#and having double standards of her vs every other female character

[goddessofwisdom18]

the witnesses, the barrister and the judge vs the defendant

my art featuring lyrics from pink floyd's the trial /

a court of wings and ruin chapter 61 /

carolina by taylor swift /

nyt article speculating on taylor swift's sexuality /

outer banks season 3 episode 6 /

barbie (2023) /

text post by @irontrashglitter /

a court of thorns and roses chapter 46 /

my art of the trial part ii

[inthehouseoffinwe]

Aite, female character and general inclusivity rant incoming. Hate it and want to make a post? Sure. But give me the respect I gave those who inspired this and don’t tag me in it:

People immediately bringing the ‘female character’ argument into things drives me insane. Like we know she’s a female character, but trust me, that’s got very little to do with why people dislike her.

Are some people misogynistic? Absolutely!

Are most people misogynistic? No.

When we talk about Galadriel, and Luthien, and Elwing, and Aredhel, and Nimloth, and Melian, and Nerdanel, and Ahsoka, and Padme, and *insert literally any female character from any fandom here*, being female has nothing to do with it. It barely crosses our minds.

So for the love of all that is good, stop bringing ‘but she’s a female character! Anyone who sees her as anything but perfect, or thinks the male characters made better choices than her is obviously horrible and misogynistic and would never do this to a man :(‘ Into arguments.

I don’t care how few there are in the work. You can explain why you like her without blaming people for hating on the fact she’s female when 95% don’t. There are very literally hundreds of other reasons people interpret fictional events which portray the fem char negatively.

Especially in work like the Silm which is written by a canonical in-universe historian with basic backstory. We have every right to see him as unreliable and play with what that could mean. Doesn’t make it misogynistic if we want to see female characters as more shifty than they’re outwardly portrayed. Many of us often do the same with male characters, and even if we don’t, you have no right to judge someone so harshly when you barely know a thing about them outside an online persona. 99.9% of people don’t even consider male vs female when they write these things. And it’s not because of some weird subconscious misogyny either.

This is mainly aimed at those who bring this up over. And over. And over again in some weird attempt at guilt tripping people into ‘liking’ characters.

On the topic of things people do that make no sense, if characters are stated as being white, and an artist draws them all white. You have no right to say they’re being racist or whatever else you want to come up with.

Nor do you have the right to slander anyone who casually points out the character is white if others draw them as anything else. If we can call out whitewashing, we can talk about the opposite too. As long as the person isn’t being outright rude, have a conversation.

And don’t get me started on tagging pieces of fanart and fics specifically created platonic with a ship. Like the work? Great! Now respect the intentions of the person who created it.

No one in a fandom space, especially artists and writers, owes inclusivity of any kind when running off canon source material. You want to blame someone for a boring cast, blame the author! But even in general? You don’t get to force or guilt others to create content - original work included - that fits your ideal.

Yes I’m a writer and artist of original and fan content. Yes I’ve experienced all of these directly or indirectly.

Sincerely, a young brown woman tired of all the double standards.

[physalian]

Treatment of female characters in fandom

Fandom Hot Take That Isn't At All New

The floor is open for debate, feel free (but do so respectfully, yeah?). This is a pattern I notice when exploring both old and new fandoms and that’s the perception of the highest-ranking female character, with rank as in protagonist vs love interest vs secondary vs tertiary character. Upon a massive paradigm-shift I just had about Percabeth.

There is a tendency, at least as I see it, within fandom to skew in favor of the female protagonist in fanfic instead of dumping her for the two hottest male characters. This happens when the female hero is a wish-fulfilment type. As most fanfic is written by women, this tracks. The audience loves her whether she sucks or not because she's them, and they write smut and romance for her because they want to live through her. They're very forgiving to female leads in and even if the fandom argues over her, she’s still the center of the largest ships. She’s the hero, and odds are, the most popular ship is the canon pairing, with some exceptions like Zutara.

If she’s not the protagonist, look at any fandom with a male lead and she’s probably dumped for the top five hottest men in the story for non-canon pairings. She has very little slack in the fandom and is subject to incredibly critical views. She has to be on point or better than her male counterpoints (ex: Katara) to be in the top ship for the fandom, or her canon ship with the male protagonist is just that old that it predates everything else (ex: Annabeth). Why? Because they're almost always less compelling than the hero's next closest male connection, because the writer wrongfully assumes that “it’s romance, you get, it I don’t need to put in the effort” but they do have to convince you why the friendship or rivalry exists. But also, because of how fandom treats female love interests.

I don’t read a ton of original fiction romance and when I do, it’s always a lady lead. If I look up fanfic for a series and I personally think the main romance is meh, she’s still there all over the archive (TOG, Twilight, Red Queen, Outlander, Star Wars Sequels, Max Ride etc). If I look up a fandom with the same quality of problematic romance, she’s tarred and feathered by virtue of being the love interest even if her character is as deep or as compelling as her contemporaries in other works where she’s the hero instead.

As in, if Edward was the protagonist of Twilight, the majority pairing would be Edward/Jacob while Bella would be absolutely despised. Same exact personality, same exact role in the story, it’s just told from Edward’s perspective (which I know exists I’m talking the actual book Twilight). People already hate the Star Wars Sequels, but if they were the exact same movies except Kylo was the POV character, “fans” might’ve bullied Daisy Ridley so much that they killed off her character—looking at you, Supernatural fandom.

Not every single lady love interest. Astrid/Hiccup is the most popular ship on AO3 for HTTYD. Astrid is a badass character and far more than a love interest and a perfect example of writers who worked hard to make it believable (and also there’s no one really second to Astrid within the story in terms of depth and screentime, except Toothless… which is the next most popular ship so). But even when she's pretty universally loved by the fandom (ex. Hermione) that doesn't guarantee her top billing if she has a male rival for screentime.

I don’t know if it’s just different fans who pick up these different genres or double standards for female characters but it’s pretty consistent. It might just be that readers can live vicariously though a cardboard narrator but get incredibly protective of the male lead and who’s allowed to court him when they can’t. I had this debate with somebody a while ago and they argued that it simply comes down to fanfic writers getting attached to the few female protagonists they're allowed to have. But like. This is across all genres, and the idea that fans starved of female heroes will only like them if they're the main hero and not the secondar hero is not the pro-women slam-dunk that person thought it was.

I also only really participate in fandom where it concerns fanfic and not live online discourse. I write male protagonists as a female author because it’s just what I grew up reading more and I like the action adventure genre far more than the romance genre, which is usually helmed by male heroes, but my writer catalogue is nearly 60/40.

It says something pretty loud and clear about the state of Percabeth which had ten years on Solangelo, to have the gap closed between them, with some disclaimers: I’m only looking on AO3 and Percabeth predates the surge in popularity of AO3 vs FFN where Solangelo hit at the perfect time. The third most important character in the PJO books kept changing from book to book (Grover, Thalia, Luke, Rachel, Zoe, etc), so Annabeth was the only ship option, she had no big competition.

But even then, when I go out of my way looking for good Percabeth fics, they’re just not there. The ship might technically be the most popular in that it populates in the most fics, but it’s not as front and center as Solangelo, and there’s way less canon content for Solangelo. If Will had been a girl, Solangelo would not be the fandom juggernaut that it is. If Annabeth was a man and Percabeth was a gay ship, she'd probably have a lot less hate with the exact same abusive personality, simply because she'd be a man and male characters will always have more leeway.

[edenprime]

if u haven't read it a lot of liara's more action-oriented shift was told in the comics. the shadow broker DLC didn't quite capture how much effort she went thru to secure shep's body and how big feron's role. i personally welcome the change and while i like archeologist liara i think her ME1 characterization is so superficial. she's mostly just a fan girl. the shift is abrupt but it's nice that in ME2 she has her own thing going on outside shepard cos i believe the writers wrote her as the canon love interest in mind so her character often suffers from the fangirl disease. i think a lot of people in the fandom dislike how the game shove her to us so much. which is funny since another famous shepard ship is garrus, who's equally as pushed as liara and is just as much of a shep fan. it's just that he's a guy so he doesn't suffer sexist hate.

I haven't read/seen anything outside the games, no! I've been thinking of getting into that, but first I'd like to sort out all of my feelings wrt the main event - the games. I feel like if I got into the "peripheric" media, it could maybe influence how I view the games and i want to analyze those by themselves (i'm thinking i'll finish this playthrough + another one in which i might or might not play as mshep) and then see about everything else. Thank you for the rec, though! I knew there was extra stuff about tali and garrus but this is the first i'm hearing about liara <3

And well... let's be real, most of the squad is part of the Shepard fan club, even those that can't be romanced, like Grunt and Wrex. The fact that Shepard gets a breeding request in Tuchanka after completing grunt's loyalty mission is like the most Mary Sue thing ever (and I don't necessarily mean this in a bad way). The asari, sex symbols of the galaxy, are throwing themselves at them left and right (Liara, Shiala, arguably Sha'ira, Morinth...). Shepard is the main character, everyone wants a piece of them. It's one of the entertaining parts of the games (or at least I have a lot of fun with it, if maybe a little bit ironically).

I suppose people might single out Liara because she's the one whose actions are the most extreme, and thus it crosses the line from "cute" to "creepy", but she's not the only one. Legion literally wears the armor off their dead body. As I said in my post, maybe her actions and/or attitude aren't 100% justifiable, but they are understandable.

I'm not sure about the game pushing Garrus as a love interest (I think the game itself is skeptical of the player making this choice, like when Shepard says she "can't believe she finds comfort in the arms of a turian" or something like that), but I do think he's definitely meant to be one of the characters that's most influenced by Shepard, regardless of gender.

Personally, I think him being so popular a choice (at least on Tumblr, which has a mostly female userbase compared to other social media) is due to him being a man, yes, but not necessarily because of sexism (or not always), but because het ships are farrrr more popular than femslash. Also, it's very clear how much he respects Shepard in basically every aspect, and it's incredibly fucking rare to see a het relationship in such equal ground, especially with a """bad guy""" lmao. (though ME in general does quite good in that regard I think, the romances in general are not toxic™️ or unequal) (mostly... ignoring that Shepard is basically everyone's boss... lol).

I completely agree that there's a double standard in how female characters are expected to behave vs male ones, and from what i've seen Liara is 100% a victim of this (I had the very bad idea of reading some threads on reddit...yikes). I don't know the fandom enough to know how it compares in relation to Garrus in particular, though, or if there's a correlation between Shakarian fans and Liara haters.

[misrepresentedmorallygrey]

PROPAGANDA

Alana Propaganda

"this poor woman. every other hannigram fic is “oooh look at alana she’s such a bitch and a slut and she never believed will and she’s stupid”. it’s horrible. she deserves the world"

Kikyo Propaganda

"Picture this: the love of your life betrays you and causes your death, then you're brought back to life later against your will and your lover is with your reincarnation. Anyone would feel bitter! She tries her best to keep living her half life and helping people. She's hated just because she's not the main character and gets in the way of the show's OTP."

"Kikyo was such an interesting character. She was murdered by the villain, who tricked both her and her love interest into thinking the other had betrayed them, brought back to life against her will only to find that fifty years had passed, the world had moved on without her, her baby sister was now an old woman, and she'd been condemned to an awful half-life in an unfeeling clay body where she was stuck in her worst moments and basically a vengeful spirit, but she eventually managed to move past it, gave up her one chance at getting revenge on her murderer to save the life of a child, and achieved some measure of inner peace before she died for good. But, she also has the misfortune of being the first love of the male lead, so of course the only thing anyone seems to care about is how she supposedly did him dirty and wasn't good enough for him. The whole fandom is chock full of meta posts about how she didn't trust Inuyasha enough and should have known he'd NEVER betray her like that. Meanwhile, Inuyasha fell for it just as easily when the villain framed HER for attacking HIM, but nobody ever tries to claim that HE didn't trust HER enough. (For further context, when she thought he'd betrayed her, she retaliated by pinning him to a tree and putting him in an enchanted sleep. He retaliated by destroying her village.) In at least 90% of the fanfics that she appears in at all, she's either the Bad Girlfriend or the Evil Ex, who either previously or is currently abusing the hero, or cheating on him, or trying to coerce him into turning human, or dating him for years only to break up with him by telling him he disgusts her because of his demon blood (huh???), none of which she did in the actual canon, solely so the preferred love interest can swoop in and kiss it all better. People will claim they're just making valid criticisms of her actions (which, to be fair, aren't always great), or saying she didn't properly earn her redemption (which is actually pretty standard for a shounen series) because she didn't apologize enough, but them multiple male characters who did far worse than she did somehow miraculously managed to escape the constant criticisms that she's subjected to, this despite having a so-called redemption that's literally just "He stopped eating people because he wanted to get into the heroine's pants", and remain very popular characters both in their own right and as alternate ships for the female lead. The double standards are so glaringly obvious, yet people will bend over backwards and jump through mental hoops that would give a gold-medal Olympics gymnast pause to insist that they're being completely objective and fair and that this isn't just about trying to score points in a ship war or holding female characters to completely different standards from male characters."

[angelasscribbles]

Hii 🥰

What is something you love about your MC / OC? You can create and share anything you’d like 😍 HC‘s, moodboards, edits or drabbles. Have fun and gush about your MC / OC 🥰

Also what made you create your MC /OC what was your inspiration?

Thank you so much for the ask!!

I use the default name, Riley Brooks for my current MC, but of course, my Riley is different from anyone else's, and even my Riley's are from series to series.

No version of her that I write is me, but yet there are pieces of me in every version of her.

It took me forever to find my face claim for her: Barbara Palvin. I preset to you now some of my favorite things about her.

This mood board:

Then there is this edit by @peonierose :

and this one by @harleybeaumont :

My original eight series used MC Riley Campbell. I stuck close to canon for my first five series. As I moved away from canon and played up the love triangle angle, I felt like there was a double standard for the male LIs vs the female MC. So I created my version of Riley Brooks to kind of push back against that a little. My first endeavor in that direction was Savage Love. Here is the snippet I posted about that. This is taken from the "Premise and notes" I posted ahead of the prologue:

A/N 3: My main reason/idea/inspiration for this story was to write a main character who was a bit different. In my other series, I feel like I’m constantly having to explain/justify/make reasons for her to be sleeping with more than one man. And I got to thinking, why? Why not have a main character who owns her sexuality? Who has sex with who she wants, when she wants, without apology, without needing a justification? You know, like men do? Someone who is a badass in her own right. Someone who refuses to be controlled by outdated, sexist ideas. So, without further ado, I present to you Agent Riley Brooks.

I love her independence, her audacity, and her irreverence. She is out of bounds half the time and she drives the men in her life crazy, but when she loves, she loves fiercely and will go to any lengths for those she loves.

Riley acts the way Riley acts because she's protecting herself.

I think I'll let Savage Love Liam speak here:

I knew she wasn’t as jaded as she wanted everyone to think she was. She had a heart, and it was soft and vulnerable and that’s why she protected it. I could see it so clearly. I saw it that first night in New York.

Yes, she was full of life and fire, she glowed with it. She was magnetic, drawing men to her effortlessly, most of them knocking into her in vain, unable to penetrate her shields. But she was more than that. Everyone could see the physical beauty and that spark of life that was so intoxicating, but not everyone realized how much more was simmering below the surface.

I did. And I wanted it, all of it. Not just her fire, not just her passion, I wanted her depths, her pain, her tenderness. I wanted every piece of her.

Or Bad Romance Drake:

She certainly made my career more interesting. Guarding Riley has been an exercise in forethought, contingency planning and diplomacy. Trying to stay a step ahead of her can be exhausting. You have no idea the number of international incidents that have been narrowly avoided over the years because someone’s boyfriend, husband or son was a little too enamored of our queen. Or, sometimes their girlfriend, wife or daughter. She attracts attention wherever she goes, and she chaffs under restraint. She has always kept us on our fucking toes. It’s infuriating and frustrating is what it is. But I really wouldn’t have it any other way because then she wouldn’t be her. And I fucking love her.

Mostly I love the way she owns who she is wholly, completely, and without apology.

I hope ya'll aren't tired of my tags tonight! Clearing out my asks and my "extras" folders! Tagging under the cut.

All Things TRR:

@nestledonthaveone  @karahalloway  @tessa-liam  @belencha77 @lovingchoices14

@21-wishes @secretaryunpaid @lunaseasblog  @princessleac1 @bebepac

@emersyn-in-cordonia @walkerdrakewalker @73geenalove  @sillydg @twinkle-320

@queen-arabella-of-cordonia @tinkie1973 @differenttyphoonwerewolf @jared2612 @mainstreetreader

@amandablink @harleybeaumont  @xpandass420x @ladyangel70 @twinkleallnight

@dcbbw  @indiacater @queenmiarys @phoenixrising0308 @gabesmommie1130

@kingliam2019 @3pawandme @bascmve01

[beardedmrbean]

Oh about the censorship

This the double standard

https://x.com/theguymatthew20/status/1784220013202751867?s=46

I also saw people said that the stellar blade Mc have the face of a child…have they seen an Asian woman before?

No I don’t mean the ones who eat too much junk food or read meat. There a running joke among adult Asians is that many people including their own people think they are younger then they are because of their diet, genes, and skincare.

Yes I know about the horror show that is Asian beauty standards and plastic surgery industry. But remember baby face? You know when adults often very young faces

(Also why actors like Mark Hamill and Chris Evans grows out beards)

But I often heard that Asian and Latino women are often infantilze due to their heights and features. Oh no groups of women who have different and often food diets, as long with generations dealing with famine, warfare, very limited access to certain food

Look different than their first world counterparts?

Unless you think that all women as soon as they turn 18 are hit with the ugly fication ray where they look like a hunchback of Norte dame

Side note my stepmom had a very rough life and don’t have the beauty standards. But there a difference between her from a poor background vs modern female vide game characters who face look like their mothers drunk every liquor in existence during pregnancy

I don't know enough about all of that, I just trust @shuunnico to know what she's talking about and even if she doesn't there's still the keeping the conversation alive. This does seem to be a bit of a double standard here now tho .

Yes I know about the horror show that is Asian beauty standards and plastic surgery industry. But remember baby face? You know when adults often very young faces (Also why actors like Mark Hamill and Chris Evans grows out beards)

(I hope people get that this is supposed to be a joke)

(I hope people get that this is supposed to be a joke)

But I often heard that Asian and Latino women are often infantilze due to their heights and features. Oh no groups of women who have different and often food diets, as long with generations dealing with famine, warfare, very limited access to certain food

For the sake of this article much like Jewish and Catholic diets "fish" isn't considered meat.

but ya, still with the diet and lifestyle they're going to have different deals when it comes to aging and all that, weird how humans evolved to work in the environment they occupied isn't it........

Lactose intolerance or not is another one, thank god white folks got the good end of that so we can eat copious amounts of cheese.

Unless you think that all women as soon as they turn 18 are hit with the ugly fication ray where they look like a hunchback of Norte dame.

Quasimodo was a guy so that would be extra weird, possibly welcome for some though at least in part.

Side note my stepmom had a very rough life and don’t have the beauty standards. But there a difference between her from a poor background vs modern female vide game characters who face look like their mothers drunk every liquor in existence during pregnancy

She's lucky in a way, at least if she was younger she'd be lucky given the cookie cutter look we've had pop up in the last 10-15 years, still might be lucky because all that stuff is just going to disintegrate in people's faces and other body parts over the next 10 years.

That and the illegal operations that wind up killing people.

[horizon-verizon]

@miloisthebestdog, in the comments.

First, I am talking about the books for the most part. If I am referring to the show, I will say it.

You either are making a bad faith argument on purpose or just...like that. Who said that Aegon (II) shouldn't behead people actively trying to crown different kings? Was that the argument I was making? If you truly think so, go back and reread very carefully.

IF your issue is not terrible reading comprehension (which for your sake, I hope it is), then you are purposefully trying to redirect the issue at hand so you can defend the real thing being bashed here.

The real thing being bashed here is the double standards made for Rhaenyra versus Aegon (II)'s actions not as their characters themselves or their specific characters but how men vs women's actions are interpreted and told as inherently different when they perform exactly the same actions for the sole purpose of protecting their own seats of power. Rhaenyra and Aegon represent a bigger fish, a criticism to be made of readers (probably like you) AS WELL AS the patriarchal Westerosi society that makes a man's violent actions as "necessary" and even "natural", but when a woman does something similar--even to those who have to be eliminated like slavers, rapists, etc.--she's painted as "evil". These double standards reveal a clear preference for male leaders in many forms as long as they aren't disabled or have a certain look or have people actively plotting against them; women, though, will receive every sort of insult, criticism, etc for even attempting to just keep power that has been taken from her, even power granted--by all rights--legally, as Viserys named Rhaenyra his heir and that is how succession in Westeros works.

I must also remind you that the only "law(s)" are what monarchs declare. In general, no matter the station or rank of the noble house (royals are nobles, just the highest ranking ones and the ones usually making the final decisions for the entire state), the only person who makes official and legitimate decisions for the next leader of the house is the actual house leader...who also happens to be Viserys I of House Targaryen. He made a decision for his own house as well as the state, so Rhaenyra would also have been the head of House Targaryen. And for years we see he made no change or indication of hesitation enough for others to notice. To decide who will be the next lord/lady/monarch is entirely the current lord/lady/monarch's privilege and right--even after they die and others plot against the heir, that heir has the strongest claim....and why? Because they were the declared heir. That's how it works. Viserys absolutely knew rhaenyra had children who were not her gay, mainly absent husband's and we have a written moment where Viserys--again, head of the house and final authority--say to Jacaersdy that he will become the next monarch after Rhaeyra since they boy happened to be her oldest. Corlys as well would have known and accepted these 3 V boys. We can preach all we like about how bastards cannot inherit, but we go back in both real and Westerosi history--if you don't know, brush yourself up on it or look through my post HERE, HERE, HERE where I again provide a list and context--bastards certainly did inherit or they were eventually respected either through conquest or displays of strength and skill. this tells us two things: people have always had the choice and ability to accept/not accept bastards and they do so according to their own desires, will, and advantage AND bastardy is not a real thing but a legal thing made up to suit the current people's interests in whatever creative way they can take advantage of when it comes to public opinion about bastards through Faith's bogus narratives about it or else. While the boys are not Laenor's, they are very much "Velaryon" ALL by need & affection from Viserys and Corlys and their response to the societal uber restrictions on female autonomy/succession rights AND the problem of Laenor simply being unable to impregnate Rhaenyra. The same woman, who, unlike Aegon II, only slept with a total of 2 men we know of in the original story and 4 men in the show for her entire life. Her kids, can ride dragons and just have better moral characters & competencies than any of Alicent's children (Heleana is too socially restricted bc she is a woman on top of her seemingly just being one of those people happy to be there and being a mom, book or show. She is not "bad" but she certainly has not been "bred" or at least nudged to rule).

So if you wish to try to argue with me about "oh, what about the lords?! What about Westerosi law! Rhaenyra's sons are bastards! Rhaenyra is a slut and endangered Westeros/House Targaryen", Don't say I haven't told you what is up here. Up to you to read the links, not my problem.

Aegon II did NOTHING for the realm but execute the smallfolk who were claiming for rights (Gaemon Palehair’s court) and wasting the crown money to build ridiculous and goofy ass golden statues of his brothers AMIDST THE WAR.

No arguments here. I'm assuming that you're responding to this POST. I remain annoyed that people find Rhaenyra to be the absolute worst thing that could have happened for Westeros because she had no plans of doing as Daenerys would have wanted to do for the smallfolk, and then we have most Targ men (and Westerosi lords, aristocratic patriarchy, hello?!) do fuck all for these people, yet are unquestioned as to the "right" to the throne.

[sunfyress]

so i see a lot of people talking about how the asoiaf fandom treats it’s female characters today and i figured that i would give my two cents on it (also, it gives me a reason to procrastinate writing my history essay lmao).

first off, read this post by @maesterleia because they explained my exact thoughts better than i ever could.

female characters are treated are with a double standard compared to male character -- which, unfortunately, is very typical in all fandoms but it seems to be taken to the extreme in asoiaf, a book series that does everything possible to make it’s characters as nuanced and shaded grey as possible. and while most of the male characters are analyzed with that in mind, every female character either must be a) a perfect woman that has never done or even think a wrong thing or b) an evil, scheming seductress who’s probably going to end up a worse war criminal than tywin lannister.

forget nuance, forget complexities of the human nature, forget being human -- women are not allowed to be flawed here and if they are, they must be a villain. it’s like @maesterleia wrote in their post “Why is a female character having flaws seen as detrimental? Because this mindset is rooted in the idea that only villainous female characters are allowed to have flaws. Cersei, for example, can be dissected and analyzed critically because she’s on the villainous side of the narrative. She’s complex and sympathetic, but still largely classified as a villain (generally), and therefore, she is--according to this mindset--allowed to be flawed.” 

it’s a ridiculous ideology and the cause of so many stupid and pointless fandom wars. the idea that a hero that happens to be female must be free of any flaws or arcs where they battle with their own morality when male characters like jon snow or robb stark is judged the same way makes no sense to me. 

why isn’t jon judged for the way he called myrcella “insipid” for smiling at robb and being an eight year old girl or how he was classist and insensitive to his other night watch’s recruits in the beginning of agot the same way sansa was mean and insensitive to arya? why isn’t robb talked about descending into madness or dictatorship after he ordered the execution of rickard stark the same way daenerys is talked about after she ordered the execution of the slave masters? why is tywin admired for being ambitious but cersei or margaery or arianne is called a scheming slut for having ambitions too? why isn’t ned shamed for taking a young theon away from his home and culture and forcing him to live as a hostage the same way catelyn is shamed for not being a mother to her husband’s bastard? hell, why is jaime considered to be morally superior than cersei, who yes is a very bad and terrible person, when he tried to kill an eight year old boy and still shows no remorse, why he is the good lannister and worthy of redemption but cersei is not?

the unfair and ridiculous double standard is of no use when it comes to analyzing the female characters and the only thing it does is caused the fandom to pit women against each other. the “sansa vs daenerys” debate or the “arya vs sansa” or the “elia vs lyanna” debate, all discussion full of misogyny -- deciding which character is better by saying who hasn’t done any wrong things (all of them have done some not-so-great things and all of have them done even more great things, give it a break guys) or who’s better by who’s more feminine or who’s less feminine (ridiculous AND sexist, especially considering it’s possible to be both feminine and masculine and not just one or the other). This also goes hand in hand with the idea that there is only allowed to be One female character that can be the hero in the series and all the others must be either be their enemy or something to prop them up -- all while most of the fandom can find it in themselves to have multiple complex male characters in their heart.

the whole ideology that male characters can have flaws and make mistake and still be considered capable of redemption, or capable of learning, or still a good person while such ideas can’t be afforded to female characters is fucking toxic and a great way to make a fandom unbearable to be in.

[bullworthdrabbles]

Women of Bullworth: Part 4 Lola Lombardi

The woman who through her infidelity drives the plot of chapter 3, she didn’t do that intentionally, Rockstar didn’t give her enough agency or character to do so. So once again she was just another Helen of Troy plotline, but hey at least she’s aware of it this time. I have a lot of complex feelings about Lola and they’re incredibly difficult for me to unpack because of the sheer amount of sexist oversight with her.

Jimmy, the player character, canonically also dates around, and no one really cares that he broke up established relationships or was seemingly dating all of these people without the other’s knowledge, consent, or ending the prior relationship. Yet, Lola does much of the same and suddenly she gets slut-shamed by the story in a way Jimmy is not. Hell, even many in the fandom give her hate for doing the same shit Jimmy does with no criticism. That’s a double standard if I ever saw one.

“But Cas,” I can hear you say, “Lola was in a committed relationship with Johnny”

Yeah, and Jimmy was in a committed relationship with Pinky (I assume at some point their relationship dissolved but Rockstar didn’t show or tell us it happened) before suddenly going around dating other girls. I also have to question Johnny here, this isn’t to blame Johnny. I definitely feel bad and have been in his shoes before, but after several times of being cheated on and lashing out at the wrong people, you would think he’d get sick enough to leave. Oh wait I know exactly why he didn’t, Johnny’s actions have the most sway over the plot in this chapter and the writers couldn’t be fucked to make their actual antagonist whip up any drama. So they once again used their free conflict device, a woman, to make some slapped together bargain bin Outsiders Prep vs. Greaser's plotline. Although the Greasers and the Preps hated each other already and literally anything could have caused a clique war between the two factions, but okay I guess.

Despite her being the catalyst for a lot of Chapter 3, she doesn’t really move the plot forward. We also have no idea as to why she cheats on Johnny other than “it’s exciting”. Take a shot every time she says “excited” or “exciting” in a double entendre and yet never explains why the things she is talking about are exciting to her. What does she even get out of dating around? Rockstar sure won’t tell you. What pisses me off here is that they could have tied her actions into the main plot easily by just saying she was doing it purposely to help Gary in the plan of taking over the school. They could have explained that she wanted to be the queen of the school and given her good motivation for wanting to be better than all the other girls in the school. But that involves seeing your female characters as people with their own goals, thoughts, and feelings. Rockstar, a company mostly made up of men during 2006, clearly didn’t view their character that way and that is deeply saddening.

What makes me the saddest is the fact that a lot of the fandom has a unique hatred of Lola despite her not being unique at all in the story. She’s just a “maneater” stereotype with no character beyond that. The hatred and narratives spun about her in the fandom very much feel misogynistic, I understand not liking people who cheat, but many folks have a unique disdain for her that makes no sense considering how flimsy the writing is. I hear the argument that what Lola was doing was somehow worse than all the other characters and frankly I have to laugh. She’s nothing more than a free conflict device, walking health pack, collectible item, and minor quest giver. Johnny has more of an effect on the plot and character development and that is why we care more about him and justify his actions more than Lola’s despite Lola not being as overly possessive, and getting as irrationally violent to others as Johnny.

Rockstar could have very easily tied Lola into the plot, given her some sort of motivation, and given her agency within her own story. But to do that, you have to view women as just as valid and valuable characters and men. That would have meant introducing nuance and they didn’t want that. They just wanted Lola to be a plot device, decoration, a reward for the player, and a glorified health pack. The fandom’s hatred of her clearly comes from a lot of misogyny and a bunch of double standards.

And what makes this worse is that I really like her and I could see the potential for a story. Little kernels of good ideas and concepts, going to waste because Rockstar can’t write a woman beyond a cliche stereotype. She’s honestly a favorite girl character of mine despite her lack of development because I see all the ways she could have been more interesting and developed. I see all the ways she could have made a commentary on sexism, poverty, and cis-hetero relationships in high school. I see a morally gray character that could have challenged many stereotypes and notions about what teenage girls go through and do, but will never fully be realized because the writers couldn’t be bothered to care about their own characters. So instead we got a weird amalgamation of several other teen girl fantasy characters and man-eater stereotypes to get this cardboard character with no agency or motivations outside of wanting to be “excited”. Queue me giving the biggest eye roll known to man.

Anyway, I think I’ve ranted long enough. In the next post, I will be talking about Mandy, and that will also be a pretty long post so strap yourself in this will be a long one.

[lonelier-version-of-you]

It might not be so annoying if Holby had used Max McGerry well as a character, that might make it feel like Jo Martin not getting much screentime as the Doctor was worthwhile for something, but... it didn't.

Like Abigail Tate before her, she never got to flourish professionally because the show seemed to think Henrik was the only person who had the "right" to run the hospital. And the show's treatment of any female character who "got in Henrik's way" was dreadful. Holby's narrative basically seemed to be that Henrik must be in charge at all times - unless he's running off, in which case he must be reassured "You're a great leader, Henrik!" no matter how many examples of why he is a terrible leader he himself gives - must be listened to and considered right at all times, and any woman who dares to want to be considered a superior or even an equal to him is a horrible bully and victimiser of poor little Henrik who needs to be put in her place, no matter how reasonable she's being or how much professional power she has.

And any woman who wants Henrik to not be misogynistic to her? Oh, how horrible of her to treat him in such a way, he's just so sad because of his tragic victimhood that he has to be misogynistic! /sarcasm

And then in Max's personal life... again, the double standards the show had for her vs. Henrik are just ridiculous. When Max does/says something bigoted, tons of story time is dedicated to making her suffer for it. When Henrik does/says something bigoted - as he very, very often did - the show was, much of the time, basically cheering him on. Max's transphobia was "punished" by having a "twist" where her son is trans, which is just an awful trope anyway - queer people do not exist as punishments for our parents, thank you very much. Henrik being constantly misogynistic and classist, however? Well, it was a lucky day if the show was doing something so basic as not cheering him on for being misogynistic and classist.

I'm not saying Max doing or saying bigoted things was okay or that she shouldn't have been held accountable for her transphobia. But why were months dedicated to making her face up to it, when we were lucky to get even the occasional one-off story for Henrik to face up to his bigotry?

And after all of that - okay, all of that and also the Guy Self romance storyline and a potential relationship with Ric that never went anywhere - basically nothing ever seemed to be done with Max again. She became friends with Ange which was nice, but that was about it. Every other storyline that had anything to do with her really either ended up being, or was from the start, primarily about Louis when he was not nearly as interesting as her.

I just hate that Holby basically entirely wasted a character who had so much potential and I hate the thought that if they hadn't, we might have had more of Jo Martin's Doctor - I hate it because it would have been brilliant to see more of her in DW and we didn't get to. Sigh.

Speaking of Doctor Who, it's so frustrating to think that maybe if it weren't for Holby we could have had more of Jo Martin's Doctor.

I mean, obviously I know there was other stuff like COVID that may have got in the way of possibly giving her more screentime, but still.

[lilisouless]

The grishaverse´s best female relationship and how gender roles play a part on them.

Most group dynamics with only two girls, normaly have a tomboy and a girly girl/woman in order to set up how they are diferent. There is nothing wrong with this dynamics if done well (like anything else in writting) , but is notable that this is using gender roles as defining the characters (she is girly, she diferenciates from her because she is not) and setting them as oposites, rarely there is a third girl since this dynamic is mostly used as "there is only two type of women" narrative.

In the case of Six of Crows, the desition of having only two girls is probably not made with this distinction in mind: the author wanted three romantic storylines with six characters , but since she also wanted one of them to be a same sex couple, then the female-male radio was not going to be equal, and in this case she decided to make a male mayority (the oposite would happen later in the Nikolai Duology)

Let´s see it for a second how this compared with the original grisha trilogy (yes, me again praising Bardugo by critizing Bardugo)

Leigh doesn't write a lot of tomboy characters, the only one i can think is Tammar (yes, Hanne exist but i am not sure if i should be talking about them as "girl" with all that obvious trans coding) that could also be a factor. So, there are not a lot of girly girl/tomboy comparissions,but this doesn't mean gender roles doesn't make an impact in female relationships

There are a few ,important woman/woman dynamics: Genya and Alina is a dynamic that is still in the dark for me, i haven't finished S&S not read R&R , so i would rather keep them out of this, but as long as i got, they are not an equal relationship and neither are Tammar/Alina since most of the dialog is bringing Alina up, Tammar only had a couple of lines about herself .The other is Zoya and Alina and is what normally happens when you put two femenine women together: The virgin/whore complex

warning,warningwarning this may not be friendly to Alina fans warningwarningwarning skip this skip this

Alina is the inocent ,virginal "just like you" girl, but at the same time is "not like other girls" and Zoya is presented as the bitch, the sexually active, those other girls Alina can't stand.

Alina deep inside, is just as bitchy as Zoya , the only diference being that Zoya is more aware of this and actually voices it while Alina keeps it to herself.

Leigh eventually would realize the potential in Zoya, or maybe she planned it since early but managed to save Zoya and only the first book is where she is unlikeable and the designated target so the viewer could spill her internalized misoginy without feeling guilty. But even if Zoya gets most fleshed out in the second book (when by accident, is shown how she is actually more put together than Alina) they are still against each other: because Zoya becomes phisically involved with Mal , she is placed as the wrong choice while Alina is the right one. Compare it with the opposition of Mal/Nikolai where Nikolai is possed as a tempting rebound (yes, he is too good to be the rebound but that´s how the book makes him to be) and a good, even better option as Mal, but Zoya is made to be Mal´s terrible mistake. Yes, Alina is the narrator therefore we see this since her perspective but the double standard is still there. (see Anne with an E for an example where this doesn't happens as Gilbert is not shown in the wrong for dating Winifred instead of Anne)

Zoya and Alina´s conflict only gets resolved when Zoya is the one who becomes nicer and (like every other woman on this series) beggins to adore the floor Alina steps on.

In an ironic note, Leigh would eventually realize she liked Zoya better ,she is a character that was rescued but the point here is: this is not a mutual relationship, Zoya is the one that must prove she is a better person that she let on and Zoya is the one that has to realize Alina is amazing.

I could go on for a lot, but you people don't have the whole day, the point is this: Not all female relationships have to be compelling , rivaldry exist, BUT when gender roles play into said relationship you have to be carefull ,because you, accidentaly or not, may be saying that there is one type of woman superior to another one. Zoya/Alina is NOT the worst dynamic, in fact is almost almost out of this problem, but almost is not enought. In this case,Alina=the inocent and virginal girl is placed as superior as Zoya=the sexualy active girl,despite the author´s better eforts not to.

Now : Six of Crows

Before getting to the relationship you actually came to see, i´ll point out that Bardugo DID wrote a relationship based on contrast femenine vs Masculine traits, but she did it with two guys,just to note the author is no stranger to this dictonomy

Now, the point of this: instead of being girly girl and Tomboy , both Inej and Nina are presented as femenine.

So, you are probably right now yelling for what i promised in the title , so now i´ll get back to Inej and Nina, unfortunately i am better talking about things i don't like and the ones i do , so this could be disapointingly short:

Reminder,they are both femenine in very very diferent ways.

-Inej is more quiet, wise ,graceful,and overall softer

-Nina is more loud, sexually open,charming, childish and overall more extroverted

They have some traits that can be oposite ,yet still quite femenine. And the most important part: none of them is presented as superior to the other.

Like i said, not ALL female relationships must be perfect and sweet, conflict is interesting but in this case there wouldn't make sense for them to be in conflict. Their beliefs and goals clashes with Kaz and Matthias , not with each other. And of course they don't fight about boys because there is absolutely no need for that,not fight for dominance.

Unlike the Zoya and Alina example above , Nina is not somehow seen as inferior than Inej.Sure Nina is the flirty one that uses her sex appeal to her advantage and Inej is (with very good reason) adverse to sex. Inej doesn't look down at Nina, she encourages to be herself unshamelessly , since she knows what is like to be stripped from will and is happy to see how free spirited her friend is, also can't tolerate Matthias calling her "too much" . Nina is someone with a very diferent temperament from her and admires her,without actually trying to be like her.

And in return, Nina doesn't look Alina down for being diferent for her, for her more calm character, she actually shows to be grateful to having Inej around with her sweet but blunt honesty.In fact, with all Nina´s good self steem, she still feels that Inej "saved her" and her final speech makes you think Nina thinls she much say thank you to Inej for "tolerate her" even if Inej actually feels just as grateful for having her.

The way they express their feminity not only compliment each other, this is something they both consider "saved her life" Nina for having someone to listen to her and Inej for having someone to light her up.

As a bonus,in comparission to , to say ,Alina with Genya or Tammar, none of them is reduced to be the other girl´s best friend. They both have their storylines and goals, can exist without each other, they just don't want to.

With dynamics like Inej and Nina is shown that there are more than one way to handle gender expressions, and this doesn't mean one personality traits are better than the other, they are just diferent people.

Now, let´s adress when the reader is probably thinking: there are two female vs female confrontations in the book.

Tante Heleen is femenine as well, she wears expensive jewellry , clothing and make up. But Heleen´s apareance is more reminicent of a privileged rich woman , and she harms and abuses girls for a living and her looks are not to punish her for being femenine, but for gaining all those expensive items by the horrible things she does to other women, in contrast, Inej wants money to help and liberate sex slaves.

Then there is Dunyasha, who has a more polished look than Inej, with white and gold elegant clothing. As Inej´s speech is worth something, i don't have to say a lot to remind people this was a privileged vs opressed conflict and gender traits doesn't really play on that much.

In conclussion, Nina and Inej´s relationship is aspirational, it feels real because there is a mutual understanding and it helps expand the traditional writing of female dynamics and how the gender roles play into it in an actually positive way.

[gayregis]

in reference to the previous post.... if you are going to go by the strict canon of the books to assess a character’s behavior...

then you can’t hate yennefer for her canon behavior if you do not hate geralt and dandelion for their canon behavior. it’s hypocritical and shows a double standard of engaging with female vs male characters. saying i don’t like yennefer, yennefer is abusive, look at exhibits A, B, and C from the books, she made a r*pey commend towards geralt in the last wish, threw strawberry preserves at geralt, analyzed ciri’s body in a grotesque manner... alright! i will agree with you.

but then you go on to absolutely love geralt and dandelion as characters, completely ignoring their canon horrible behavior from the books, geralt sleeping with barely-of-age girls including his best friend’s little sister, and dandelion cracking misogynistic jokes and statements perhaps every short story or book...

you don’t get to hammer yennefer for the horrible things she does in canon if you won’t equally address the guys for their horrible things, too. either you hate them all for the poor decisions of the author or you acknowledge the poor decisions that do not make up their entire characters.

a side note to this of course is that they’re JUST fictional characters, and you don’t have to like or dislike any character for anything they do — and i think especially it’s important to acknowledge how some characters’ horrible canon behaviors (such as yennefer and the other sorceresses being kind of obsessed with femininity, geralt and dandelion cheating on their girlfriends practically every single page) can be triggering to readers and make them not want to interact with that character at all, some behaviors are more specific to a reader’s life than others are. that’s completely fair; however, if you’re literally just saying “YENNEFER IS A HORRIBLE PERSON because of her HORRIBLE ACTIONS in canon, we must look at what is written in the BOOKS!...” without any other context, and then gush about geralt and dandelion being so sweet and lovely together, yeah nah... that’s a double standard for treating female and male characters. if you say that “geralt and dandelion just suffered from being written by an author who put misogyny into their mouths and actions, it’s a result of author bias, it’s not actually their characters,” then why not extend that same critical thinking and mercy to yennefer? to all of the characters? make it make sense.

treat the characters equally, don’t fail to acknowledge the shitty things your faves have done in canon just because they’re your gay ship!

[queenaryastark]

Anti-Arya Discourse That Needs to End

and honestly never should have started to begin with:

Arya couldn’t have survived what Sansa survived:The insistence that Arya couldn’t have survived as a highborn, political prisoner of the Lannisters has always been not only inaccurate but completely ridiculous given her arc in ACOK where she is a prisoner of war with none of the protection that a highborn hostage would receive. She could have been killed by anyone with the wrong word or the wrong look or just because a random Lannister guard felt like using her for target practice. She literally endures hard labor and beatings and has to conform her behavior and her speech in order to stay alive. Saying she couldn’t survive what Sansa survived completely discounts what she endured and survived in canon.

Arya is too far gone and could never have a normal life after everything she’s done: It’s funny how no one ever says that Jon or Tyrion or Jaime or any other male character who has killed to survive or because it will benefit their cause are too far gone to have a normal life at the end of the series. Death and murder are very common in ASOIAF. Nearly every character has killed another either by deed or word. Ned Stark, a heroic figure, beings the book by killing a traumatized man who is telling the truth about the Others. Not only is that man far from the first he has executed, but he has killed countless men whose names he will never know in battle and he went home afterward to have a happy family life. The people Arya kill are either in self-defense or because they are criminals who have committed specific crimes and are getting away with it. She isn’t killing random commoners who have done her no other wrong than being forced onto a battlefield by theirmasterlord or people who want to come south to safety but are being stopped byborder patrolthe Night’s Watch. So to say that while male murderers with far higher body counts can and should end the series with happy lives and families, but Arya can’t stinks of double standard. 

Arya wasn’t bullied by her sister or gave as good as she got.This is such an easily refutable argument. All it takes is reading their chapters. It’s clear as day and not even debatable that Sansa bullies Arya and Arya does not bully Sansa. Believing otherwise requires completely ignoring the books in favor of fanon. Not only is this an argument that needs to end because of the constant cycle of Arya vs Sansa discourse, but because refusing to acknowledge that Sansa canonically bullied Arya means refusing to acknowledge hugely important aspects of both of their characters. Refusing to see that Sansa is an irrefutable and unrepentant bully is to strip away her complexity. Refusing to believe that Arya was the victim of bullying is to strip her of key aspects of her character that are direct results of being bullied by Sansa, Jeyne, Septa Mordane, and even her mother. Both of the characters are complex and Sansa bullying Arya (can’t say it clearly or often enough) is part of that. Saying Sansa didn’t bully Arya is the same as saying Ned’s head was never cut off or Cersei and Jaime never had sex. It’s the denial of a concrete part of this story.

Arya doesn’t want a position of power or leadership.Again, this is something that can be easily refuted with the books. We know of some of Arya’s dreams from AGOT: "Can I be a king's councillor and build castles and become the High Septon?" A king’s councillor and High Septon are indisputably positions of power, leadership, and political influence. Note that she doesn’t ask if she can be a knight, a profession she mentions Bran wants. She goes straight to two leadership roles and a possible profession as an architect. 

Arya is all about killing and vengeance.Another one of those “Read the books!” arguments. Arya’s primary drive is reuniting with her surviving family with wanting specific criminals to meet with justice being a secondary or even tertiary motivation. 

Arya is a misogynist. Out of all the characters, Arya is honestly one of the last who can be accused of hating women. She literally has canonically positive relationships with a variety of different female characters (Weasel, Lady Smallwood, Brea, Talea, Merry and her employees, Daena, etc). We know she loves and admires her mother, Catelyn and her heroes are women, Nymeria of Ny Sar and Wenda the White Fawn. She even defends Cersei’s right to be represented in her childrens’ heraldry since “The woman is important too!” Given the kind of culture being depicted in the series, it’s strange that Arya doesn’t have more female companions earlier in the books (daughters of her father’s vassals). But that oversight in the writing doesn’t support the idea that she hates or doesn’t respect women.

It’s impossible to say you’re not anti-Arya if you’re pushing any of these inaccuracies. 

[zorkaya-moved]

🔥🔥 let the salt spill

@queensconquest

Unpopular opinions = Salt opinions, my pals. I’ll be treating these as salt opinions because I can’t find the meme, but yeah, consider those two being the same thing. 

I will sound like a hypocrite here and I’ll explain why later, but the gender still screams loudly of how strong a character is and what he/she/they are allowed to do or what power level is “allowed” by the roleplaying community, ESPECIALLY when it comes to Original Characters. Tumblr RPC continues to pressure the unfair standards on everyone when we’re roleplaying. The double standards when it comes to Female vs. Male muses are distinctly showing off itself even on the subconscious level every day if I am honest. I’m guilty of that as well, don’t get me wrong, I’m not a white, pure bunny on this road. 

There are still a lot of things that go with double standards - the power levels are the same thing. The problem that lies with my personal experience along with the reason why my anon option is fully closed is that no matter how much I’m explaining in vivid, specific details where my female character’s experience and powers are coming from - I was getting BASHED for it hard before. That’s why there are countless posts underlying and trying to explain why my muse has the powers and why you do not fuck with her. But noOoOOOoOOoOo, my muse is not allowed with all her powers to be stronger than a male counterpart that has the exact same capabilities. It is very damn unfair that a male muse that I could have will not need the same explanations because people just take it, but a female muse has to have every single little thing written down, recorded, and everything or then she’s being called, well, the all-time favorite “Mary Sue.” And it doesn’t matter if the person has flaws written right there and if the person clearly states that the character is not perfect. But does some butthurt person understand that? Not really. It’s quite irritating because it is unfair and it makes me bitter, however, I am also bitter at myself for letting such things affect me. 

Why was I saying that I was going to be hypocritical about this? I repress my muse a lot, because I’m personally always trying to write my muses, even if they are very powerful, without offending another mun. The problem currently is that I’ve been so devastated by the Tumblr RP experience is that no matter how much I want to write my muse (currently Zarina), I have to hold back because I feel like at any point I’ll even speak or even joke that my muse could kick another muse’s FOR A REASON (the simplest: no training individual vs. trained/skilled individual), I’m going to be blasted with ‘She cannot do that’ or any other insults I’ve been thrown at via anon before, because as much as I love to say ‘fuck anons,’ the previous experience of being basically bullied was not a fun experience that lets you trust people, you know. 

And you know why? Because as much as I am trying to write details, those details can easily be ignored since it becomes another problem: If you write too many details, people will not read it. But if you do not have those details, people will scream powerplay and ‘you didn’t explain shit.’ Or just downright ignore your writing attempts with them because female original characters cannot have it easy. 

[nobodyfamousposts]

You know I was watching a video by overly sarcastic productions and I’m pretty sure that from that definition Adrien is a Mary Sue. The episode was Trope Talks: Mary Sues.

Pretty much Adrien is this to a T.

I hear people throwing the term around a lot and complaining about the term being thrown around a lot but I think what ends up being missed is what actually constitutes a Mary Sue in the first place.

A Mary Sue is not a character who is overpowered or “too strong” like the complaints about Captain Marvel. If that was true, then literally every anime protagonist or super hero that exists is a Mary Sue by default. Every one. Ever.

Nor is it someone with a tragic backstory like Batman or any other long line of superheroes or anime protagonists. Whether it’s dead parents, a past trauma, abuse, bullying, or just a conga line of horrible circumstances, plenty of characters have had bad things happen to them. That’s kind of part of life and what makes them relatable and sympathetic.

It’s not even someone who is loved by many people. Or is a good judge of character. Or whom manages to talk someone into a heel-face turn. Regardless of what claims may come, these are not what make a character a Mary Sue.

What makes a Mary Sue—the central core aspect of what makes a character problematic all boils down to how the narrative itself treats the character.

The narrative is generally indicative of the author’s own preferences or leanings. We see it all the time with stories that create straw characters to symbolize people the author doesn’t like or things the author doesn’t agree with in order to belittle it. The opposite can just as easily occur where a character or position is hyped up to look better or promote what the author wants promoted.

Those previously mentioned tropes are a sign of that. For a Mary Sue, everything from powers to past traumas to relationships are all just “things“ for the character to have. Whether to emphasize their importance or to highlight their greatness. While they’re not necessarily what automatically makes a character a Mary Sue, they are often utilized as tools by the narrative for the sake of propping the character that is a Sue. That’s why they’re easy to pick out and attribute to a Mary Sue as well as used to claim characters are Sues. Because they are tools used to try to make people support a character instead of actually making a character people can like and WANT to support.

A Mary Sue is given powers for the sake of making the character awesome without the character actually doing anything to be awesome. A Mary Sue is is given a tragic backstory for the sake of making the character sympathetic without the character actually doing anything to warrant sympathy. A Mary Sue is given relationships for the sake of being the center of attention and adoration by other characters to shell how awesome they are without having to do anything to show how or why anyone would or should actually like them. Any relationships a Mary Sue has are NOT legitimate connections between two or more people, they’re just labels to slap on the Mary Sue to make the character seem more relevant and important.

Ultimately, a Mary Sue supplants the story for the sake of having this character BE the story, and it’s a major reason why they are despised in most fandoms. A reason that, sad to say, was actually deserved in the early days of fan works.

That said…

Adrien IS a prime example of a Mary Sue because of the way the narrative is going out of its way to portray him. Even the creator has come out and said he is “perfect” and that any flaw he could have isn’t actually on him so much as an indication of something being wrong with the world around him. Anything bad that happens, even as a direct result of that character’s own actions, is portrayed as being the fault of anyone and everyone else but that character, in this case Adrien. That, RIGHT THERE is pretty much the epitome of what a Mary Sue IS.

Some call it an ego trip. Some call it a power fantasy. Many consider it as a sort of reality warper. It’s ultimately the case when the story is being turned in on itself to make this character look good without the character actually DOING anything to BE good and even when the character is specifically doing things that AREN’T good.

This is why Bella Swan from Twilight is a certifiable Mary Sue.

This is why it can be argued that Rey from Star Wars is a Mary Sue.

This is why Anita Blake is definitely a Mary Sue.

And this is what separates Adrien from Marinette. And Adrien from pretty much everyone else in the series.

It’s not that he has superpowers—if anything, I think he got cheated in the powers department, all things considered. No, it’s the way he doesn’t seem to take those powers or the responsibilities that come with them seriously. Given that he has had THREE instances already in which he threw a major fit in the middle of an akuma battle because he wasn’t happy about something only for him to be shown as being RIGHT to do so even to the detriment of his partner, his Miraculous, and ultimately all of Paris.

It’s not that he has a missing mom and a neglectful dad, it’s how the narrative keeps emphasizing how sad Adrien is without actually DOING anything with it so they can milk the “Sadrien” angle. Because let’s face it, seeing Adrien looking sad sells.

It’s not that he has multiple girls who like him. I mean, he’s a model, and is rich and famous. I’d be surprised if he didn’t have multiple girls who were into him.

No, it’s in the over the top emphasis of his supposed greatness. It’s in this consistent impression the narrative is giving that the female lead we are supposed to be rooting for—whom we all KNOW has gone well out of her way to do things for him, try to make him happy even to her own detriment, and has struggled more than any rational person should be willing to just to try confessing to the guy is somehow the one side of the love square that “isn’t trying hard enough”.

It’s in the way he is always portrayed as being the “moral voice” and the one in the right in any situation regardless of how little he’s involved or even understands what’s going on. Whether it was lecturing people on how to deal with a bully or for being happy when their bully was leaving (when he was never actually a target of that bully). Or lecturing people on how to deal with a liar (when again, he wasn’t the one being played or threatened). Or threatening to quit when Paris was flooded by an akuma all because he wasn’t being told secrets that he wasn’t showing he was ready to know and that his tantrum CERTAINLY didn’t show he was ready or mature enough for.

It’s in the back and forth on whether he is supposed to be the epitome of “perfection” and the wise person everyone should listen to only to suddenly be made out as the innocent victim of everyone else when his less than noble or heroic behaviors are pointed out in order to excuse or justify his behaviors. (I call it the Standard Adrien Defense and it follows this trend each time.)

It’s in the clear and blatant double standard between what Adrien/Chat is allowed to do and get away with vs what is allowed from anyone else. It’s in the way that Adrien can do things that anyone can agree is wrong without getting so much as a lecture but anyone else in his place will—and have been raked over the coals by the same narrative that gives him the equivalent of a pat on the head and a cookie.

It’s in the way he’s just…there. He has the plot connections. He has the relevance. He has the position of being at the center of quite literally everything from the villain’s plans and motivations to the adoration of the female lead…and he does NOTHING with any of it.

And it’s in the way that no matter what he does or what side he takes, the narrative always ALWAYS frames him as being the one in the right when there’s a conflict, the one to sympathize with when he and another character are hurt, and the one we as the audience are supposed to agree with and support more in any situation.

And the truly sad thing is that Adrien as a character has potential. From a humorous character to a serious one, from the wise and introspective person to the wide-eyed innocent being thrown into the hero job, there was SO MUCH that could have been done with his character. Instead, Adrien is reactionary. Anything involving him is less a matter of what he personally is doing and more about what is being done to or for him. He has no dreams or aspirations other than being with the main female character, has no interests to speak of, and his other relationships actually seem pretty lacking—again, based less on what HE’S doing and more on what other people are doing to and/or for HIM. He somehow has a wide-ranging impact without actually taking action.

As it stands, Canon Adrien is about as real as the cardboard cutout or wax statue of him. To the point he might as well be either for all that he actually seems to accomplish. Because nothing annoys fans or creates salt quite like wasted potential, and that’s all canon Adrien is at this point.

That’s why Fandom Adrien is awesome, whether he’s portrayed as being dense as a brick, showing a polite exterior while internally screaming, acting like a massive dork, or just acting passive aggressive in how he deals with his father and people like Chloe or Lila. Because however way he’s being made to deal with the crazy situations the fans put him in, he’s at least doing SOMETHING besides standing there and looking pretty for people to fawn/fight over.

Strangely enough, this may be the first case I’ve seen where fans have taken a Mary Sue and made him a real character rather than the other way around.