• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Works of fiction and feminism

Viridian

New member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
3,036
MBTI Type
IsFJ
I was browsing Fandom Secrets a week or so ago... A lot of the secrets - and discussions - bring to the table Social Justice-related topics such as privilege and heteronormativity. I was then intrigued by this submission (discussion here, just scroll down), which is about the anime Puella Magi Madoka Magica. Despite not having seen it, therefore being unable to judge its "feminism quotient", so to speak, I began wondering about the idea of a work of fiction being "feminist".

Another secret (discussion here) brings up the question of what social issues are inadvertently present in works of fiction, which is a subject studied by several literary schools. It's not my cup of tea, but it got me thinking: how does one anlyze that? How does a white, privileged male know if his characterization of female characters, for example, does not come across as sexist, racist, ableist, gender binary, etc?

Basically, what makes a work of fiction feminist, sexist, "empowering", etc.? Not being very acquainted with feminism, I wanted to understand those topics better.

(Sorry if this is kinda messy.)
 

Colors

The Destroyer
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
1,276
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
(Oh Fandom Secrets. I <3/loathe/<3 you.)

I think by being aware that works of art happen not accidently, that they are crafted and their choices are, well, chosen, is a great first step (as mentioned in the second step).

Don't let the people who throw terms left and right scare you off! Feminism is, in a lot of ways, simply common sense. You know women in real life, you know they are complicated and have their own inner lives and not easily confined to categories-- that they are people, first and foremost.

And that's what I look for in a feminist piece of fiction. Female characters who are people, in that they aren't limited to being just victims (or even presumed victime), just girlfriends, just mothers, just objects of desire, just masculine tough or feminine weak, etc.

Admittedly, it's not always easy to see a lack (of complex characterization, of existence outside the "male gaze"). But here's some questions that might help:

- Is this character solely defined by her relationships to men? (For example, is she simply the love interest, the mother, etc? Does she have her own motivations, dreams, past, future, etc. beyond said men?)

- Does this character have relationships with women? (Relationships that have nothing to do with aforementioned men, particularly fighting over men.)

- Are the female characters confined to one or two "types", such as the "damsel in distress" or the "castrating shrew"? (For example, are all the "good" women are all good in only exactly one way, and all the "bad" women completely opposite, ie, madonna/whore.)

- Does the narrative/characterization recognize the perspective offered by her gender without limiting her to only stories and characterization stemming from her gender? (For example, are women only strong because they act exactly like men? )

*I think these same questions can apply to the race problem as well.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
I agree with Colors - the hallmark of a feminist work is nothing more than equality. Feminism is NOT about women being "better" or "dominant."

It just means they are whole people, and in works of fiction whole characters, rather than simply being defined by their relationship to men (for example, in sexist works women are portrayed as nothing more than victims, sex objects, daughters, wives, girlfriends, and are often "flat" characters rather than dynamic).

As a heterosexual male if you strive to make your female characters human beings with validated thoughts, feelings, wants, needs, and plans of their own just like you would make a male character, then you're on the right path.
 

Viridian

New member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
3,036
MBTI Type
IsFJ
Yay, responses! Thank you, guys/ladies! :D

(Oh Fandom Secrets. I <3/loathe/<3 you.)

I can relate... I keep coming back, there's something alluring about it, especially when a secret makes you think, "Oh boy. OH. BOY. Here we go."

What is it about F!S that makes you loathe/love it? Just curious...

I think by being aware that works of art happen not accidently, that they are crafted and their choices are, well, chosen, is a great first step (as mentioned in the second step).

Don't let the people who throw terms left and right scare you off! Feminism is, in a lot of ways, simply common sense. You know women in real life, you know they are complicated and have their own inner lives and not easily confined to categories-- that they are people, first and foremost.

And that's what I look for in a feminist piece of fiction. Female characters who are people, in that they aren't limited to being just victims (or even presumed victime), just girlfriends, just mothers, just objects of desire, just masculine tough or feminine weak, etc.

Yes, it's mostly about fleshing out characters, but there are a lot of issues involved... For example, can a female character like the color pink/have a crush on a male character/be sensitive and delicate/be portrayed as an intelligent yet deceptive individual without it being sexist?

Admittedly, it's not always easy to see a lack (of complex characterization, of existence outside the "male gaze"). But here's some questions that might help:

- Is this character solely defined by her relationships to men? (For example, is she simply the love interest, the mother, etc? Does she have her own motivations, dreams, past, future, etc. beyond said men?)

- Does this character have relationships with women? (Relationships that have nothing to do with aforementioned men, particularly fighting over men.)

- Are the female characters confined to one or two "types", such as the "damsel in distress" or the "castrating shrew"? (For example, are all the "good" women are all good in only exactly one way, and all the "bad" women completely opposite, ie, madonna/whore.)

- Does the narrative/characterization recognize the perspective offered by her gender without limiting her to only stories and characterization stemming from her gender? (For example, are women only strong because they act exactly like men? )

*I think these same questions can apply to the race problem as well.

Hey, that's the Bechdel Test, right? :D I've heard a lot about it...

I agree with Colors - the hallmark of a feminist work is nothing more than equality. Feminism is NOT about women being "better" or "dominant."

It just means they are whole people, and in works of fiction whole characters, rather than simply being defined by their relationship to men (for example, in sexist works women are portrayed as nothing more than victims, sex objects, daughters, wives, girlfriends, and are often "flat" characters rather than dynamic).

As a heterosexual male if you strive to make your female characters human beings with validated thoughts, feelings, wants, needs, and plans of their own just like you would make a male character, then you're on the right path.

I'm not actually a writer, just a consumer of works of fiction who doesn't have a lot of experience when it comes to "liking the right things". ;) Still, that also brings the question of what counts as a "flat" or a "rounded" character, especially since the reader can make several automatic inferences or theories about a character - fanon is full of the stuff, or so I hear. :thinking:
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
Flat characters don't have full personalities. They're one dimensional and don't grow or change. Like, if all of the women in your story are nothing more than attractive props or mothers without other aspects to their personalities, those are flat one-dimensional characters. A woman is more than a role she plays for a man or society.

There's nothing wrong with female characters liking pink or having crushes on boys. I love boys and I own things that are pink. I'm perpetually 14 years old. However, I obviously also have other characteristics to my personality, like intelligence, and many interests that have nothing to do with my relationships with men. I don't need a man to survive, et al.

Also, it's probably good if ALL of the girls in your story aren't pink-loving boy crazy ExFPs or ESFJ mommy types. It's good to flesh out to acknowledge the women who hate pink and don't think about relationships very much.
 

Perch420

New member
Joined
Jan 21, 2011
Messages
381
MBTI Type
NiTi
Enneagram
5w1
Women already have equal rights. The modern feminist movement seeks for women to not just have equal rights, but have equal outcomes to men, which is evil and degenerate.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
Hell is an island filled with adolescent INTJ virgins.
 

Viridian

New member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
3,036
MBTI Type
IsFJ
I wished for responses, and I got them from awesome people; alas, all wishes must, per the laws of narrative drama, contain a twist...

Flat characters don't have full personalities. They're one dimensional and don't grow or change. Like, if all of the women in your story are nothing more than attractive props or mothers without other aspects to their personalities, those are flat one-dimensional characters. A woman is more than a role she plays for a man or society.

There's nothing wrong with female characters liking pink or having crushes on boys. I love boys and I own things that are pink. I'm perpetually 14 years old. However, I obviously also have other characteristics to my personality, like intelligence, and many interests that have nothing to do with my relationships with men. I don't need a man to survive, et al.

Also, it's probably good if ALL of the girls in your story aren't pink-loving boy crazy ExFPs or ESFJ mommy types. It's good to flesh out to acknowledge the women who hate pink and don't think about relationships very much.

Again, I'm not a writer, just a curious individual. This thread may end up having good advice for novice writers, though. :yes:

I understand the definition of of flat and round in the context of characterization, but I do believe it to be a fuzzy boundary sometimes... Sometimes, even complexity has a kind of archetypal aspect to it, which is not necessarily a bad thing.

All in all, it's hard sometimes to say how "girly" is too "girly", especially if said character has a kind of vulnerability to them, or displays such at times...

Women already have equal rights. The modern feminist movement seeks for women to not just have equal rights, but have equal outcomes to men, which is evil and degenerate.

Do the women where you live get paid the same as men? Are they as likely to be taken seriously when asking for a raise of doing a job interview?
 

Perch420

New member
Joined
Jan 21, 2011
Messages
381
MBTI Type
NiTi
Enneagram
5w1
Men are generally more ambitious and intelligent than women, so of course they are paid more.

I know of no objective criteria for determining how "serious" someone is taken when asking a job interview, so the second part of your post is a moot point.
 

Thalassa

Permabanned
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
25,183
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx
You think men are generally more intellgent than women? Apparently you've never been to the Deep South.

But seriously bro how can you even make such a claim? Where is your evidence or statistics for such assertions?
 

Viridian

New member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
3,036
MBTI Type
IsFJ
Can we stay on-topic, please? We already have a thread for "gender roles" and whatnot...

What would you say is the difference between a work that just happens to have well-written female characters and a "feminist work"?

Also, people other than Colors and Ms. Dearest are welcome to contribute! I'm interested in exploring different perspectives. :smile:
 

Savage Idealist

Permabanned
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
2,841
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
As I see it, a work of art is feminist if it can portray women as normal humand beings compared to man; although this would depend on the content of such fiction, like a story set in the 18th or 19th century would probably not have strong and independent women in it, historicaly speaking. But a story that gives a female character who is just as capable as any guy is usually feminist, but if they're too perfect, if they're basically Wonder Woman incarnate, then that becomes the oppoisite of a feminist work for it's sexist. Like most male leads in stories will have some flaw they have to deal with or a problem they need to overcome, thus having a female lead should be the same way.
 
A

Anew Leaf

Guest
Can we stay on-topic, please? We already have a thread for "gender roles" and whatnot...

What would you say is the difference between a work that just happens to have well-written female characters and a "feminist work"?

Also, people other than Colors and Ms. Dearest are welcome to contribute! I'm interested in exploring different perspectives. :smile:

well-written vs feminist is usually deciphered by whether or not there is some ulterior motive in the author's creation.
 

Viridian

New member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
3,036
MBTI Type
IsFJ
As I see it, a work of art is feminist if it can portray women as normal humand beings compared to man; although this would depend on the content of such fiction, like a story set in the 18th or 19th century would probably not have strong and independent women in it, historicaly speaking. But a story that gives a female character who is just as capable as any guy is usually feminist, but if they're too perfect, if they're basically Wonder Woman incarnate, then that becomes the oppoisite of a feminist work for it's sexist. Like most male leads in stories will have some flaw they have to deal with or a problem they need to overcome, thus having a female lead should be the same way.

Is it possible to be sexist against men, though? I've heard people on LJ say that "misandry" doesn't exist because a woman who hates men has much more precedent and much less power than a man who hates women...

well-written vs feminist is usually deciphered by whether or not there is some ulterior motive in the author's creation.

That would be the most common-sense explanation... But what about the Death of the Author concept, though? Is the literary canon free for interpretation in spite of the author's "official" statements? :thinking:
 

Elfboy

Certified Sausage Smoker
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Messages
9,625
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Is it possible to be sexist against men, though? I've heard people on LJ say that "misandry" doesn't exist because a woman who hates men has much more precedent and much less power than a man who hates women...


That would be the most common-sense explanation... But what about the Death of the Author concept, though? Is the literary canon free for interpretation in spite of the author's "official" statements? :thinking:

of course you can be sexist against men. tons of women in the United States are (although probably not in Brazil)
 

Elfboy

Certified Sausage Smoker
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Messages
9,625
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Men are generally more ambitious and intelligent than women, so of course they are paid more.

I know of no objective criteria for determining how "serious" someone is taken when asking a job interview, so the second part of your post is a moot point.

actually, that's not quite true. women and men are of about equal intelligence HOWEVER, there are more men on the extremes of the spectrum (very stupid or very intelligent) while most women are in the middle.
 
A

Anew Leaf

Guest
That would be the most common-sense explanation... But what about the Death of the Author concept, though? Is the literary canon free for interpretation in spite of the author's "official" statements?

Few Authors are truly able to allows their own selves to "die" before their writings. Ones that can transcend themselves are usually able to produce works of breathtaking beauty. Most are simply writing about themselves.

Examples. (I am a huge fan of fantasy fiction right now, so this is where most of my examples will come from.)

BAD:

Christopher Palolini (whatever his name is) - kid who wrote those terrible "Dragon" books. If you haven't read them here is a summation: Imagine the love child if Star Wars and LOTR screwed each other.... and then made the author the main character.

Stephanie Meyers of the horrific Twilight saga. Summation: Bella = who SM wanted to be in high school. Another summation: Twilight is the heartwarming tale of a young girl's journey into adulthood where she must choose (like every woman must eventually choose) between beastiality and necrophilia.

GOOD:

George RR Martin of Song of Ice and Fire fame: He has hundreds of unique characters, all of them various shades of gray. He's brilliant. Summation of series: He kills everyone.

Terry Pratchett: HILARIOUS INXP author. OMG I adore him. Books are hilarious, often make social commentary on societies today... but it's done in a fairly subtle and funny kind of way. My favorite of his books, Jingo, made fun of language barriers by having a special font for when the "foreigners" were speaking.

TL:DR Version: Any book that doesn't trust the reader to think for itself is a book that I don't trust myself. Make your argument... but ultimately it is I who will decide how much or how little merit it has with me.
 
Top