Too few female characters?

[Valentinator]

Yes, there are biases and stereotypes for both genders, but I still don't agree that they balance each other out. I also don't feel that you've actually provided a good example of where this is the case.
Instead, I feel as if you've been enforcing/perpetuating the stereotype of women being weaker, less interesting, versions of men. It may not have been your intent, but it's what I've gotten out of it.

Come on, I'm not saying that women are weaker and less interesting version of men. This is a straw man argument. I'm trying to say they are interesting in different way, not the same way as men. Their strong sides are being displayed in other types of situations, not while cutting dragons to pieces.

 

[Butterfly]

I already told you... That dragon is a pet.

 

[Gryphos]

Come on, I'm not saying that women are weaker and less interesting version of men. This is a straw man argument. I'm trying to say they are interesting in different way, not the same way as men. Their strong sides are being displayed in other types of situations, not while cutting dragons to peaces.

But at the same time you're saying, or at least seriously suggesting that women can't cut dragons to pieces.

 

[cupiscent]

Come on, I'm not saying that women are weaker and less interesting version of men. This is a straw man argument. I'm trying to say they are interesting in different way, not the same way as men. Their strong sides are being displayed in other types of situations, not while cutting dragons to pieces.

I have not yet seen you suggest that women have anything to add to a story. Would you care to elaborate?

 

[Valentinator]

But at the same time you're saying, or at least seriously suggesting that women can't cut dragons to pieces.

No, I'm saying it seems less realistic and I was referring to particular trope we were discussing.

 

[Mythopoet]

I think most of the debate in the thread right now is irrelevant.

Here's the thing:

We all use stereotypes. Every single one of us. Man and woman. We use stereotypes in the sense of placing people in groups with labels because we cannot actually process the ridiculous amount of people in the world around us. We don't have the capacity to think of all the people as individuals. So we put them in groups and we attach labels to help us. Most people don't do this to devalue others or to attack them. It's just a coping mechanism for living in a big world with lots of people.

Now of course there are people who are really sexists or really racists. They do actually think women are inferior to men or black people are inferior to white or whatever. But the sexism and the racism that they profess is just a symptom of a deeper disease, it's not the disease its self. The disease is egoism. The problem is the individual person placing themselves as the epicenter of the world in their own worldview and dealing with everyone else in the world on an us vs. them basis. Thus the people who are their friends, their family or happen to be like them become the "us" and everyone else becomes "them". For egoist men, women often become the "them". But for egoist women, men are the "them".

You can't combat this kind of thinking by trying to tip the scales in favor of whoever the "them" are. You can only combat it by targeting the base assumption: the individual is not the center of the world.

 

[Valentinator]

I have not yet seen you suggest that women have anything to add to a story. Would you care to elaborate?

Women have plenty of things to add to the story. I'm talking about particular trope, please don't overgeneralize what I'm saying.

 

[cupiscent]

You can't combat this kind of thinking by trying to tip the scales in favor of whoever the "them" are. You can only combat it by targeting the base assumption: the individual is not the center of the world.

...and you can't do that by telling stories with different individuals at the center of them?

 

[Svrtnsse]

No, you really are saying that women are weaker and less interesting.

I guess slaying the dragon supposed to be extremely challenging. Surely, some women would choose 'masculine' route and they would face the dragon and show average fighting skill, therefore, the dragon would simply kill them like the rest of the contenders. Otherwise, you have a scenario where the female knight just gets lucky or the dragon isn't that scary after all. In both cases, it would be less exiting to read.

 

[Mythopoet]

...and you can't do that by telling stories with different individuals at the center of them?

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

My point is that if someone is telling stories mostly full of men, and you think that's a problem, it won't be solved if that author slaps a few women in the story. Balancing the number of men and women in a story is not going to help anything.

 

[Steerpike]

We all use stereotypes. Every single one of us. Man and woman. We use stereotypes in the sense of placing people in groups with labels because we cannot actually process the ridiculous amount of people in the world around us. We don't have the capacity to think of all the people as individuals. So we put them in groups and we attach labels to help us. Most people don't do this to devalue others or to attack them. It's just a coping mechanism for living in a big world with lots of people.

That's true when you're talking about our brain's functioning in terms of categorizing and labeling the world as a whole. It makes sense, it had evolutionary value to us, and it is impractical to do otherwise. But none of that is relevant to your creation of an individual character. When you create a character, you should be thinking of that character as an individual in most instances, and the inability of a human being to visualize concretely every single individual on the planet doesn't really enter into it.

 

[Jabrosky]

No, I'm saying it seems less realistic and I was referring to particular trope we were discussing.

And you still glossed over my point that neither human sex would be all that effective at cutting up something on the scale of a dragon. The body mass difference between men and women is ~15%. Do you seriously believe that would make such a tremendous difference against such a huge animal which has the advantage in brute strength either way?

 

[Mythopoet]

That's true when you're talking about our brain's functioning in terms of categorizing and labeling the world as a whole. It makes sense, it had evolutionary value to us, and it is impractical to do otherwise. But none of that is relevant to your creation of an individual character. When you create a character, you should be thinking of that character as an individual in most instances, and the inability of a human being to visualize concretely every single individual on the planet doesn't really enter into it.

No one here has said you shouldn't think of each character as an individual. But many have been suggesting that when you think of those individual characters, biology shouldn't have anything to do with it. And that's just patently ridiculous. Biology is still a part of every individual.

 

[cupiscent]

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

My point is that if someone is telling stories mostly full of men, and you think that's a problem, it won't be solved if that author slaps a few women in the story. Balancing the number of men and women in a story is not going to help anything.

Ah. And my point is that individuals will not stop thinking of themselves as the centre of the universe if all the stories being written star - or in fact are solely populated by - individuals just like them. So if we want to challenge the unthinking creation of stories with mono-demographics, we need to produce more stories with varied demographics.

 

[Steerpike]

And you still glossed over my point that neither human sex would be all that effective at cutting up something on the scale of a dragon. The body mass difference between men and women is ~15%. Do you seriously believe that would make such a tremendous difference against such a huge animal which has the advantage in brute strength either way?

Fighting a dragon, it seems to me more likely a human in a one-on-one situation would rely on wit and speed to have a hope of survival. If it comes down to going against it muscle for muscle, you're already dead.

 

[Steerpike]

No one here has said you shouldn't think of each character as an individual. But many have been suggesting that when you think of those individual characters, biology shouldn't have anything to do with it. And that's just patently ridiculous. Biology is still a part of every individual.

Biology is part of every individual, true. My point is, though, that biological averages don't have to define individuals. I know men who fall much more on the female side and vice versa. So, for any given character, they can fall anywhere along the spectrum between traditionally male and female, regardless of physical sex, and it's still a fine character. There's no basis for saying the character is unrealistic. You might say she is atypical, but that's about it.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

That's true when you're talking about our brain's functioning in terms of categorizing and labeling the world as a whole. It makes sense, it had evolutionary value to us, and it is impractical to do otherwise. But none of that is relevant to your creation of an individual character. When you create a character, you should be thinking of that character as an individual in most instances, and the inability of a human being to visualize concretely every single individual on the planet doesn't really enter into it.

I think Mytho was just trying to give some perspective on the source of an individual's perspective, not the generation of characters.

Although, an inaccurate or inexperienced perspective can damage or inhibit solid character creation.

 

[Steerpike]

I think Mytho was just trying to give some perspective on the source of an individual's perspective, not the generation of characters.

Yep. And that makes sense, insofar as it goes. Our brains were built to generalize. We had to generalize to survive.

 

[Valentinator]

No, you really are saying that women are weaker and less interesting.

Wow, it's getting ridiculous. So here is my train of thought. In order to kill the dragon, a knight must be the best. The best male knights are stronger than the best female knights (in my personal opinion). That doesn't mean all women are weaker than all men. And it doesn't mean that females can't slay the dragon. They can do it differently.

About the interesting part. I was blaming the author, not the women. If the author puts character in a situation where he / she doesn't seem realistic it not because of the gender, it's because the author's sloppy writing. It has nothing to do with the gender by itself.

 

[Steerpike]

In order to kill the dragon, a knight must be the best. The best male knights are stronger than the best female knights (in my personal opinion).

The logic breaks down here. You assume that strongest=best when it comes to killing a dragon with a sword. I don't think that's true.