultimately make anything have no meaning. One of the reasons I often say language is insufficient. I do think there is such a thing as a power fantasy, even it holds to a fuzzy definition. BUT....

Given the number of posts above that maybe 'power fantasy' was something different than I assumed, I went and looked it up. Hard to find a definition that does not end up being about masculinity vs femininity in some way, and quickly these devolve into something other than definitions, but the first definition I found would change things a little for me.

"A power fantasy is a character the audience is presumed to want to be. They are often sexy, but their main appeal isn't relegated to their sexuality. Male characters are often talented, respected, and otherwise powerful before their physical appeal is evaluated."

Given that as a definition, I would call the girl from 50 Shades of Grey (Anastasia Steele) a female power fantasy character. She is not actiony, so...

Maybe that definition does not fit either, but I will say a theme seemed to be a character the reader (or author) wanted to be. Which is great, cause my most prominent female character, while wicked and dangerous sometimes, is someone I am sure no one would want to be.

(As an aside, that is not at all how I would have defined it. I will plead that I would have defined it differently if this were romance writers site )


----------



## FatCat (Apr 3, 2019)

I think there's a major oversight here. What makes a protagonist powerful. How is that defined? What are we willing, as readers, to expect power from and how does that differ from a female/male lead. If you focus entirely on gender, then I suppose these kind of pitfalls will happen, and yet it's just as simple to not rely on them and create a character YOU feel is strong. The debate of masculine and feminine hierarchy is tiresome, everybody loves well written characters. If you must ask society permission upon their creation, I view that as a total negative.


----------



## Annoyingkid (Apr 3, 2019)

TheKillerBs said:


> That's the same logic the rich use to take advantage of the poor. "Oh well if they weren't stupid and/or lazy they wouldn't be poor."



If someone had *power fantasy* level smarts, they really wouldn't be poor. Unless literally everybody was poor and there was no way to be well off. Like a post apocalyptic setting. But even then, poor is relative.


----------



## Miles Lacey (Apr 3, 2019)

I made a list of all the things that all the trendy writing forums stated you should not do when you create a female character.  By the time I got to the end of that list I came to the conclusion that the people who drew up those lists are the reason why many (if not most) writers would rather just stick with white males.  No one gives a toss how they get portrayed so they are the easiest to create and work with.

The problem with the topic of female power fantasy and others of a similar vein is that they get bogged down in gender politics.  Lots of words are wasted in debating how females should or should not be portrayed in fiction.

In my view female characters should be portrayed in whatever way the writer feels fit.  In other words there should be no bloody check lists to determine if your female character is suitably family friendly, politically correct, socially acceptable or whatever.  Create the female character you want to read and write about!  If you want her to be a man with boobs who can punch an orc out with a single punch then so be it.  I'm sure there will be plenty of readers who'll love to read about a kickass lass who has orcs cowering in the corner of their longhouse when she rides past on her horse drawn cart.

I personally love kickass female characters who defy conventional notions of beauty, kick serious butt physically and isn't afraid to be her own person even if it upsets and offends others. 

Finally why are we allowing such constraints like patriarchy or matriarchy based power structures or how females should (or shouldn't) be portrayed shape our worlds and writing anyway?  Fantasy writers have the power to do away with these power structures and social restraints in the worlds we create if we choose.


----------



## skip.knox (Apr 3, 2019)

In theory, we should write however we please. Scratch that--in fact we can write as we please, but that doesn't mean we ought to expect everyone will receive it the way we intended, or even that we won't be roundly criticized.

Every writer, as has been pointed out on this thread, comes to a blank page, but we do not come to it with a blank mind. We are all culturally conditioned. We may sincerely believe we are writing without prejudice (pre-judging), without cultural bias. We may even believe we are breaking barriers, doing something radically different. 

That doesn't mean we are, nor does it mean we're doing so well or successfully. It just means that's how we see it. When others come along and say the story is sexist or racist or culturally biased or ignorant, it can hurt, but we ought not climb onto our high horse and claim it was no such thing. We as writers are not unfettered, no matter how free we think we are. It's probably worth at least listening to the criticism from others, just as we would listen to the criticism of our grammar or word choice.


----------



## Annoyingkid (Apr 3, 2019)

Miles Lacey said:


> By the time I got to the end of that list I came to the conclusion that the people who drew up those lists are the reason why many (if not most) writers would rather just stick with white males. No one gives a toss how they get portrayed so they are the easiest to create and work with



  I find the idea that it's going to be criticized whatever, to be liberating. The criticism of the character becomes nothing but noise from the eternally unsatisfied. So I can write whatever I want without concern for it. Basically any female  that leads a power fantasy, is considered a Mary Sue anyway. As a writer, there's nothing you can say to that. Any response or capitulation legitimizes it.


----------



## A. E. Lowan (Apr 5, 2019)

A. E. Lowan said:


> I've heard it said that feminism is the outrageous belief that women are people.
> 
> Try that approach.


This bears repeating at this point, I think.


----------



## Solusandra (Apr 5, 2019)

Geeze, leave the internet for one little funeral and the world runs away with your necromancy.



Annoyingkid said:


> The reason "girl power" is a thing and used in a derogatory manner as you just did, is the same reason "boy power" isn't a thing. It's normalized and assumed that boys will be in power. Whereas a girl who upsets that by not playing to standards of femininity is derided as shoved in people's faces for "girl power". This is because it upsets people's conditioned, internalized paradigm that forms as a result of living in a society that pushes the message that male characters that can defeat trolls, dragons, all manner or monsters believably with a badass one liner, but a woman who can outfight men is a "Man with boobs" and unrealistic and "Girl power propaganda". I've seen that double standard over and over in debates. The fact that people use it without any self awareness is in itself a problem. The fact that people immediately go on the defensive instead of self reflecting and considering internalized sexism, is a problem.


No. Girlpower being derogatory is not an issue of double standards. This is you once again missing the point. Girl power is a slogan. Its one constantly rubbed in peoples faces. Typically accompanied with the singsong attitude "anything you can do, I can do better..._in heels_". This naturally engenders a negative reaction and sticks well in the mind. THAT is why girlpower is more or less universally derogatory among men. They apin disgust to what our mothers tried to push pride and superiority.

A man with boobs also does not apply to women whose only non-female characteristic is that they can outfight men and take on giant monsters. THAT is Femme-Fatale. A man with boobs is a different monster. Women in the 70's accurately noted that "men act like pigs" But because men and women are equal, instead of insisting that women rise above that, they decided that women should also act like pigs. And this infected hollywood. A man with boobs is exactly what it sounds like. The characters physical form is a woman, but instead of being written as a woman, the author writes a man and then adds sexy descriptors everywhere because politics. People noticed because the characters suck ass, like the current Captain Marvel movie, and people wanted to look into it an know why the characters sucked ass. So Man With Boobs became a meme.


Annoyingkid said:


> If a movie came out tommorow with the top 2 greatest fighters as women - the fact that that this would be considered girl power sjw propaganda, is the problem. Female power fantasies are not viewed with the fairness of male power fantasies.


No. It. Would. Not. Wonder Woman. It was feared that it would be feminist sjw probaganda, but it wasn't and made a billion dollars because of it. The only reviewers who didn't love wonder woman were Ironically the feminist journo's who were pushing it as a triumph for women. The same journos who insisted that Captain Marvel was the first female led superhero movie and that Kamala Khan was the first muslim superhero in comics.


Annoyingkid said:


> You are strawmaning my position. Re-read my argument. At no point did I argue about well received by the general tv or moviegoing audience.





Annoyingkid said:


> Neither character took a lead with the action. A female character that does take the lead in action as the main character tends to get a very different response. That's the problem.


Your own words betray you. I again point to the range of your experience discussing this issue. That the men you talk with only mention Sarah Conner and Ellen Rippley is a shame, but again, neither I nor many of my con friends have had this issue. Both were mentioned in many of the conversations, but they were NEVER the only ones mentioned. LOTS of female leads, actual leads, were well received by men. So your quote ("Neither character took a lead with the action. A female character that does take the lead in action as the main character tends to get a very different response. That's the problem.") is wholly in error. This is not a generalization you can make honestly.


----------



## Solusandra (Apr 5, 2019)

Futhark said:


> Wildcats, Superheroes and the True Female Power Fantasy


Thanks, Futhark, though I disagree with your initial statement this article and the next quote were useful. The articles featured quote goes well with mine. Both about men with boobs, and why people, _men and women_, still liked Wonder Woman. IE because she was still written _as a *woman.*_
    “Not even girls want to be girls so long as our feminine archetype lacks force, strength, and power. Not wanting to be girls, they don’t want to be tender, submissive, peace-loving as good women are. Women’s strong qualities have become despised because of their weakness. The obvious remedy is to create a feminine character with all the strength of Superman plus all the allure of a good and beautiful woman.”–William Moulton-Marston


Futhark said:


> As I see it, a power fantasy, whether male or female, is not a bad thing. The current negative connotations associated with it seem to stem from examples of this trope that rather than empower a social demographic, they objectify, denigrate, humiliate or oppress others. For this reason, most of the power fantasies that *aren’t *remarked on have somewhat two-dimensional or unsympathetic villains (think mindless aliens, faceless governments, heartless corporations, etc.)
> 
> Another possible reason for it’s unpopularity is that these heroes are supposed to do great things and _get away with it_ as Ray says. I would suggest that some writers confuse this with _not being accountable, _so you end up with heroes that are psychopaths (which is fine if that’s what your aiming for, not so good if it’s some Freudian nightmare).


THIS. With the major issue being that far too many female power fantasies fall into this trap, while it's not nearly as common in male power fantasies. Still common, yes, but nearly so.


Annoyingkid said:


> Yes he does. Qui Gon breaking story logic by bringing him - a child - to a warzone so said child could save the day when none of the experienced pilots could.


Anikin had already distinguished himself early in the movie by winning a pod race that was well known for killing aliens with much higher reaction times than humans. All of the fighters in the Naboo airforce were human. It also didn't break story logic or cannon because by the time the prequel trillogy was filmed, Starwars already had a MASSIVE expanded universe where Lukes story of a trainee being brought along for the ride on the masters adventures was a core trope. This is also not uncommon in general fantasy, though typically the age of the new hero is 14, not 11.
The issue with Ray is not her age, gender or experience, force users, even untrained, are simply bullshit, massively established cannon and authorized marketed fannon, material. The problem with her was that EVERYTHING came easy to her. Her story trod all over dozen main characters. Everybody instantly loved her and forgave her doing things that would get any other character shot. She was wooden in her acting and characterization.
And the propaganda surrounding the series certainly did nothing to help.


skip.knox said:


> Are there no examples of well-written female characters in modern (say, post 2010) fantasy? I find examples of things done well to be more helpful to me as a writer than examples of things done badly.


The recent Wonder Woman movie. MCU's Black Widow. I...can't really think of any others. Most movies and books of the last decade only deepen my antipathy for female characters rather than redeeming it like Gal Gadot and older modern scyfy.


pmmg said:


> I might put Harley Quinn from Suicide Squad there. Would Moana qualify? Probably. The girl from the newest Mad Max movie...Oh yeah, and Mrs. Katnis. Anyway, sure there are others, just a small list.


I'd generally agree on ms Everdeen, but her acting was a bit wooden. The book was better. Moana was good though.
Suicide squad and Mad Maxine fury road were just crap. Sorry. IMO.


----------



## Solusandra (Apr 5, 2019)

ascanius said:


> example: 'Cleopatra should be played by a black actor – but not just for historical accuracy'
> This line quote. "The casting should be informed by the racial and social dynamics of today." It's a brave new world of woke power fantasy. I can understand historical accuracy but this come on.....


There's also the issue that Cleopatra isn't African, but Greek. The Ptolemy bloodline took over Egypt from a previous invasion and when they weren't marrying their siblings, they were marrying other greek nobility.


Futhark said:


> A ‘real’ women refers to an actual, living, breathing person. Therefor it cannot apply to fake women as they don’t exist. But yes, it does apply to men. Examples: real men don’t cry; if you care about your woman’s feelings you’re ‘whipped’;


False dichotemy, but ok. 'Real woman' proclamations do exist, and they differ from conservative to feminist.
Also, cyring and being sensitive is a serious issue. Just watch most women. Cry in front of them once or twice after extreme experiences because you feel 'safe' with them, it may strengthen their empathy for you, but cry with _*ANY*_ regularity, and watch that empathy turn to disgust and spite. Same with sensitive emotions. Men tell each other that to protect themselves. Women tell men that because despite what propaganda you hear, women hate weak men.


Futhark said:


> To give an example of what I would arguably call a ‘female power fantasy ‘, that I enjoyed, thought was done well, didn’t see her as a ‘man with boobs’, and didn’t have any of ‘I’m just a girl in a man’s world, but I can do it too’ (looking at you Captain Marvel), is Jessica Jones on Netflix.


Hmm. I'll have to go watch that then.


Futhark said:


> But gender equality does not mean gender sameness. We are different (technically males are mutant females). Gender equality means* valuing *those differences and recognizing that we all have inherent rights.


thank you.


FifthView said:


> Fourth, what is the male power fantasy? Do I know?
> Fifth, what is the female power fantasy? I don't know.





Svrtnsse said:


> What IS even a power fantasy?
> 
> Is there such a thing as a universal male/female power fantasy?
> I don't think so.


There is. And it's fairly well defined.
Svrtnsse is correct, it's not connan the barbarian or other over-muscled Schwarzenegger or Dwayne Rock Johnson films, that's just one expression of hundreds.

The Male Power Fantasy is about overcoming adversity and being the hero. The how is immaterial. The strong man. The trickster. The sage. A thousand variations between the three. The male power fantasy is that he saves the day.

The female power fantasy is different. Both seek adulation form society, but the female power fantasy doesn't care about being a hero. That's *sometimes* an element, but not even the majority. It's to be able to do whatever you will, and have those important to you reward you for it. saintly or malicious.

And Annoyingkid , girls don't consider "chick flick" to be derogatory unless they're professed feminists. And even then, twilight and The Other WOman which are total chick flicks are massively popular among feminists. And male feminists. And women in general. So unless you're limiting your view of worth to male approval...


Annoyingkid said:


> I mean what woman wouldn't want sexual assault or physical assault to no longer be a concern.


Except that we DO sexualize sexual and physical assault. Fuck, TheMarySue, an absolutely dripping feminist propaganda rag published articles about how women are the overwhelming audience of rape porn. And I've talked before about the Harlequin romances already.


Annoyingkid said:


> The ability to be highly competent without threatening dude's masculinity.


Trust me, that's not the part they're threatened by. It's actually a fetish.


A. E. Lowan said:


> I think we can also agree, given the statements in this thread, that a woman's basic "power fantasy" is being recognized as a whole person with agency and not a sexy lamp. Women are also people, individuals with their own desires and hopes and dreams. Women are not a monolith.


It's about agency, I can wholly agree with that... Though, before you get too far into the objectification idea, you should really check out the romance section. 95% written by women, 100% sexually objectifying. Men, women, sheep, lamps; ALL are sexually objectified! The massive majority of female written pieces, power trips and otherwise would not pass the Bechdel test.


Annoyingkid said:


> In fantasy, how can a weak character be smart, if it's not smart to be weak.


The Sage and the Trickster. Two common expressions of the power fantasy that typically are not only not strong, but deliberately portrayed as weak. And yet, they're still power fantasy heroes.


skip.knox said:


> It feels wrong to be talking about "female power fantasy" as if there was only one such fantasy, shared by all females.


There...is though?


skip.knox said:


> Historically, one could make the case that there never has been a female power fantasy, at least not one culture-wide and openly expressed. It's sort of a modern invention. And if it is an invention, I'd very much like to see something like "top twenty female power fantasies" or the like. That is, plenty of different ideas about what constitutes power among women. Let a thousand flowers bloom.


There has been, and it's not recent. It's just recently taken the front seat in hollywood.


pmmg said:


> I am not sure it matters that agriculture did this, or some other factor did.


I'm going to go with some other factor. The situation was even worse in mens favor when we were hunter gathers. Agriculture is simply the period when we started writing about it.


Devor said:


> Yeah, the "Power Fantasy" usually plays out like a 90s Schwarzenegger action flick, with the tough guy being awesome, shooting up the bad guys, capping the villain with some badass line, and getting the girl. It's not supposed to be deep, or make a statement, just tick off all those "masculine" impulses and suppressed inner desires.
> 
> Just the notion behind it is going to tick people off (is this really what guys feel like they want? Which guys?). It's not surprising to me that looking at a "Female Power Fantasy" is going to annoy people. If you just swap the genders and portray the "super-strong woman" with the badass lines, there's a real question if that would be expected to hit the deep emotional impulses of what many woman want, and if you try to speculate about what would, that's extremely shaky territory.


No, that is far too narrow, but I've already pontificated.
And just flipping the characters gender does not make it a FPF. Never has.
That's probably the root of what's causing this psychological dissonance, that people think it is.


----------



## skip.knox (Apr 5, 2019)

A gentle reminder to all our members: _ad hominem _arguments are poor practice at best. They turn a discussion of ideas into attacks (or defenses) of individual members. My general guideline is simple: am I replying to a person or to an idea? If the former, then I need to breathe deep and not click that Post button. The place to argue with someone directly is by way of direct message. Doing it on a thread is roughly like getting into a loud argument at a party--you force everyone else to listen to the gripe you have with an individual. 

I would also encourage people, when a thread heats up, to return to the original post. Are we still on topic, or have we become preoccupied with defending a position we've taken? If it's the latter, it's time to take a break.


----------



## Solusandra (Apr 5, 2019)

I don't think I'm ad-hominem-ing. I mean, maybe where I'm telling annoyingkid his experience is vastly different than me and my friends, but I'm not sure what else.


----------



## Devor (Apr 5, 2019)

Solusandra said:


> There is. And it's fairly well defined.
> Svrtnsse is correct, it's not connan the barbarian or other over-muscled Schwarzenegger or Dwayne Rock Johnson films, that's just one expression of hundreds.
> 
> The Male Power Fantasy is about overcoming adversity and being the hero. The how is immaterial. The strong man. The trickster. The sage. A thousand variations between the three. The male power fantasy is that he saves the day.
> ...



Do you happen to have a source for this definition?  I'm confused because this definition, at least as worded, doesn't seem to be focused on power.


----------



## Solusandra (Apr 5, 2019)

Devor said:


> Do you happen to have a source for this definition?  I'm confused because this definition, at least as worded, doesn't seem to be focused on power.


Being able to get away with anything isn't power?
I'll grant you, that's the less charitable interpretation, but what you quoted me was paraphrasing from Readers Digest.
The recurring themes as I've been chasing this across the internet and print are 1: wishing to be able to manipulate the social lives of people around them 2: get the perfect guy (rich, good looking, good in bed, an odd mix of Dominating and highly deferential) 3: not be held accountable or successfully shift the blame if their actions broke laws or hurt people.


----------



## Futhark (Apr 6, 2019)

Solusandra said:


> Girlpower being derogatory is not an issue of double standards. This is you once again missing the point. Girl power is a slogan. Its one constantly rubbed in peoples faces. Typically accompanied with the singsong attitude "anything you can do, I can do better..._in heels_". This naturally engenders a negative reaction and sticks well in the mind. THAT is why girlpower is more or less universally derogatory among men. They apin disgust to what our mothers tried to push pride and superiority.



Well yes, but I would say Girl Power is a slogan *because *of double standards in the first place.  I remember a time in my dim past when Girl power became a thing (in Music and Hollywood at least) and it was generally well received.  Your elaboration on how it became a derogatory term is accurate IMO.



Solusandra said:


> False dichotemy, but ok. 'Real woman' proclamations do exist, and they differ from conservative to feminist.
> Also, cyring and being sensitive is a serious issue



Not sure what you mean by this.  By this statement I meant that ‘real’ women are people.  ‘Real’ men are people.  They are both idealised on screen or on the page, to a greater or lesser extent.  It just seems to me that women are idealised more than men.

Also, crying and being sensitive is a serious issue.  I know first hand.  I suffered from anxiety and depression for 20 years before being diagnosed Bipolar after a serious psychotic break.  I cried a lot (usually by myself).  Men told me to ‘suck it up’.  Women didn’t know what to do.  Why?  Because, like it or not, people have a predisposed idea of ‘normal’, and when you act outside of these parameters they are generally confused.  Attitudes are changing now (at least in my part of the world) as people become more educated and are exposed to these issues in media (eg. autism and The Good Doctor, off the top of my head).

The reason I would hesitantly label Jessica Jones as FPF is not because she has super strength and can get away with stuff.  It is because she has promiscuous sex, *and doesn’t get called out on it.*  She drinks like a fish, hardly wears any makeup, goes out without her hair done, doesn’t wear heels *and doesn’t get called out on it, *except when and if it’s plot relevant.

Posted by 40yr old house dad who’s about to go hang laundry, so wife has clothes for work tomorrow.


----------



## Futhark (Apr 6, 2019)

Solusandra said:


> There's also the issue that Cleopatra isn't African, but Greek. The Ptolemy bloodline took over Egypt from a previous invasion and when they weren't marrying their siblings, they were marrying other greek nobility.


(Jokingly) Hey, I said that first..;(


----------



## Solusandra (Apr 6, 2019)

Futhark said:


> (Jokingly) Hey, I said that first..;(


heh, wrote that before I saw your post, didn't delete it afterward. Lazy.


----------



## Annoyingkid (Apr 6, 2019)

Solusandra said:


> Geeze, leave the internet for one little funeral and the world runs away with your necromancy.
> 
> 
> No. Girlpower being derogatory is not an issue of double standards. This is you once again missing the point. Girl power is a slogan. Its one constantly rubbed in peoples faces. Typically accompanied with the singsong attitude "anything you can do, I can do better..._in heels_". This naturally engenders a negative reaction and sticks well in the mind. THAT is why girlpower is more or less universally derogatory among men. They apin disgust to what our mothers tried to push pride and superiority.



As a slogan, "girl power" hasn't been used since The Spice Girls" in the Brit Pop era of the late nineties.

 As a concept, Girl power is derogatory among men because challenges to  masculinity are threatening. Not because of a slogan that was popular 20 years ago.




> A man with boobs also does not apply to women whose only non-female characteristic is that they can outfight men and take on giant monsters.



Female and male are terms of biologicalsex/gender identity, not behaviour. That's called being feminine or masculine. So a "man with boobs" is actually simply a woman performing masculinity.



> THAT is Femme-Fatale. A man with boobs is a different monster. Women in the 70's accurately noted that "men act like pigs" But because men and women are equal, instead of insisting that women rise above that, they decided that women should also act like pigs. And this infected hollywood. A man with boobs is exactly what it sounds like. The characters physical form is a woman, but instead of being written as a woman, the author writes a man and then adds sexy descriptors everywhere because politics. People noticed because the characters suck ass, like the current Captain Marvel movie, and people wanted to look into it an know why the characters sucked ass. So Man With Boobs became a meme.



Women didn't act like pigs in the past because the social freedom to act like a pig was lacking. Yours is an argument against social freedom, which is antithesis to a power fantasy.



> No. It. Would. Not. Wonder Woman. It was feared that it would be feminist sjw probaganda, but it wasn't and made a billion dollars because of it. The only reviewers who didn't love wonder woman were Ironically the feminist journo's who were pushing it as a triumph for women. The same journos who insisted that Captain Marvel was the first female led superhero movie and that Kamala Khan was the first muslim superhero in comics.



Top 2 fighters in that film are Diana and Ares, the latter of which is a dude. But saying certain amounts of femininity are required in order for it to not be "sjw propaganda" is putting limits that aren't present in male led action stories. Which supports my point. It's not viewed fairly.




> A female character that does take the lead in action as the main character tends to get a very different response. That's the problem.") is wholly in error. This is not a generalization you can make honestly.



It's not in error, considering you responded the way I predicted.



> Anikin had already distinguished himself early in the movie by winning a pod race that was well known for killing aliens with much higher reaction times than humans.



You can't justify a Gary Stu feat with another Gary Stu feat. Everything came easy for kid Anakin. He built a protocal droid, by himself, as a slave, as a pre pubescent uneducated child,  to factory specifications with the ability to learn, or be compatible with the programming of learning 6 million languages.

At the Pod Race, if you stalled, at the starting line,  like he did, at  NASCAR or Formula 1, you'd lose instantly. And fixing it mid race as slowly as he did, hed be dead. DEAD.

The difference between Rey and Anakin, is because shes a woman, people look for reasons to condemn her as a Mary Sue as their default position, and because Anakin is male, people look for reasons to defend him from Sueism as their default position.

The cognitive bias is as obvious as it is staggering.


----------



## Annoyingkid (Apr 6, 2019)

Solusandra said:


> Being able to get away with anything isn't power?



This ties  into the infantilization of women in a Patriarchy as described in feminist theory. A child fantasizes about being able to get away with anything without getting into trouble.

Notice how the proposed "male power fantasy" is fundamentally _benevolent_, "saves the day" whereas the female one is fundamentally_ malevolent_, as one doesn't need to "get away" with things that are moral.

Also notice how the female power fantasy listed above is passive and reactive, relying on other's reactions to you. "Others" "Let" her get away with it. Whereas the male one is active. "YOU go out and save the world, through your actions."

It's sexism.  Caused by, or the result of.


----------



## Futhark (Apr 6, 2019)

Annoyingkid said:


> As a concept, Girl power is derogatory among men because challenges to masculinity are threatening. Not because of a slogan that was popular 20 years ago.


I’m male.  I don’t find that Girl power threatens my masculinity in any way, or even that many men under 65 use it as a derogatory term.  20 years ago I had a hairdresser that was also an international judo champion.  She could’ve beaten me easily, anytime, in a fight (or in cutting hair).  But I never felt my masculinity was threatened, never less of a man.  She had worked hard, very hard, to be that good.  Isn’t that what Girl power is?  Excelling in a previously male dominated arena?


Solusandra said:


> Its one constantly rubbed in peoples faces. Typically accompanied with the singsong attitude "anything you can do, I can do better..._in heels_". This naturally engenders a negative reaction and sticks well in the mind.


This is the sticking point.  I for one am tired of seeing female heroes dashing about in high heels punching out guys twice their size, never breaking a nail.  It’s unrealistic, (unless it’s Rhonda Rousey) and this is where the ‘man with boobs’ comes into it.  The part would be better served being played by a male, but for whatever reason they have a female with all the strengths and traits of a male.  This is *not *to say it can’t be done.  Black Widow does a fine job of not only defeating powerful opponents, but multiple opponents, and not coming across as ‘masculine’. The difference is she fights based on *her *strengths, not what a man might do.  That’s girl power,  not the poor writing or decision making based on political propaganda, flavour of the month BS, trying to use platforms to springboard their product.


----------



## A. E. Lowan (Apr 6, 2019)

I can't escape the thought that we are feeding a troll with this necro'd thread.


----------



## skip.knox (Apr 6, 2019)

I suggested folks go back and read the OP. Anyone doing so will see that this thread is far removed from the question as originally posed. Here's a chance to get back on track.

What is a female power fantasy? The best way to answer the question is to provide not only a definition but one with examples. Bonus points for providing examples from books rather than movies or comics. I say that because each medium has its own peculiar history and social dynamics. And because nearly all the examples so far given have been movies.

The OP also rhetorically asks what is a male power fantasy. I found the definition provided there to be superficial, so here's an invitation for folks to put forward examples there as well. 

I'm curious about the responses because, near as I can tell, I've never had a power fantasy (I wonder if there's a gender-neutral power fantasy). I will point out that there is a significant difference between a character who is or becomes powerful--that's just a hero--and a [gender] power fantasy. The one is a character, or even an archetype. The other is a social construct.

It's also worth pointing out that the OP was concerned because their experience with the term male power fantasy was largely negative. He was planning to write a female protagonist and didn't want to wind up writing something that would be received badly. Didn't want to write the female equivalent. So it's at least possible that there's such a thing as a [gender] power fantasy done well or poorly. Again, examples would really help. When folks argue about definitions, it devolves into arguing who's right. When folks argue about examples, it evolves into talking about why you liked and and I didn't.


----------



## Solusandra (Apr 6, 2019)

Anything written by Trudi Canavan. For positive examples. 
Twilight and all boddice ripper romances. For the negative.


----------



## skip.knox (Apr 6, 2019)

Thanks for the reference to Trudy Canavan. It wasn't a name I knew. In case that's true for others, can you add a little bit about why her characters embody the female power fantasy? 

Is _Twilight etc. _an example of a power fantasy done badly? Or an example of women being dependent victims rather than being powerful? I couldn't make it very far in _Twilight_, I'm afraid.


----------



## A. E. Lowan (Apr 6, 2019)

skip.knox said:


> Is _Twilight etc. _an example of a power fantasy done badly? Or an example of women being dependent victims rather than being powerful? I couldn't make it very far in _Twilight_, I'm afraid.


Read the whole thing, and I believe that while the author struck a chord with many, many fans, she missed the mark on what she was shooting for: a vampire story without the sensuality. As to how she portrays relationships and female characters in general, I will leave that for others to say.


----------



## Futhark (Apr 6, 2019)

I am of the belief that there is no definitive definition.  One persons ideas of power will always be influenced by their real life situations, experiences and feelings.  Take me for example.  When I was young, I wanted to have Spider-man’s powers.  Strength, agility, reflexes, and the ability to navigate through a convoluted world in his own unique way.  When I got the game on the PlayStation 2 I would sit there and swing from one end of Manhattan to the other for hours.

Some people want to be the knight in shining armour, others want to be feared for their brutality.  Some want to be adored by the masses, others may just want options in life.  To me power fantasies are a very individualistic concept based on wish fulfilment.  (Defined pretty well here Wish Fulfillment - TV Tropes)

I would suggest though, that there needs to be some element of escapism (which is probably a given in fiction), and perhaps some type of catharsis, allowing the reader/viewer/gamer to vicariously live a different life; one that provides a sense of power that they lack in real life.


----------



## skip.knox (Apr 6, 2019)

I agree, Futhark, but I keep going back to the OP. If there is such a thing as a female power fantasy, it's almost certainly possible to handle it badly. What advice can we give?

It's easy to say don't write your hero as a man with boobs--don't write a male power fantasy and substitute a female. So now we have to know what constitutes stereotypical male power behavior, so we can avoid having the female lead behave in that way. 

And that, I think, is how the OP got to asking about the female power fantasy, looking for ways to have a strong female lead, presumably in ways that would resonate with female readers. Looking, iow, for what to do rather than simply what to avoid.

It's no good, or at least I think it's no good, saying just to write the character. I'm a male. Specifically, white male American. So, my notion of neutrality is skewed by my background. I may *think* I'm writing a believable strong female, but who knows how many gaffes I'm making along the way. One easy piece of advice, then, is to do your best, then make sure you get some female readers. And that gets us quickly over into "sensitivity readers." I shy away from that, partly because of the presumption that such readers are uniformly reliable, partly because I'm arrogant enough to believe I can learn to do this for myself, and partly because I see no end to the sensitivity reviewing--gender, sexual orientation, race, nationality, language, level of education, age, and so on. Right now, it's an unanswered conundrum; one I'm willing to let hang because it doesn't feel urgent to me. Which is probably one manifestation of the white male American.

Anyway, the original question is interesting to me.


----------



## Futhark (Apr 6, 2019)

A. E. Lowan said:


> As to how she portrays relationships and female characters in general, I will leave that for others to say.


I only got halfway through the first film.  The vampire came across so creepy/stalker/emotional manipulator to me, and the girl was like ‘it’s fine, he loves me.’  Maybe a strange male power fantasy?  Idk, it didn’t interest me.

Dr. Rowan Mayfair from the _Lives of the Mayfair Witches _by Anne Rice is, IMO, a good example of a strong female protagonist.  Probably not a power fantasy though.  This is hard, cause I have no clear definition, so I can’t provide examples.  You always ask the tough questions skip!


----------



## Futhark (Apr 6, 2019)

Came across an article at Problematizing Power Fantasy  - The Enemy that, while about gaming, has some relevant points, I think.  It’s very late here, or very early (4am), and I’m going to sleep, so I’ll post again later.


----------



## skip.knox (Apr 6, 2019)

That was an excellent article. Thanks for the reference. I'm going to chew on it a while and either respond here or maybe start a new thread. The authors raise a number of points, as you say, that are directly relevant to writing fantasy stories.


----------



## Annoyingkid (Apr 6, 2019)

Futhark said:


> m male. I don’t find that Girl power threatens my masculinity in any way, or even that many men under 65 use it as a derogatory term. 20 years ago I had a hairdresser that was also an international judo champion. She could’ve beaten me easily, anytime, in a fight (or in cutting hair). But I never felt my masculinity was threatened, never less of a man. She had worked hard, very hard, to be that good. Isn’t that what Girl power is? Excelling in a previously male dominated arena?



In discussions like these, it's useful to think of men/women as a class of people with broad social trends and responses, instead of as individuals.


----------



## skip.knox (Apr 6, 2019)

In some discussions like these, I agree. This, however, is a forum on writing. When it comes to writing, I tend to think of individuals. Indeed, we are often writing about the exceptional individual--not merely the talented or overpowered, but even the one-dimensional or the stereotype. Characters in stories are not like "humanity" in the abstract, in much the same way that dialog in a story is unlike real-life conversation.


----------



## Annoyingkid (Apr 6, 2019)

skip.knox said:


> So now we have to know what constitutes stereotypical male power behavior, so we can avoid having the female lead behave in that way.



You say a dispute about if and why that should be avoided in the first place is off topic, yet you make this statement that it should be avoided as if thats a given. It's not a given. Theres no reason to particularly  avoid the ridiculously and offensively named "man with boobs". Not in 2019.


----------



## Annoyingkid (Apr 6, 2019)

skip.knox said:


> In some discussions like these, I agree. This, however, is a forum on writing. When it comes to writing, I tend to think of individuals. Indeed, we are often writing about the exceptional individual--not merely the talented or overpowered, but even the one-dimensional or the stereotype. Characters in stories are not like "humanity" in the abstract, in much the same way that dialog in a story is unlike real-life conversation.



When discussing audience responses to power fantasies, one cannot speak in terms of individuals unless they've met every individual on Earth. There will always be people who claim to be exceptions to social theories, trends and claims. Does that invalidate said theories? No.


----------



## skip.knox (Apr 6, 2019)

>one cannot speak in terms of individuals unless they've met every individual on Earth

Um, what? When writing a story, I deal with individuals all the time. So does any writer. I think that's good; that it is, in fact, one of the great strengths of storytelling. It lets us say things about ourselves that the social scientist cannot. Social theories are, by their nature, abstractions. Novels (poems, etc) are insights. Both have value, but the latter is the subject of this particular forum. It's one reason why I hang out here rather than in a sociology forum.


----------



## pmmg (Apr 6, 2019)

Well, I can see the Mods are trying to steer this one back in a certain direction. I've not found a better definition for a 'power' fantasy other than one I used earlier, in which the Author, or reader, is meant to want to be the character the story is about. This is different than how I first approached this thread. So, I was off track on that topic from the beginning.

I am currently reading a romance (Chessie), and I'm gonna go out on a limb and say, I think most romances are female power fantasies. This is a totally different use of the word power in the way 'Girl Power' would get used, which...I am pretty sure was around before the spice girls and has never gone out of style. In the right context, it comes up pretty fast.

I think Annoying Kid and I are pretty far apart on how we look at the world, I but I can tell she has invested a lot of time and energy into these things she values, and I think she presents them well. I hope others find value in the things we don't agree on. Disagreement gives contrast right, and that is more useful than agreement in looking to understand new things. I feel much of the stuff I said early in the thread were kind of on a different topic, due to a lack of a good definition, but I don't think any of it could not be useful to any looking for things in that context. I am not sure where any has crossed over into ad hominem attacks on someone, but sometimes in social interactions things get misread.

I try to approach all of this stuff looking for what I think is true about things, and standing on things that make sense to me. If my arguments are weak, I think it will show, and I would know to reevaluate them.

Someone called the thread 'necroed'. I am not sure that can be said so long as others still find it worthwhile to talk about. This topic (female heroes in fantasy) comes around again and again, so even if we end it here, it will be back in a few months. But you know, while the thread is topically about female power fantasies, which I think was ill defined early on (least for me), us artist types are just interested in stuff. And all of this bleeds into trying to understand the nature of the universe so we can have art that imitates life (or vice versa, right?). It is a philosophical pursuit that we are also trying to capture in wrestling with all of this. I think those subjects are important even if they drift a little. Ultimately, I think all of this breaks down to how can we get it right, and say what we want to say. In spite of my different values, I think I've been pretty open to telling others to 'write what you want and not what you think I want'. There is no other way to be. When it breaks down to 'your wrong', 'no, you're wrong', no wait, 'you're wrong...' and the reasons are missing or just repeating, then I guess is time for a breather. But honestly, from what I've been reading, I think people still have stuff to say. I hope it is allowed to continue, even if I find these threads a little personally draining to myself, as I tend to post long messages in them.

Anyway, the mods seem to do a great job here. I almost never see something posted I think they need to do something about. I assume that is because of stuff that goes on behind the scenes. So good job to you guys.


----------

