Women in fantasy

[Feo Takahari]

On the objectification issue: I think a lot of the problem today is with what we lack, not what we have. As an example, suppose the most important female character in a story is a close compatriot of the hero. She has an interesting personality, has clear goals she works towards, and helps to defeat some of the bad guys. In and of herself, this character is probably fine. But when most female characters in a certain genre or medium are no more relevant than her--in particular, when there aren't that many women who get to be "heroines" in the same way the guys get to be "heroes"--then the genre or medium can be said to be lacking, as a whole. (This varies a lot from genre to genre--fantasy's actually getting pretty good about allowing women to take a central role.)

 

[Ophiucha]

You could always read the Gor novels from the 80s

I'm embarrassed to say how much I liked the first couple of those in high school. I even had, like, a nice box set. Genuinely awful, probably the worst thing I ever liked as a teenager and I liked Eragon and Simple Plan.

@Mytho, I think it'd be easier to list the women I didn't feel like were being objectified than the ones I did. Every female comic book character ever would be a good place to start - even Diana, who is basically an Amazon strawman feminist, spends a lot of time being grabbed by her enemies and contorting into poses that show off more of her assets. The vast majority of Captain Kirk's one-off love interests in Star Trek. Possibly every female vampire ever written, dating back at least as far back as Carmilla. While I think George R. R. Martin often avoids these pitfalls in his books, the writers of the TV show Game of Thrones often include extra sex scenes and nude scenes that exclusively show women naked and not their male co-stars, scenes that were not in the book. There was also a controversy surrounding a Wildling woman being clean-shaven in her nude scene, despite the actress's desire to wear a merkin as a 'wild woman' would have no reason to shave down there. The entire 'Hot Scientist' stereotype, which basically says "yeah, she's intelligent, but we're only writing her in so she can take down her pony tail and remove her glasses seductively". For bonus points, every portrayal of a Romani woman where she isn't meant to be evil. Some of the ones where she's meant to be evil, too. The previously discussed 'damsel in distress' trope, which turns women into prizes to be won. There are genuinely too many examples to name.

I have nothing against attractive female characters, but when you have entire blogs dedicated to the nonsensically sexualized armour women get in comics and video games, or the contortionist poses they're in on the cover of comic books, it's pretty obvious that these characters aren't being drawn for other women to emulate, enjoy, and be empowered by. They're drawn and written for men who presumably haven't figured out yet that you can just watch 'em in even less clothing on the internet.

 

[Steerpike]

As an aside, Opiucha, you ever see the show Lost Girl? I think Bo and Kenzi are both well-done in terms of how their characters are portrayed.

 

[Feo Takahari]

As an aside, Opiucha, you ever see the show Lost Girl? I think Bo and Kenzi are both well-done in terms of how their characters are portrayed.

I find it amusing that when not used as villains, succubi are often among the least sexually objectified women in fiction. Because they're defined around being actively sexual, they can't just be passive trophies for the male characters to win.

 

[Steerpike]

I find it amusing that when not used as villains, succubi are often among the least sexually objectified women in fiction. Because they're defined around being actively sexual, they can't just be passive trophies for the male characters to win.

With a succubus, I thought it likely there would be objectification or shaming (or, more probably, both). Lost Girl manages to avoid both.

Kenzi is my favorite character, though. She's smart, tough, and doesn't have all the magical advantages everyone else has.

 

[Mythopoet]

I guess I'm confused. What do people mean when they talk about female characters being objectified? From some of the comments above, it sounds like if every female character doesn't have as big a role in a story as a male character or if somehow their character doesn't live up to some personal ideal of what a woman should be, that means she's being objectified. I see people often (in many other places around the internet) complaining whenever a female character isn't the main character. It almost seems as if some people are not satisfied unless any female character in a story should overshadow any male character.

Now, where I'm coming from, if the greater quantity of heroes is due to industry or societal pressure to keep male characters in the forefront, that's a problem. However, if it really comes down to the individual choices of authors, for instance if an author simply invents a male character that the author wants to tell a story about and all the other characters (including women) are secondary to that character's story, then there's nothing wrong with that. Readers pressuring authors to portray female protagonists, if that is not what the author wants to do, is just as bad as industry or society doing so. If readers prefer female to male protagonists, they should refrain from buying books with male protagonists.

 

[Zero Angel]

I guess I'm confused. What do people mean when they talk about female characters being objectified? From some of the comments above, it sounds like if every female character doesn't have as big a role in a story as a male character or if somehow their character doesn't live up to some personal ideal of what a woman should be, that means she's being objectified. I see people often (in many other places around the internet) complaining whenever a female character isn't the main character. It almost seems as if some people are not satisfied unless any female character in a story should overshadow any male character.

I believe most people are going with the definition, "Degrade to the status of an object."

If you want to go a little further, it seems the general consensus is that "objects" are characters that lack or appear to lack agency, i.e. a will, when told from an omniscient perspective or that character's perspective, or when other characters and/or the author regularly treat those characters as though they are objects.

It seems that you may be referring to what Mindfire brought up a few pages ago when we started talking about the feminists people think of when they hear the word "feminists".

 

[Devor]

I guess I'm confused. What do people mean when they talk about female characters being objectified?

I'm going to drop the word "objectified" just because I don't like its origins in Communism and Marx's portrayal of women. It probably doesn't matter.

But in general, what people are upset about is the following:

- Women have only a few predictable archetypes which they fall into in fantasy stories, like the damsel in distress or the "warrior woman," and often aren't included as well-rounded characters. For me, I completely agree that this is a problem that we need to work on, but I disagree that it's the job of every last author to set new boundaries for female characters.

- Women characters often don't have agency, meaning that their actions don't really drive much of the plot. This, to me, is an easy enough problem for most authors to fix, so I fully support campaigning for authors to give female characters have more agency. That seems like the easiest issue to gain buy-in on to me and to make a big impact.

- Women are seldom protagonists. To me, novels are written by one person, so I don't see a point in complaining that male authors write too much about male characters.

- The publishing industry doesn't buy or market books by female authors or with female protagonists as much as they do those by male authors or male protagonists. I'm not really up to date about how true this is, whether it's out of proportion to the male/female audience, or whether there are alternate explanations - I presume it's at least true enough to complain about. However, when I hear similar arguments about industries I know more about, I find the complaints often show a poor understanding of the industry. But as authors we can't really do much about what the publishers are up to, anyways.

- Women are often sexualized. Even strong female protagonists feature lengthy descriptions of their breasts. As a Catholic, I've seen this problem a lot, too.

 

[saellys]

Thanks for the excellent summary, Devor.

 

[glutton]

On the objectification issue: I think a lot of the problem today is with what we lack, not what we have. As an example, suppose the most important female character in a story is a close compatriot of the hero. She has an interesting personality, has clear goals she works towards, and helps to defeat some of the bad guys. In and of herself, this character is probably fine. But when most female characters in a certain genre or medium are no more relevant than her--in particular, when there aren't that many women who get to be "heroines" in the same way the guys get to be "heroes"--then the genre or medium can be said to be lacking, as a whole. (This varies a lot from genre to genre--fantasy's actually getting pretty good about allowing women to take a central role.)

I really like this post, for obvious reasons.

 

[A. E. Lowan]

I have nothing against attractive female characters, but when you have entire blogs dedicated to the nonsensically sexualized armour women get in comics and video games, or the contortionist poses they're in on the cover of comic books, it's pretty obvious that these characters aren't being drawn for other women to emulate, enjoy, and be empowered by. They're drawn and written for men who presumably haven't figured out yet that you can just watch 'em in even less clothing on the internet.

And, for the funny visual argument about female armor in video games...

College Humor: Female Armor Sucks

 

[A. E. Lowan]

Seriously, though, while it's great to have a succubus as an empowered woman (I like that), they're SUPPOSED to be sexy. It's their stock in trade. It's like saying to a swordswoman, "Get out there and fight, but no weapons for you." A succubus, and conversely an incubus, feeds on intimate energy. I'm not saying they should be objectified, but I also don't think that a woman, or a man, who is seen as attractive or amorously aggressive/interesting is automatically objectified. I have one in my WIP, and I would dare anyone who reads her to say she's objectified, even though she works as an exotic dancer. Girl's gotta eat.

 

[LadyCass]

Interesting discussion. I had a few females in my mind to bring to the table but after reading the qualifications what the character couldn't do or be they were quickly canceled out. But I got to thinking.... how many male characters are that great of a strong character? How many male leads have agency? Agency and protagonist have everything to do with style of writing. If the writer is story driven the characters will suffer, male or female. So are we saying there are few stories that are character driven that are female?
I love Morgan from Nine Kingdoms series, love Mercy from the Mercedes Thompson series, also love that in the Thief series by Megan Whalen Turner the third book changes from a male lead to focusing on a female lead.
I don't know.... seems a bit over board to say there aren't any good female characters. I think there are a lot of weakly written characters male and female out there. Is the percentage higher for woman? Perhaps. I do think that has changed a lot in the past century. Many top selling media have female leads lately, fantasy and other genre.
I'm all for women being represented fairly but there should be credit given to how that has been changing and evolving tons over the past years.
As a female writer and reader and consumer... I feel women are represented. Some of us are reliant on our looks, some our dumb, some do kick ass, some do save the day. Having all of that makes it realistic to me.
I don't know... maybe I'm missing the point. And as far as sex selling, it sells for men too. The male lead is more appealing if he has a romantic story line. Romance sells, our society has simply forgotten romance and replaced it with sex.

 

[saellys]

I probably have the most extreme opinions in this thread, but nowhere did I (or anyone else, for that matter) say there aren't any good female characters. I certainly recognize and applaud the improvements that have happened--maybe not in the past century, but definitely in the last couple of decades. Heck, I finally finished The Deed of Paksenarrion (which has been touted as a great example in this and other threads), and that was written twenty-five years ago. Elizabeth Moon did then what many people wish more authors would do now.

Being a "story-driven" author does not mean characters have to be weakly written. Characters with agency influence a story. A writer who creates characters, male or female, with no agency weakens their own story.

 

[Chessie]

I'm going to drop the word "objectified" just because I don't like its origins in Communism and Marx's portrayal of women. It probably doesn't matter.

But in general, what people are upset about is the following:

- Women have only a few predictable archetypes which they fall into in fantasy stories, like the damsel in distress or the "warrior woman," and often aren't included as well-rounded characters. For me, I completely agree that this is a problem that we need to work on, but I disagree that it's the job of every last author to set new boundaries for female characters.

- Women characters often don't have agency, meaning that their actions don't really drive much of the plot. This, to me, is an easy enough problem for most authors to fix, so I fully support campaigning for authors to give female characters have more agency. That seems like the easiest issue to gain buy-in on to me and to make a big impact.

- Women are seldom protagonists. To me, novels are written by one person, so I don't see a point in complaining that male authors write too much about male characters.

- The publishing industry doesn't buy or market books by female authors or with female protagonists as much as they do those by male authors or male protagonists. I'm not really up to date about how true this is, whether it's out of proportion to the male/female audience, or whether there are alternate explanations - I presume it's at least true enough to complain about. However, when I hear similar arguments about industries I know more about, I find the complaints often show a poor understanding of the industry. But as authors we can't really do much about what the publishers are up to, anyways.

- Women are often sexualized. Even strong female protagonists feature lengthy descriptions of their breasts. As a Catholic, I've seen this problem a lot, too.

I like this response. In the last couple fantasy books I've read, one of my main issues has been the lack of non-cliched females. In one of the books, a young teen was the protagonist and she behaved like the 13 yr old that she was. Slowly, through the course of 5 books, she came out of her shell. In book 3, I almost had it with her stupidity because by then, come now author, can I see her be stronger now?

In other stories, women seem to use their sexuality a lot in order to get ahead. As a woman, this irritates me. Women have brains and strong personalities too, it would be nice to see more of it in modern literature. If anyone has examples, I'd welcome the chance to look at them.

I don't mind reading sexy scenes either so long as they have a point in driving the story forward. Just my opinion, but women these days use sexuality to get ahead a lot less than they are portrayed to by media.

 

[Legendary Sidekick]

One thing that's been fun for me is playing a female role in Steerpike's Dragon's Egg game. I originally planned to play a guy, but came up with a Joan-of-Arcish barbarian woman that seemed to fit into the world of the RPG. What's fun about it is I try to play her as a powerful warrior, but add a feminine side that goes with her whole I'll-become-a-Valkyrie-when-I'm-dead theme. Kindness and compassion are the feminine touch to this character who would otherwise be like a man but wearing a dress.

The best compliment I got was from a woman playing the game who felt my character was believable as a woman.

Baldhart

The lovely fool! She's always trying to empathize with everyone, gentle, sensitive. She tries to look after the group, and she's strong, really strong. You know you can count on her to save your ass. You can say she's trying her best to keep the group together, yet she got some internal conflicts to solve. While sometimes I feel like she's a young girl trapped in big barbarian body, being almost frail, it's not the whole truth. She's wise in her own way and her ominous dialogues with Nissa can be a little disheartening. You're doing a good work with her, for she's also believable as a woman. Don't die too soon!

Since I have three daughters, I think my goal is to have powerful female MCs that aren't objectified.

 

[Zero Angel]

Has anybody seen the latest controversy with the SFWA bulletin? SFWA appears to have stepped in it big-time.

I didn't find the original articles, but here is a reaction which includes what they're reacting to:
Dear SFWA

 

[Feo Takahari]

I found a scan of what the authors in question said about the controversy. (It's at the bottom of a page of very heavy criticism, so skip over that if you just want to get to the scan.)

I'm most inclined to sympathize with this response to their response.

Edit: Oh dear God, Resnick's actually going onto blogs to complain in the comments about being criticized. Think Fandom Wank covers this kind of rubbish?

 

[Devor]

Stepped in it seems right. It doesn't look like they're responding well, which is usually the part that's worse than whatever it was they originally posted.

I would just say, without seeing the offending piece, that in my limited experience I think they would probably have a better chance changing the organization by staying than by leaving.

 

[saellys]

I could play "I said a bunch of awful crap and got called out for it" bingo with this.