# Women in Fantasy



## Amanita (Dec 6, 2011)

Inspired by the thread about interesting societies, I’d like to open one about women’s role in fantasy now. Female characters are being associated with clichÃ©s much more often than male ones.

As I’ve mentioned there, one of the fantasy clichÃ©s I can stand least are the stories female protagonists defying the rules of their society for no reason. The author, usually a female one, creates a strictly patriarchal society, but for obvious reasons she doesn’t like this herself. And what does she do then? She has her character who has lived there all her life hate this society as well, without every explaining, why she’d start thinking that way. The protagonist either dresses like a boy or succeeds against all odds and evil, chauvinist men. 

Why does it seem to be such an issue to actually create a society where the gender roles are different? Especially if magic comes into the game, there’s no reason why it shouldn’t have similar effects, modern technology had in our own world, at least for the people who are able to use it. And even without magic, this isn’t such an impossible task. Fighting women haven’t been unheard of in real life either, especially in ancient times. Among some western Asian people, women have been buried with weapons as well. Why not go from something like this and make it make sense in your world?
And if you do that, have the courage to have evil and cruel women as well.

Strong female characters don’t have to be fighters though. There aren’t nearly enough stories that give respect to the numerous tasks women actually did perform and are still performing in many societies. 
The idea that women are weak, fragile and in need of protection isn’t common among all patriarchal societies, it’s more of an European ideal and there one more or less exclusive to the higher classes. Peasant women and later female factory workers had to do as much as the men. (Even though the latter often got lower wages.) 
In many African countries women have to fetch water over long distances. This could be a start for a fantasy story as well. Maybe there’s a dragon or a water snake lurking there...
The healer and herbalist Hildegard von Bingen is an example of a European medieval woman who did plenty of things, that could create plots. Why not have a quest for a certain healing herb growing in a foreign country? Or for the reason and treatment of some kind of disease.

Even in some strongly patriarchal societies there are exceptions, where women do find themselves in power and not just as power behind the scenes. An interesting story I’ve discovered a few years ago searching for something completely different, is the one about the Begums of Bhopal. 
Not one but three women in a row holding positions of power in an otherwise strictly patriarchal society at a time where this would have been completely impossible heyer in Germany. 
Sultan Shah Jahan, Begum of Bhopal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is one of them, but if you type it into Google you’ll find more information if interested.

There are many more stories like this out there, that can serve as inspiration, I’m sure. 
Some of the ideas I’ve described here might not be interesting to some male readers, but I highly doubt the stories about pseudo-feminist characters fighting evil men are. 
What do you think about the role of women in fantasy? 
And do you know any books featuring female characters doing what I’ve described here?


----------



## Ravana (Dec 6, 2011)

I have a strong tendency toward writing egalitarian societies, so their "roles," for me, are not meaningfully different. Which is a solution of sorts, though it has its own problems: ignoring gender differences, while aesthetically more pleasing, is pretty "fantastic" even for fantasy stories. Even without a strict equality, though, I almost never confine any class of sentient being to only certain roles… and when I have, it's nearly always been aliens, and for the purpose of exploring those differences without the baggage that accompanies familiar stereotypes. 

(Once in a long while, I'll toss some minor culture with some variation on divided roles into a fantasy setting, for the "makes-you-think" value: for instance, a tribe in which men are always elected chiefs… but only the women are allowed to cast votes. Or vice versa: I've used both.)

On the other hand: how often do you see male fantasy characters who take a strong interest in needlepoint? Try doing that–and then try to convince your reader that the character in question is supposed to be a normal, well-adjusted heterosexual man. (Especially if he's the only male in the story who _is_ interested in it.) Or even calligraphy… which _was_ a primarily, sometimes exclusively, "male" art throughout much of post-Roman Europe's history? Which may point to an even bigger problem in gender portrayal: not that some activities are seen as exclusively male, but that a great many are seen as exclusively female. And, no, those tasks generally won't see much respect, no matter who's performing them, at least not in what experience suggests is the "average" fantasy setting. ("Darling, I absolutely adore the latest trim you made me! Sir Hedugrim is going to turn green with envy at next month's tourney when he sees me in it!" Not so much.)

At any rate, the personalities I give women do not differ fundamentally from those I give men, no matter what their activities may be. They can all be generous or cruel, benevolent or conniving… or simply narrow, petty, self-interested and largely timid herd members. Which is about the _least_ "fantastic" thing I do in my stories.


----------



## ThinkerX (Dec 6, 2011)

One of the main characters in my current story is female.  She is in a mild state of rebellion against her noble family, (running away from an arranged marriage with a not-so-nice noble twice her age) and in the story acts as a sort of agent for a powerful merchant.  She is NOT a sword swinger (though after the events of this story she'll be taking up self defence training), a thief, or a spellcaster - just a well educated young woman.  Most of the story is told through her eyes.

Two of her male companions are skilled in combat, veterans of a long and brutal war.  One is a knight (minor noble) whose family has a lengthy history in the area the story is set (with all the attendant complications), the other a peasant turned warrior turned petty military magician when he was discovered to have a modicum of magical talent. 

And no, she does not become the classic 'damsel in distress' - she is traumaticised by the some of the events in the story, but she is mostly concerned with other events.


----------



## Kit (Dec 6, 2011)

Ravana said:


> Which may point to an even bigger problem in gender portrayal: not that some activities are seen as exclusively male, but that a great many are seen as exclusively female. And, no, those tasks generally won't see much respect, no matter who's performing them, at least not in what experience suggests is the "average" fantasy setting.



I would submit that it's not the task itself which is demeaning, but the fact that women in society have accepted both the task and their second-class status.

If we had a society in a cold-weather climate in which hardly anyone had the skill to sew a functional piece of clothing, that skill (whether it was performed by a male or a female) would be esteemed. 

If the lower classes of a society decided to abruptly quit their work- work which is essential to survival but which the upper class people haven't the first idea of how to do it- either the class system would be radically changed, or everybody would die.


----------



## Kit (Dec 6, 2011)

Amanita said:


> Inspired by the thread about interesting societies, I’d like to open one about women’s role in fantasy now. Female characters are being associated with clichÃ©s much more often than male ones.
> 
> As I’ve mentioned there, one of the fantasy clichÃ©s I can stand least are the stories female protagonists defying the rules of their society for no reason. The author, usually a female one, creates a strictly patriarchal society, but for obvious reasons she doesn’t like this herself. And what does she do then? She has her character who has lived there all her life hate this society as well, without every explaining, why she’d start thinking that way. The protagonist either dresses like a boy or succeeds against all odds and evil, chauvinist men.



People write what they know. Almost every woman has felt (to a greater or lesser degree) that experience of being subjugated in some way for having been born with the substandard plumbing. People also write their wish-fulfillment.... anyone who has felt the aforementioned experience wishes she could do something heroic and spectacular to change it- even though in real life, what most of us must do in most of those situations is suck it up and deal.


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Dec 6, 2011)

I don't know that I'm radically shaking up any conventions in my novel about gender roles, although my main protagonist is a very forward, who-cares-about-conventions-this-seems-like-fun kinda girl. The society she lives in is modelled after 18th century England socially (although with a 15th-century level of technology). Inheritance (including noble titles) is through male primogeniture, although women who are bullheaded enough can end up ruling, and nobody really bats an eye (although it _is_ considered a little unseemly). Women's roles are more circumscribed in the upper echelons of society; in rural areas, women are respected almost as much as men, although town magistrates and constables are (almost) always men.

That's how it starts, anyway. Things change a bit during the story.


----------



## Telcontar (Dec 6, 2011)

Amanita said:


> Strong female characters don’t have to be fighters though.



I think it was an important part of my development as a writer when I realized this. In my very early attempts at writing female characters, the closer they got to main-character status, the more likely they were to be fighters, uncaring, brash - in a word, mannish. Not because I didn't think feminine women were interesting (THAT hasn't been a problem since puberty  ) but because I didn't understand how to portray a woman's strength in traditional roles.



Ravana said:


> ignoring gender differences, while aesthetically more pleasing, is pretty "fantastic" even for fantasy stories



Yeah. So many people forget - or ignore - that the gulf between traditional male and female roles wasn't an accident. The differences don't apply as much in the modern age, to be sure, but that doesn't mean that differences don't exist.



Ravana said:


> On the other hand: how often do you see male fantasy characters who take a strong interest in needlepoint? Try doing that–and then try to convince your reader that the character in question is supposed to be a normal, well-adjusted heterosexual man.



I don't see the difficulty in that, but maybe that's just me. After all, in much of medieval Europe pretty much any skilled craft was the domain of men, even needlework. Offhand I can't think of one that has been associated with women for more than a couple hundred years (though this area is definitely not my forte).

Anyway, as I started out saying, it was very valuable to me when I realized that I could have strong women characters that still filled the stereotypical women's roles. Silly young me, not seeing how much strength it takes to be a good mother...


----------



## Amanita (Dec 6, 2011)

> Yeah. So many people forget - or ignore - that the gulf between traditional male and female roles wasn't an accident.


Yes, but I really do wonder, where the idea that woman are worthless/not really human/without any intelligence/the source of evil comes from. I understand that the male desire to make sure that the children they were caring for played an important role in this but it still doesn't explain all of it in my opinion. It is common in many cultures and yet humanity would die out without women and most men probably did love their mother at some point of their lives, and maybe their wife as well. 
It's obvious why there weren't female mine workers, soldiers etc. in early times, but I don't really understand why for example female scientists faced so much animosity even though no intrinsic female trait keeps women from being good scientits as those who did make it, show.  Even during the first half of the Twentieth century this was still a big issue. 
Another interesting bit is the fact, that witchcraft is one of the few crimes in the Bible, only women are accused of. In most of the other laws, everything not marriage and adultery-related always only applies to men, but this is specifically directed at women. (There was a discussion about this at NaNo as well, that's why I'm mentioning it.) 
Die anyone here ever give these matters any thought? 

Even in modern western society "strong women" usually are expected to act like men are supposed to act. This is going so far that sometimes, women are asked to learn to speak in a deeper voice because otherwise they aren't supposed to be taken seriously and other things like that.


----------



## Telcontar (Dec 6, 2011)

Amanita said:


> Yes, but I really do wonder, where the idea that woman are worthless/not really human/without any intelligence/the source of evil comes from.



Can't say much about it myself, since I really don't see much of it personally. I know I've heard plenty about how it is rooted in religion somewhere (Eve offering the apple, Delilah cutting Samson's hair, blah blah) but religion usually just passes on pre-existing prejudices, so it probably predates that.

To the part about witchcraft, I don't know about in the Bible but I do know that plenty of men were accused of it in history - it was certainly not a woman-only 'crime' (woman dominant, yes, with something like a 3:1 ratio). This may have something to do with the fact that it was often merely used as a political weapon against people without the influence to escape or prevent the accusations. More women fall into that category than men - and of the men who were accused, relatively fewer were actually brought to trial.


----------



## Leuco (Dec 6, 2011)

Amanita said:


> What do you think about the role of women in fantasy?
> And do you know any books featuring female characters doing what I’ve described here?



Women in fantasy, as in reality, take on many roles. In literature, there are many female archetypes that, when viewed collectively, exemplify the great diversity of feminine vices and virtue. Ancient literature has all sorts of interesting characters (Dido, Penelope, Circe, Camilla, Atalanta, Hippolyta...) and often they serve as both maiden _and_ warrior. They can be both princess and priestess, queen and witch, temptress and savior. Personally, I enjoy reading about the warrior princess and the sorceress queen. Maybe there's a reason why they're so common in literature. 

In my books I have many female characters who take many roles (including a half elf outcast who serves as protector, teacher, warrior, and philosopher) and together I'd like to think they reflect something intriguing about the feminine spirit. 

One book that comes to mind, that portrays women in a radically daring way, is R.A. Salvatore's _Homeland_. The story takes place in a subterranean, matriarchal society ruled by priestesses who worship and serve Lloth-- the spider queen.

The women in this book are so evil!


----------



## Kit (Dec 7, 2011)

Amanita said:


> why for example female scientists faced so much animosity even though no intrinsic female trait keeps women from being good scientits


----------



## Amanita (Dec 7, 2011)

Excuse me, but what am I suppsoed to think about this reaction to my post? Clumsy wording that gave this a completely different meaning is quite possible with me, just ask "The Blue Lotus".


----------



## Kit (Dec 7, 2011)

I was reacting to the stunningly Freudian typo.

And yes, "completely different meaning" applies. Wasn't sure whether to ROFL or get offended (did I mention I'm a female scientist?), so I settled for


----------



## Telcontar (Dec 7, 2011)

_Giggles like a twelve year old._

Heh heh heh. Didn't even notice that. 

ScienTits. _Back to giggling._

What sort of scientist, Kit?


----------



## Kit (Dec 7, 2011)

Apparently, one with good scientits.


----------



## Steerpike (Dec 7, 2011)

With respect to a point raised earlier, doesn't the embodiment of evil in women, as a mythological concept, start to come about with the advent of agriculture and the move away from hunting and gathering, when men start to intrude more on spheres of life that belonged to women in the nomadic way of life and you get a bit of a power struggle? Also, women represent and embody mystery and the supernatural to early people in a way men cannot, because women have the power to bring new life into the world and that is not well understood. This is another source of power. Associating certain evils with the woman is a way to marginalize that power.


----------



## Amanita (Dec 7, 2011)

Thank you for pointing it out. 
Should I edit it or not?
I hope it's obvious that I didn't write this on purpose. And I am female by the way.


----------



## sashamerideth (Dec 7, 2011)

In my fantasy work, I have a mix of societies, with the minority that my characters interactive the most with being a matriarchy. Others are meritocratic, or patriarchal.


----------



## Kit (Dec 7, 2011)

Amanita said:


> Thank you for pointing it out.
> Should I edit it or not?
> I hope it's obvious that I didn't write this on purpose. And I am female by the way.



No, don't edit, it's funny. Thanks for being a good sport about my teasing.


----------



## SeverinR (Dec 7, 2011)

My society humans still have the belief of human women being second class or sub.  But elven women are integrated into society equally. (Dwarves would too if I had any) Some humans try to treat elven women as they do human women, but find that they don't submit.

I have yet to create a female character sword swinger, it would be represented by a female body builder though.(the non-steroid using, female looking body builder) Not just some super model with a little muscle tone.  
If she swings a sword equal to a man, she will have to be ripped like a man.

The one or two female fighters I have written have used rapiers, out moving the heavy armored and heavy sword swinger.

I think readers kind of want the traditional damsel in need of a knight in shining armor to come rescue her.  The princess who knows how to handle a eligant party, but doesn't know which end of the sword to hold on too.  It is interesting that even when a woman(Queen) rules, the women are treated no better.


----------



## Amanita (Dec 7, 2011)

> I think readers kind of want the traditional damsel in need of a knight in shining armor to come rescue her. The princess who knows how to handle a eligant party, but doesn't know which end of the sword to hold on too. It is interesting that even when a woman(Queen) rules, the women are treated no better.


Well, I definitely don't want the kind of characters described above. (At least, if the cliche isn't used very well ) But that partly due to the fact, that I'm not a big fan of the traditional fantasy princesses anyway. Sometimes I think, I'm rather wrong in the fantasy genre, especially because I prefer democracies or dictatorships to kingdoms, but where else to go to with the magic?


----------



## Steerpike (Dec 7, 2011)

You do have readers who want that traditional sort of thing. I'm not opposed to it, but it has to be very well done to hold my interest.

I prefer more intriguing female characters, such as the title character in Kristin Cashore's excellent YA fantasy, _Fire._


----------



## Reaver (Dec 7, 2011)

Steerpike said:


> You do have readers who want that traditional sort of thing. I'm not opposed to it, but it has to be very well done to hold my interest.
> 
> I prefer more intriguing female characters, such as the title character in Kristin Cashore's excellent YA fantasy, _Fire._




I have to agree with you here, Steerpike, my main character is called Imani, a 19 year old woman who is both a student of history and the combat arts.  She's smart, quick-witted and deadly with everything from swords to crossbows.


----------



## Steerpike (Dec 7, 2011)

Reaver said:


> I have to agree with you here, Steerpike, my main character is called Imani, a 19 year old woman who is both a student of history and the combat arts.  She's smart, quick-witted and deadly with everything from swords to crossbows.



That sounds like an intriguing character, Reaver. I like the pairing of something like history with the physical skill in combat, to show development of the mind as well as the body. Being a student of history could give her a number of strengths to draw on in terms of problem solving.


----------



## Reaver (Dec 7, 2011)

Steerpike said:


> That sounds like an intriguing character, Reaver. I like the pairing of something like history with the physical skill in combat, to show development of the mind as well as the body. Being a student of history could give her a number of strengths to draw on in terms of problem solving.



Thanks, Steerpike.  That's exactly what I'm aiming for when telling her story.  Say...you've probably had someone ask, but can I use your name for an Elfin warrior?  Seriously. It's a very cool name.


----------



## Steerpike (Dec 7, 2011)

Reaver said:


> Thanks, Steerpike.  That's exactly what I'm aiming for when telling her story.  Say...you've probably had someone ask, but can I use your name for an Elfin warrior?  Seriously. It's a very cool name.



Reaver: feel free to use the name, but you should know that it is actually the name of the antagonist in Mervyn Peake's brilliant Gormenghast books, which are non-magical fantasies published in the 1940s and 1950s. Others might recognize it.

Here are a couple of cool passages from Wikipedia where Peake described Steerpike:



> If ever he had harboured a conscience in his tough narrow breast he had by now dug out and flung away the awkward thing - flung it so far away that were he ever to need it again he could never find it. High-shouldered to a degree little short of malformation, slender and adroit of limb and frame, his eyes close-set and the colour of dried blood, he is climbing the spiral staircase of the soul of Gormenghast, bound for some pinnacle of the itching fancy - some wild, invulnerable eyrie best known to himself; where he can watch the world spread out below him, and shake exultantly his clotted wings.



and



> Limb by limb, it appeared that he was sound enough, but the sum of these several members accrued to an unexpectedly twisted total. His face was pale like clay and save for his eyes, mask-like. These eyes were set very close together, and were small, dark red, and of startling concentration.



Peake is wordy


----------



## Jabrosky (Dec 8, 2011)

Let me confess to an obsession that has been driving me insane for years: I want more than anything else in the world to publish a fantasy story featuring a strong and beautiful African female protagonist who kicks butt and has an interracial relationship. I feel that strong yet romantically desirable black female characters are too scarce in fantasy or any other genre (or in any kind of creative media in general) and that getting such a story out there would present a much-needed sympathetic portrayal of a black woman in the media. The fact that I haven't been able to get such a story completed or even decide exactly what my plot or setting is going to be has been a continual source of frustration for me and I am angry at myself for lacking the self-discipline to pull it off successfully.


----------



## Ravana (Dec 8, 2011)

> I would submit that it's not the task itself which is demeaning



Didn't say they were, just that they're as likely to receive short shrift in fantasy writing as they did in medieval Europe. Even if you make the men "second-class" citizens in a story, as long as you keep all the traditional gender-linked tasks the same, I doubt you're likely to convince your average fantasy reader that a man who does needlepoint is better than one who does not. (Let alone that he isn't homosexual–a convergence of two stupid prejudices, rather than just one.) As someone who's done both heavy-weapons combat and embroidery (and both equally indifferently…  ), I'd never be inclined to consider either demeaning, nor any other task that proved useful. But I've also frequently noticed that my own views tend to diverge from those of the society I find myself compelled to live amongst.

-



> I don't see the difficulty in that, but maybe that's just me. After all, in much of medieval Europe pretty much any skilled craft was the domain of men, even needlework. Offhand I can't think of one that has been associated with women for more than a couple hundred years (though this area is definitely not my forte).



Actually, I had to cast about for a minute to come up with needlework… since I know full well that most tasks have been performed by both genders–often very close to equally–throughout European history. (My other main candidate was spinning.) Doesn't change the stereotypes, unfortunately. That might be part of the problem: soldiering was one of the few that _was_ highly differentiated. On the other hand, so was fishing, so I'm not sure how far that can be taken. They certainly occupied very different positions in the social spectrum. And while I don't have any numbers at hand, I strongly doubt there were that many more soldiers than fishermen, such that one would become strongly associated with men and the other would be largely ignored.

-



> Sometimes I think, I'm rather wrong in the fantasy genre, especially because I prefer democracies or dictatorships to kingdoms, but where else to go to with the magic?



Go to Steven Brust and Glen Cook. You'll never feel the need to ask that question again… well, not about the role of women, at least. (They aren't as big on democracies.) Strong women–however you take that–they've definitely got. And plenty of magic. And in Brust's case, there's even a leading male character who regularly engages in… needlepoint.


----------



## Kit (Dec 8, 2011)

Karen Wehrstein does probably the best job I've seen so far in creating a society with equality of genders. (Jabrosky- there's also a strong black female MC in an interracial relationship in this story.)

Women do not need to turn themselves into faux men in order to be fighters. I am 5 feet tall and 124lb, and a martial artist. Yes, it is challenging to spar men who are three times my size, and they usually beat me- but that's because they are heavier and have longer arms and more muscle mass, not because they have penises. The women who are heavier than me and have longer arms and more muscle usually beat me too. It is also worthwhile to note that all of those people have training, and I'd certainly fare better against a random big guy who has no training.

 Sometimes I can beat THEM by being faster and more flexible, having better targeting, or if they have less training than I do. Men who are closer to my weight, we're pretty evenly matched. I have a lot of muscle, but it doesn't make my body look like a man's. 

In Brazilian JiuJitsu, it's a common tradition for the teacher to pair the big brand-new guy with the tiniest female advanced student in the room on his first night and let her tool on him, to show that technique can trump size. (This also weeds out the egotistical a-holes, which we don't want in our MA schools anyway.)

There is always a market for stories with "traditional" damsel-in-distress stories, but I like to think that the market for alternatives to that is growing. My favorite fairy tale is Tam Lin, where the WOMAN rescues the man!  

 In my WIP, I'm trying to keep the genders equal in my society. Recently I found- much to my amusement- that that means (in my case) that I had to do away with the concept of dresses entirely.


----------



## SeverinR (Dec 8, 2011)

Kit has it right.

Size, height and mass rule in close in combat.  
Strength is important, but reach, and physics matter more.
Strength lets you hit hard, but if you can't reach to make the hit, its worthless.

That is why my women tend to fence then to heave swords around.  

A woman can do as well against a man their size(if they are commited.)

I do like damsels in distress, but I turn it with reality. The woman when faced with a rescue or good shot at escape will act in their defense as most people, man or woman would do.

I think gender bias is a good realism to challenge, not by changing nature, but by using what women have to make them survivable in a hostile world.  Smaller people are quicker, smaller means lower center of gravity, meaning they are harder to knock off their feet. (Unless blitz'd by a 400 lb armored man, ask a quarterback) also smaller people are lighter.

In martial arts, size matters, but you can work around it.  It takes a lot of energy to fling a giant sword around stomping around in heavy armor, while your opponent bounces effortlessly side to side.

I believe most smaller people would prefer to stay out of close in combat, and use missles or magic to fend off the typical barbarian.  It's healthier that way.


----------



## Kit (Dec 8, 2011)

Other small fighters may have different opinions/experiences, but surprisingly I do much better against a large opponant up close.

I used to have a kung fu classmate who was six feet tall and very wiry-strong. His arms seemed a mile long. I always did very poorly against him in stand-up striking. He could reach me long before I could reach him, and just hold me off and keep walloping me while I couldn't get near enough to strike him at all.

If I could close, though, his long arms couldn't do as well once I was pressed right up against him- while I could go to town. Part of this was because he physically could not make full use of his body mechanics at that range, and part of it was that he just wasn't accustomed to fighting like that. People tried to engage him on his terms- stand-up at his arm range- and he kicked all their asses.

Weapons don't seem to even the playing field much. A weapon is the extension of your arm, and his weapon was still tacked onto a very long arm that had better reach than my weapon on my short arm. Not to mention that the ideal length of your sword, staff, etc is a function of your height, so his weapons were longer and heavier than mine.

In general, I do better grappling at close range than striking at longer range, even if the opponent is bigger.

Smaller fighters have our center of gravity closer to the ground, which changes the physics of grappling a lot. Techniques that work on people your own size often fall flat when you try them on a person whose center of gravity is in a very different place. Throws, for example- even very skilled martial artists have a heck of a time trying to throw me.

No matter how big the opponent is, he still has to breathe, so the smaller opponent can go for a choke or  a tracheal strike. He still has to see, so a smaller opponent goes for the eyes. 

If your adversary is larger and stronger, generally the longer you spend fighting the worse it gets for you, so the smaller person has to be both economical and ruthless and incapacitate the opponant as swiftly as possible. (The exception is when he's bigger because he's out of shape- in that case you can sometimes exhaust him and wait till he's winded, and then finish him off...)

Missles, of course, are a completely different story. That really DOES nullify size difference (although relative strength of throwing or being able to draw a heavier bow still come into play).

The most important factor is to figure out what your strengths are and tailor your fighting style to those strengths. It's true that when you're less than half your opponent's size, it's going to be hard to fight him on his terms... so you have to fight him on YOUR terms.


----------



## Telcontar (Dec 8, 2011)

Kit said:


> It is also worthwhile to note that all of those people have training, and I'd certainly fare better against a random big guy who has no training.



Definitely. When taking two people of roughly equal training, size will matter a lot more - largely, it is training and experience that have to go towards making up for physical disadvantages. Some, such as the already-mentioned low center of gravity, turn out to be strengths in their own way. 

Furthermore, once you move past sparring a lot of benefits open up. Especially in striking arts, sparring puts smaller people at a larger disadvantage (unless they have a very noticeable speed advantage) because they cannot make up for their small size by being, at a word, vicious. I often tell my students that the first thing I would do in a highly asymmetrical, and serious, fight, is to break my opponents knee. Being short, I'm already close to his legs...


----------



## Kit (Dec 8, 2011)

Telcontar said:


> I often tell my students that the first thing I would do in a highly asymmetrical, and serious, fight, is to break my opponents knee. Being short, I'm already close to his legs...



Knees are fun, but that tender, vulnerable throat...... such a tempting target.......


----------



## Telcontar (Dec 8, 2011)

But it can be so high up!


----------



## Reaver (Dec 8, 2011)

"Kit;19901]Women do not need to turn themselves into faux men in order to be fighters. I am 5 feet tall and 124lb, and a martial artist. Yes, it is challenging to spar men who are three times my size, and they usually beat me-"


Who cares if you lose sometimes, Kit? The fact that you can hold your own against 15 feet tall, 372 pound men is impressive. You're now officially my female superhero--Sorry Wonder Woman


----------



## Kit (Dec 8, 2011)

Telcontar said:


> But it can be so high up!



That's why you gotta knock him down!


----------



## Kit (Dec 8, 2011)

Reaver said:


> "Kit;19901]
> Who cares if you lose sometimes, Kit? The fact that you can hold your own against 15 feet tall, 372 pound men is impressive. You're now officially my female superhero--Sorry Wonder Woman





We're all writers here, we understand a little artistic license! (or hyperbole, if you will...)


----------



## Reaver (Dec 8, 2011)

Certainly.  Hopefully we can also get a little tongue-in-cheek humor. I meant no offense.


----------



## Legendary Sidekick (Dec 8, 2011)

Reaver said:


> Who cares if you lose sometimes, Kit? The fact that you can hold your own against 15 feet tall, 372 pound men is impressive. You're now officially my female superhero--Sorry Wonder Woman


Bah! If he's that tall and not even twice my weight, I'll bet he has really skinny legs. I could take him!

EDIT- Or maybe not! Reaver has just ninja'd me even more effectively than when I ninja'd him in the synopsis thread! I better get to my karate class today... I need more training!


----------



## ascanius (Dec 11, 2011)

Amanita said:


> As I’ve mentioned there, one of the fantasy clichÃ©s I can stand least are the stories female protagonists defying the rules of their society for no reason. The author, usually a female one, creates a strictly patriarchal society, but for obvious reasons she doesn’t like this herself. And what does she do then? She has her character who has lived there all her life hate this society as well, without every explaining, why she’d start thinking that way. The protagonist either dresses like a boy or succeeds against all odds and evil, chauvinist men.



This is a good point that I agree with fully.  I find it really annoying when something is included for the simple sake of politics, because in cases like these that is the only reason for it.



Amanita said:


> Why does it seem to be such an issue to actually create a society where the gender roles are different? Especially if magic comes into the game, there’s no reason why it shouldn’t have similar effects, modern technology had in our own world, at least for the people who are able to use it. And even without magic, this isn’t such an impossible task. Fighting women haven’t been unheard of in real life either, especially in ancient times. Among some western Asian people, women have been buried with weapons as well. Why not go from something like this and make it make sense in your world?
> And if you do that, have the courage to have evil and cruel women as well.



Do you mean men going off to war while women sit at home with the children?  I think it wouldn't make much sense if the women went off to war while the men stayed home, or had the roles reversed.  If you think about it anything requiring physical labor a man could do faster, easier, better (I don't necessarily mean quality wise).  If you are asking why women are not portrayed beyond their roles such as fighters, rulers, and the like then I see no reason why should not be.  Having variation, I think, gives a much greater depth and lends credibility to the world, nothing is ever set in stone.  I don't think I understand what you mean.



Amanita said:


> Strong female characters don’t have to be fighters though. There aren’t nearly enough stories that give respect to the numerous tasks women actually did perform and are still performing in many societies.



Now this is something I am interested in.  How is a woman strong if not physically strong?  I've been trying to figure out what strong means when it comes to the female sex.  Having a female character that can kick the ass of a 200lb brute, that acts more like a guy I tend to be annoyed with.  I mean how do you portray strength when it comes to a woman.  I have a female character that I want to be stronger than another male character/love interest.  She kicks ass but I want to grasp what it is to be strong as a woman not just fighting.  I think I'm going in the right directions, but I could still be on the wrong continent.  So far I have portrayed her as being compassionate despite the horrible things that have happened to her.  You don't know how bad I want to tell every thing about her, she is my favorite character.  Another thing that I am doing with her is showing sense of respect and honor to her people when she is asked to do things like marry someone she does not know, though it's much more complicated than that.  



Amanita said:


> Even in modern western society "strong women" usually are expected to act like men are supposed to act. This is going so far that sometimes, women are asked to learn to speak in a deeper voice because otherwise they aren't supposed to be taken seriously and other things like that.


Women will never succeed so long as they play by the rules of men, nor will they succeed so long as they refer to themselves as substandard, plumbing or otherwise.



Jabrosky said:


> Let me confess to an obsession that has been driving me insane for years: I want more than anything else in the world to publish a fantasy story featuring a strong and beautiful African female protagonist who kicks butt and has an interracial relationship. I feel that strong yet romantically desirable black female characters are too scarce in fantasy or any other genre (or in any kind of creative media in general) and that getting such a story out there would present a much-needed sympathetic portrayal of a black woman in the media. The fact that I haven't been able to get such a story completed or even decide exactly what my plot or setting is going to be has been a continual source of frustration for me and I am angry at myself for lacking the self-discipline to pull it off successfully.



Hmm.  One of my characters is black, modeled after the Himba tribe with the red ocher skin and everything.  She kicks butt, better than most.  However... Ill leave that for a question I have.



Kit said:


> The most important factor is to figure out what your strengths are and tailor your fighting style to those strengths. It's true that when you're less than half your opponent's size, it's going to be hard to fight him on his terms... so you have to fight him on YOUR terms.


I rock climb so I though i would throw this out there, Women tend to do better in rock climbing then men do, or they usually find it easier.  It's sorta funny how this works.  Men with greater upper body strength will power themselves up the face getting tired pretty quickly.  Women on the other hand do not have the strength to do this so they rely on there legs a lot more than the guys do, they save a lot more energy, and get up the wall much more efficiently than the guys do.

So while we are on the topic I was wondering what you all think about beauty and women in fantasy, Rolling Stone anyone?  One of my characters that I mentioned above who is the love interest and impact character for another main character is black, or better ocher, same physical features.  However she is by no means beautiful.  She has terrible small scars that cover her entire body.  She is stared at, ostracized and the whole shebang.  These are my two major characters and I thought I would ask what people thought about the love interest being ugly and not the supermodel beautiful.  She is my favorite character, and the one I have most fun writing.  She doesn't speak, and rarely uses the hand gestures.  She has a very strong sense of duty to her people and traditions even when they force her to do things she would never do given the choice.  She is strong willed, short tempered, but very calculating and a quick study.  She is someone who will put others first.  I can go on but then there wont be any surprises.


----------



## Amanita (Dec 11, 2011)

What makes a strong woman other than physical strength? Well, I definitely can't give a "right" answer to this, only my personal opinion.
For me, these are women who are self-confident, have skills beyond looking pretty and getting men to take care of them. Those women believe that these skills are valuable and they aren't completely dependent on others (especially men) to determine their self-worth. 
They do not only care about getting the love of one special man (or woman too, if love stories involving lesbians do this too.) If in a story they do fall in love with a male protagonist, they have lifes, hopes and wishes unrelated to this love as well. 
Male characters almost never dedicate their entire being to "love" and if they do, it usually is described as unhealthy. Not so for females. 
I especially can't stand the idea that "men care about doing things and women care about men." That might be one of the reasons, why I hardly ever like romance novels.


----------



## Lapis Nebula (Dec 11, 2011)

I think a strong lead, regardless of male or female, definitely needs to have a few non-negotiable traits:

1 - independence and self-reliance
2 - some skill - be it cognitive, physical, or magical - that sets them apart from others
3 - compassionate drive and motivation. They have to have something that is driving them, and compassion or care for others has to be in there somewhere.

I think generally for female leads, independence is downplayed and compassion is exaggerated, often to the point of compassion being a hindrance instead of a boon.  Male leads frequently don't have enough of the compassion element, in my opinion, to be totally likable. 

I completely agree with you, Amanita, that caring _only _about getting the love of that special someone  isn't the mark of a strong lead character. But I think it can be worked into the storyline and used well, as long as there is more to the character than JUST the love of that one other person 

-Lapis


----------



## Amanita (Dec 11, 2011)

> But I think it can be worked into the storyline and used well, as long as there is more to the character than JUST the love of that one other person


Definitly. But there are too many books out there at the moment, which are only about the main character getting the love of her vampire, werewolf/"mysterious" male of choice. Characters who have no motivation and no goals in life beyond their love interest annoy me deeply, at least, if this is portrayed as a good thing. Snape's reason for "redemption" in HP 7 was a male example of this. 
I'm not sure about the compassion bit. Depending on the story, the character might be better of and more believable if he or she doesn't have too much of it.


----------



## Lapis Nebula (Dec 11, 2011)

Amanita said:


> Definitly. But there are too many books out there at the moment, which are only about the main character getting the love of her vampire, werewolf/"mysterious" male of choice.



Amen. I'm sure we've all heard the, "Harry Potter teaches the importance of courage and friendship. Twilight teaches the importance of having a boyfriend" quote, yes? 



Amanita said:


> Depending on the story, the character might be better of and more believable if he or she doesn't have too much of it.


Sure, but I think there has to be some of it, for something. It doesn't have to be for some ONE, necessarily, but there has to be something the character cares about in order to provide the motivation for whatever they are doing, right?


----------



## Wormtongue (Dec 12, 2011)

In my medieval-ish society the gender roles are practical for a people of that era.  The men tend more toward physical labor and fighting, while the women tend more to traditional female roles.

One of my four main characters happens to be a female mage.  She is strong and capable but lacks confidence.  This comes from her background as well as a certain discomfort with her non-traditional role.  I don't see this as stereotyping at all.  I can assure she will never trip and fall while running from the antagonist.  She's not the type to run.


----------



## ascanius (Dec 12, 2011)

Amanita said:


> What makes a strong woman other than physical strength? Well, I definitely can't give a "right" answer to this, only my personal opinion.
> For me, these are women who are self-confident, have skills beyond looking pretty and getting men to take care of them. Those women believe that these skills are valuable and they aren't completely dependent on others (especially men) to determine their self-worth.
> They do not only care about getting the love of one special man (or woman too, if love stories involving lesbians do this too.) If in a story they do fall in love with a male protagonist, they have lifes, hopes and wishes unrelated to this love as well.
> Male characters almost never dedicate their entire being to "love" and if they do, it usually is described as unhealthy. Not so for females.
> I especially can't stand the idea that "men care about doing things and women care about men." That might be one of the reasons, why I hardly ever like romance novels.


Do you mean that the love thing should not be the main goal of the character?  In my story I have three plots for each character, the main overarching plot that involves the entire world, the internal conflict/character plot, and the Impact/love plot.  So far my characters all have plots that are separate from the love plot.  But to sum it up a character who has self value. 
On another point though can I ask why having the main goal being to obtain love as being the trait of a weak character?  I mean couldn't you have a strong female character whose goal is to find love.  I understand what you mean to some extant, like having a character whose entire existence revolves around men as being weak, like in high school.  But what about the strong woman who is seeking love?  Why does that make her weak.



Lapis Nebula said:


> I think a strong lead, regardless of male or female, definitely needs to have a few non-negotiable traits:
> 
> 1 - independence and self-reliance
> 2 - some skill - be it cognitive, physical, or magical - that sets them apart from others
> 3 - compassionate drive and motivation. They have to have something that is driving them, and compassion or care for others has to be in there somewhere.


I can see the value of the first two but the third I don't know about.  One of my MC's has absolutely no compassion, and is forced into a situation that he has no motivation to achieve, though these both change as the story progresses.  Or do you mean that the plot should not be a series of character reactions to events?



Lapis Nebula said:


> I think generally for female leads, independence is downplayed and compassion is exaggerated, often to the point of compassion being a hindrance instead of a boon.  Male leads frequently don't have enough of the compassion element, in my opinion, to be totally likable.



Umm.  I would say that that parallels the behavior of men and women in reality though.  I had a conversation about something similar a while back with some friends.  The girls in the groups said that tragic events in the news, or to some one they knew had an emotional impact on them, sadness crying etc.  The guys in the group all said the opposite that unless it was someone they personal knew well they didn't have any response to it, even if it was someone they knew, acquaintances.  And I have to agree with them.  I'm don't see the point in emotional response to something I have no personal emotional investment in.  There are to many bad things happening for me to take the time and grieve for each case.  The girls said that they would project themselves in those situations getting the emotional response.  Based on this I don't know if compassion is necessary downplayed/overdone, though I have not read the same books you have.



Lapis Nebula said:


> I completely agree with you, Amanita, that caring _only _about getting the love of that special someone  isn't the mark of a strong lead character. But I think it can be worked into the storyline and used well, as long as there is more to the character than JUST the love of that one other person  -Lapis


 So I need to stay away from the heroin's main goal being the attainment of X's love.  OK  It's nice to know that I am on the right track.  Thank you.


----------



## Ghost (Dec 22, 2011)

I wanted to post a response to this thread for a while, but I'm at a loss for a point to make. 



Kit said:


> in real life, what most of us must do in most of those situations is suck it up and deal.



I don't relate to feeling subjugated, but I wish there were more novels featuring women who "deal with it" without becoming flat characters. I think it requires more nuance and deeper characterization to pull off well. I'd like to imagine the effort is what scares fantasy writers away, but I don't think this is something many fantasy writers take into consideration in the first place. So many fantasies are stuck in the pseudo-medieval Western setting. I say go with it and show people being sexist *without* demonizing them*, or work out how women's rights could've come about in that particular setting.

Or change the setting.



Amanita said:


> Die anyone here ever give these matters any thought?



I think about it, but I'm still figuring out which parts are natural progression and which parts are cultural. I suppose that means more research.  In AG, I have societies that have different gender dynamics from each other. It doesn't make sense to have one accepted way of living across the whole globe. That means there are places where women are treated like property of their fathers and husbands, but there are also places where a woman can be armed if she can afford the weapons. I don't have a church blaming women for everything that's gone wrong since Adam and Eve, so I have to work out what that means for AG.

I like to see people play with the social relations between men and women, but I hate when *all* women are this or *all *men are that. I don't want to read about women who say "woolhead" or "be nice!" all the time. I don't want to read about societies where the power is reversed, making men the victims of discrimination, yet the author attacks any male character who questions the system because the system is sacred. That's still sexism. I'll read books with a mostly male cast, but I will notice the lack of female characters in a nonmilitary setting. It makes me wonder what's going on there.

Then there's this idea of beautiful damsels-in-distress who are soft and demure but otherwise lacking in the personality department. They want whatever the men in their lives want. Even when most women go along with what society wants and want those things themselves, there are women who don't want those things. They learn how to hide their true feelings. Other women fight the system (but not alone!), but I suspect the activists are outnumbered by women who manipulate the system, at least in the beginning. I'd like to see more women with the guts to get what they want and the smarts to stay under the radar.

ETA: I never thought of "strong character" as a physically strong character. It's funny how words bring up different images for different people. I take it to mean someone who is principled or confident in herself. She can doubt herself, but she doesn't give in to others when her values are at stake. The path she chooses isn't the easiest one open to her, but it's the one she thinks is right. Other people have different ideas of what makes a strong character. It's all good.

* Seriously, why make a society one way just to smack them on the head with how wrong that way is? Also, villains and ignorant villagers are unlikely to be the only sexist people on the entire planet.


----------



## Taytortots (Dec 25, 2011)

My lead character is a women. She is a strong female lead, and she does fight and swing a sword. She also does magic, and a lot more than that as well. Despite these characteristics I find that my character is very different from many of those that I've read in other novels.
I also find myself with very diverse characters. I do have a women that, for all intensive purposes, is a typical working women. Strong, but not in the sword swinging way. I personally think it's important to add diversity in the people. There are no two people the same, afterall. 
Just something to add that is my opinion. When I look at creating my chracters, I never look really at their gender. I'm creating a girl, but she's not only a girl, she's a million other things. Being a women does not define her, her behaviours, thoughts emotions and etc do. I do agree that we do need more refressing main characters, specifically female because they tend to be more steriotipacal.


----------

