#they decide to be more vocal about how much they loathe lgbtq+ having as many rights as them
Explore tagged Tumblr posts
Text
every morning i wake up to more random middle aged white men debating on tv about whether i deserve to marry a woman
#its all so goddamn backwards#its like. nothings changed! nothings ever going to get better! the fear will never leave! you'll get angrier every day!#ridiculous system ran by deadbeats who instead of focusing on doing something about the amount of#femicides occurring almost daily at this point#they decide to be more vocal about how much they loathe lgbtq+ having as many rights as them#i will delete this. im just so very hopeless right now. whatever itll pass
6 notes
·
View notes
Text
More Female Characters to Avoid in Your Writing
A long while back, I typed up some posts ranting about characters and tropes I disliked. These were Male and Female Characters to Avoid in Your Writing, and they’ve become my most popular posts yet. Recently, I was struck by some topical inspiration, and decided it was time for a sequel!
One again, these are my personal, subjective opinions! No one dictates your writing or portrayals but you, and no one can or should decide how you consume fiction. Also, as you may notice, I actually like most of the ladies below; I just don’t like certain aspects of their portrayal.
Enjoy, and happy writing everybody!
1. The Daenerys (i.e. the spontaneous war criminal)
Image source
Who she is:
The formerly heroic Mother of Dragons, who randomly charbroiled a city full of innocent people.
Why it sucks:
I’m not even talking about this from a feminist standpoint, or how one of the most consistently heroic and powerful female characters took an abrupt and undignified backflip into the Dark Side. I’m speaking from a writer’s standpoint.
Regardless of whether you liked Daenerys, she was rivaled only by Jon and Brienne as the show’s most consistently heroic character From locking away her dragon children to ensure the safety of her subjects, to freeing countless enslaved citizens, she’s spent a decade proving herself to be an altruistic and noble figure. And then, in the final two episodes of the entire show, the writers dracarys-ed that shit.
For some comparison, just imagine how ridiculous it would be if Jon Snow suddenly went batshit and started hacking up citizens because he was feeling stressed. That’s about as plausible as Dany’s sudden passion for genocide.
And for the record, I’m not opposed to Daenerys becoming Mad Queen. If it was done properly. This would mean informing the actress far in advance so she could modify her portrayal accordingly (which they didn’t), and building up to it through foreshadowing and established attributes. Not at the last fucking minute.
Honestly, the only characters who remained narratively consistent to the very end are Drogon and Ghost, who are both precious babies who did nothing wrong.
How to avoid her:
Decide as early as possible where a character arc is going. Contrary to what Game of Thrones seems to believe, the character arc is important. It should have a beginning, challenges that incite development, and a satisfying conclusion that showcases how a character has changed and evolved.
And if you didn’t decide early? You still have to come up with a conclusion that makes sense for your character, and not slap on the most unexpected ending possible in the name of Subverting Expectations.
On that note? Subverting expectations isn’t always a good thing, and a reader predicting your ending isn’t the worst possible outcome. Focus on telling a good story.
2. The Rayon (i.e. the transgender stereotype)
Who she is:
A transgender woman (portrayed by the male, cisgender Jared Leto) dying slowly of AIDS in Dallas Buyer’s Club. Her role in the narrative is to teach the supposedly heterosexual (more on that later) main character that queer people are human beings.
Why it sucks:
Rayon is many things in Buyer’s Club, and most are firmly rooted in stereotypes. She’s a sassy, flirtatious, clothing-obsessed, self-loathing, drug-addicted prostitute. She’s hypersexual, but never treated as romantically desirable. She’s tragic, but also one of the few consistently comedic characters in an otherwise bleak film.
It’s her job to gently goad the main character into treating her with basic respect, but he never quite gets there. He refers to her with male pronouns throughout the entire film, and never acknowledges her as a woman. At one point, he aims a gun at her genitals and offers her a “sex change operation.” Which, is supposed to be comedic.
This isn’t to say that there are no sassy, flirtatious, clothing-obsessed, self-loathing, drug-addicted transgender sex workers, nor is there anything wrong with “stereotypical” trans people. It isn’t the job of the marginalized to dispel stereotypes. And if real trans people had created and portrayed Rayon, she could have been a realistic, dynamic, and compelling character.
And I say “created” because Rayon is strictly fictional. Outside of this film, she didn’t exist.
“Well, at least they tried to offer representation!” you protest. “What else was it supposed to be about? A straight dude in the AIDS epidemic?”
Well, no. Though the main character, Ron Woodroof, is presented to us as a violently homophobic, transphobic, womanizing asshole, the real Woodroof was, by all accounts, kind-hearted, open-minded, and bisexual.
What could have been a powerful story of a queer man defying his diagnosis, living joyfully and meaningfully, and helping to prolong the lives of countless AIDS-sufferers, was instead watered down to a story of a straight, pugnacious asshole and his stereotypical, long-suffering, transgender sidekick who dies to Teach Him Compassion.
How to avoid her:
Read books by trans people. Consume media they create or endorse.
List of youtube channels created by trans people here, and 21 books for trans awareness month here.
Put out a special call for transgender beta readers to point out mistakes, misconceptions, and offer tips on an authentic portrayal.
Garner insight into their perspective and experiences, and give them personalities outside of being trans.
3. The Piper Chapman (i.e. the unflavored oatmeal)
GIF source
Who she is:
The “protagonist” of Orange is the New Black, and its least compelling character. She and Larry are the sort of people who would ask me for a threesome on Tinder.
Why it sucks:
Piper’s hook is that she’s a privileged, affluent white woman who unjustly finds herself in prison for -- well, for crimes she committed. But expected to get away with, because, Privilege.
This isn’t to say Piper is boring. She’s far from likable, but being likable and being boring aren’t the same thing. In another series, watching a relatively cushioned, naive, bourgeoisie woman string along various significant others, thoughtlessly incite violence, and navigate an unfamiliar prison setting would make for thought-provoking and hilarious satire.
But when compared to her charismatic supporting cast, with richly developed backstories, motivations, and relationships, she’s painfully bland. I would much rather watch a series centered around Suzanne, Nikki, Taystee, Poussey, or even Pennsatucky. They’re just more developed, opulent, enjoyable characters.
It could be argued that Piper is the viewpoint character, whom the audience is supposed to relate to. But I can assert that I don’t relate to Piper. At all. Her lack of empathy towards others -- such as leaving Alex after the death of her mother, cheating on her fiance, and inadvertently starting a *ahem* white power gang -- alienated me to her.
Which might not be such a bad thing, but Piper is (supposedly) the protagonist. We don’t need to like her, but we should probably be able to relate to her.
Or maybe I’m just jealous that hot women aren’t inexplicably fighting over me.
How to avoid her:
Your protagonist doesn’t have to be the most likable character in your story. They don’t even necessarily have to be the most interesting character in your story. And certainly not the most morally good, powerful, or knowledgeable. But the viewpoint character is the character who we spend the most time with, and from whose eyes we perceive the story. It’s important that we understand and relate to them emotionally.
Look at examples like BoJack Horseman, Holden Caulfield, Tony Soprano, Beatrix from Kill Bill, Mavis from Young Adult, Nadia from Russian Doll. All are complex characters, with varying degrees of moral ambiguity. Yet we can empathize with them emotionally and identify with them. Even if we’ve never been in their situation, we see where they’re coming from.
4. The Charlie (i.e. the dead lesbian)
Who she is:
One of the few recurring openly queer characters in the incredibly long-running Supernatural. A lesbian who’s journey was (sort of) brought to an end when she was killed and dumped in a bathtub to incite drama.
Why it sucks:
I love Supernatural but it can be remarkably tone deaf towards queer people, women, and marginalized groups. Which, probably merits fixing, considering its following is largely comprised of queer people, women, and marginalized groups.
I probably shouldn’t have to explain why killing off women and queer people for drama is Bad, but I’ll delve into its history a little: from what I’ve read, censorship laws of the twentieth century forbade the portrayal of queer people unless they were ultimately killed or “reformed.” This is why so much LGBTQ+ fiction is essentially gay tragedy porn, and why gays are so frequently buried to aid in the emotional narrative of their straight counterparts.
That’s not to say queer people can never be killed off. I might not have an issue with Charlie’s death (especially in a show as violent as Supernatural), if she weren’t the only openly queer character at the time.
And there’s plenty of room for representation! If Dean was openly bisexual, if angels were vocally confirmed to be nonbinary, and if there were more recurring, respectfully portrayed female and sapphic characters, Charlie’s death might not feel like such as slap in the face. But as it is, it feels like a contribution to an ugly pattern.
In fairness, Supernatural has since improved in its portrayal of queer people: two gay male hunters were introduced and given a happy ending, an alternate universe version of Charlie was introduced to the cast, and God is portrayed as a bisexual man.
Yes. All of that happened. You have to see it to understand.
How to avoid her:
Educate yourself on the history of censorship in the LGBTQ+ community, as well as hate crimes and decreased life expectancy. Make sure you aren’t contributing to the suffering of queer people.
If you have only one confirmed queer character in the midst of a very large cast, I’m inclined to think you need more. You could say I’m BI-ased on the matter, though.
Look up “fridging,” and think about how many stories use the death of female characters to incite drama for men.
5. The Allison (i.e. the reformed feminine)
GIF source
Who she is:
She’s one of the most interesting members of the Breakfast Club, and that’s saying something. A self-proclaimed compulsive liar who will “do anything sexual” with or without the promise of a million dollars (as well as one of the most quotable characters in the film) she demonstrates the emotional pain and complexity that’s often ignored or shrugged off as teen angst.
And then she gets a makeover and a hot boyfriend, and suddenly everything’s better.
Why it sucks:
It would be one thing if Allison’s problem was that she didn’t feel pretty or desirable. But she never (to my recollection) offers any indication of that, and that’s part of what makes her such a refreshing portrayal of insecurity. She’s emotionally neglected by her parents, and that is appropriately treated as devastating.
It’s a complex and beautifully-portrayed problem that deserved far more than such a superficial, slapped-on solution.
Similarly, there’s no reason why Allison is paired up with the jock at the end of the film. Neither showed any romantic interest in one another until her unnecessary makeover.
A much better ending to her arc would be her finding acceptance among her newfound friends, and finally garner the recognition and acknowledgement she never got from her parents.
I was torn between using Allison for this example, or Sandy’s makeover from Grease. In both, girls are encouraged to alter their appearances to solve plot-related problems. And both were “fixed” to conform to some standard of femininity or feminine sexuality that they didn’t meet before.
How to avoid her:
If a character feels the need to change their appearance to accommodate others or be respected, that should probably be treated as a negative thing.
Your character’s appearance can be a good tool to represent emotional changes. If they alter their appearance, there should be a meaningful reason behind it -- outside of fitting into societal norms or garnering the approval of others.
A girl putting on makeup isn’t a groundbreaking plot point, and girls who don’t perform to standards of femininity aren’t broken or deficient. They don’t need “correcting.”
#writing#writing tips#writing advice#game of thrones#daenerys targaryen#jon snow#game of thrones spoilers#transphobia#orange is the new black#supernatural#fridging#homophobia#charlie bradbury#the breakfast club#grease#sexism
2K notes
·
View notes