What Kitchen?

                Something has been annoying me about fiction recently – in films as well as books or comics – and it’s something that I feel should have annoyed me for a longer time than it has. It’s grown from a niggle at the back of my mind whenever I see it into a full-fledged eye-roll with a ‘forget that’ wiping across my mind. Part of what annoys me about it is that I get annoyed by it at all; more on this later. The other part is that it should, based on certain arguments, be something that affects approximately 50% of main characters and an equal percentage of supporting characters, including villains.

                What is this, you ask? It’s female characters.

                Not that they exist; I firmly believe they should – in fact, that they almost need to. Not that they do – or even don’t – conform to a stereotype. No, my problem is that I over analyse exactly how they have been used and look into how it could have been done better. This in turn takes me out of the story, usually through no fault of the writing, editing, acting or direction (as appropriate), preventing me from receiving fully immersed enjoyment of the fiction I’m reading or watching.

                This obviously stems from a lot of things going on at the moment. The biggest factor in making me address how I look at this element of writing is the public response. I have been utterly disappointed with critics, the public, some friends and even myself with my response to these events and so I had to address it. Now, because I am not (yet) the most important person in the world, or close to that position, I can’t go out and change things without risking my job and a couple of other things quite important to me. How I can make a change is looking at how I write female characters. Small, but something affected by how I think and approach the subject.

                I like to think that my female characters, for the most part, have been strong and ‘progressive’ (read: able to escape most, if not all, stereotypes of females in fiction). For NaNoWriMo (National November Writing Month) I am writing a fantasy piece in which the lead character is female but does not fall into a role of character traditionally represented by her character. What are these roles? Unfortunately I do not have a complete list BUT I do have a few of the negative examples given in a video by a woman who reviews games quite critically. I have noticed she doesn’t talk about the positive roles women have in games or the strong female characters in games but that’s not the point of her vlog, so I guess I can forgive that.

                First up is the damsel-in-distress. Princess Peach is my primary example but there are countless others which I’m sure you could name if you tried. This is also the case in fiction; brave knight saves terrified princess about to be sacrificed to giant sea beastie, for example. The entire role of this character is to give the male protagonist a reason to go on their adventure – to kick-start the plot as it were. Why is this bad? Analyzing it in summary; woman can’t fend for herself, overpowered by evil male character, only men can be heroes. The defining characteristic of the damsel is ‘weak’ and/or ‘helpless’. This is a very difficult basis for a strong character, especially if they make no attempt to escape of help themselves.  

                The second example I’ll name here is the Eve with an Apple. This character is there to tempt the protagonist – usually male – into doing something wrong, evil or questionable which causes the plot to proceed. The seductress, the succubus, the one who has already turned to evil. She looks to convert the main character to the bad side to excuse her own failure, to prove she wasn’t weak. The main character refusing her only proves that she was.

                Third and final role is woman-in-the-refrigerator. This is a new term for me and originates from a Green Lantern issue in which the (male) protagonist finds, you guessed it, his wife in his refrigerator! This gives the comic plot and is the only thing this ‘character’ provides. Now, when this or the damsel character appear the issue is not really that they’re female is the problem (although this can and probably will be argued); it is that they are the only female character, or their character is only constituted by this element, defined by weakness or failure and related strongly to their femininity.

                These are traditional or conventional roles for women in fiction – not the only ones by a long way, but as far as gender stereotyping goes they are the easiest ones to name. They’re also going to be the ones I advise you never, ever use in your fiction unless you flesh out the character a lot more. Of course you can have a damsel-in-distress, but think about why she is in distress. Ideally, give them something else they are good at. If she’s a princess, make her more than a beautiful object to be saved; make her good at running her country or have other abilities that make her worth abducting or threatening. She should be more than a title and female; this is a weak character.

                The same is true for the other two roles – if the woman-in-the-refrigerator has no back story beyond the protagonist’s lover or family member then they are effectively reduced to bait. The same is true for Eves-with-Apples; if all they do is try to coerce the protagonist into betraying something or someone and then they are thin characters at best. Again this is easily solved by fleshing out the characters.

                How can you do that? Well, back story is your finest weapon here. If they have a reason for doing what they’re doing and how they got there then the reader can get on board with their motives. Maybe they were born into it, maybe they had a religious epiphany, or maybe there were several factors that lead them to where they are in your story. Make it clear and make it understandable, or at least intelligible. An author’s ability to make their characters believable is roughly proportionate to how well the reader understands said character.

                So apart from fleshing out the character what else can you do to make your fictional females seem realistic and strong? Try juxtaposing them against weak male characters – this is definitely allowed. Part of the problem with women in fiction is that they seem to be required to portray weakness rather than strength; they are the comparable character for the hero’s positive elements. So have a weak male character – Sherlock Holmes and Watson are a good example. If you find a problem with having a weak male character, I suggest you reconsider whether or not you bring culturally pre-defined and possibly sexist views into your writing.

                The other thing you can do is not make gender define your character. Try writing a short story with a male protagonist and then changing all of their pronouns. Congratulations; you’ve just written a female character exactly as you would a male one. Men and women are both equally able to display the same behaviours and perform the same actions. Therefore the gender of a character should only influence their actions if there is a very good reason in your story for it doing so. A lot of writers I talk to say they have issues writing female characters. I cannot understand how this can be the case unless they bring pre-conceived ideas to their writing about ‘how women should behave’.

                And there’s the problem with women in fiction; their writers. Some are a product of their time or culture – it is a fact that societies and cultures influence their people – and some are a product of sexist writers. It might be an active opinion they hold, or something ingrained that they aren’t even aware of. If you’re worried about it take a step back and think about whether you wrote the character the way you wanted, or the way you thought they should be written. If you answer with option B, you may want to have another look at your ‘female character’, just in case she turns out to actually be a regurgitation of out-dated and negative imagery.