Carmenere

mihawkes:

ACME is not a good resource for war assets.

I just snorted tea all over my keyboard :D

missl0nelyhearts:

flutiebear:

popculturetart:

flutiebear:

tessaviolet:

PREACH IT, JOSS.

And this is exactly what I dislike about Joss Whedon’s writing: He still considers “heroine” subordinate to “hero”; that is, a woman must adopt what society typically identifies masculine behaviors or thought processes in order to be considered compellingly strong. She must suppress her treacherous emotions or her fears in order to get the job done — or, in the case of Black Widow, she’s allowed to turn her fear into a weapon to manipulate the men who underestimate her. (And if she doesn’t suppress her emotions, then she destined to be a victim, like Penny in Dr. Horrible.)

And while that is one way of writing a strong female character, it’s not the only way, or even the best way. Inherently it’s a man’s idealization of what female strength is — it’s essentially male strength mapped onto a female form — and thus Whedon’s much-lauded “strong female characters” all end up looking and sounding and acting very much like men as a result. There’s a reason so many men love Joss Whedon’s work; his women are essentially men with boobs, and I’ll even go so far as to say that Whedon’s work reinforces the patriarchal ideal.

As revolutionary as Buffy was when it first came on, times have changed, but Whedon’s writing hasn’t. He still thinks “heroine” is synonymous with second-class character, or with someone that needs saving. But you can be a strong woman, a strong heroine, without needing to be a woman playing by a man’s rules.

Case in point: Isabela, from Dragon Age 2. If only more female characters were as self-empowered and liberated as she, I think we’d have a much healthier generation of young girls as a result. Forget Buffy. Give me a pirate with some Antivan boots every single time.

This is also a very valid and interesting take. I think I tend to say hero instead of heroine in the same way that some women prefer to be female actors instead of actresses. The binary can be harmful. And “heroines” are absolutely seen as lesser than heroes. Oftentimes in order to be seen as strong, female characters are Xena-fied, but that isn’t always the way to go. And I think you can still have a female “hero” without Xena-fying her. I think Buffy manages to retain a lot of her femininity, though you’re absolutely right about her emotional suppression.

But I also think that Joss Whedon has given us characters that aren’t superpowered or masculine but are still very strong, i.e. Fred Burkle from Angel and Inara Serra from Firefly. Inara is extremely feminine, and very in tune with her emotions. She is well-respected, and doesn’t let anyone just get away with treating her poorly. I think she shows a great strength in spirit, and while she knows how to wield a weapon, she doesn’t see it as something she has to do to prove her worth. She loves her dresses and fancy fabrics and pretty hair, but it doesn’t make her weak. 

Then again, there are different ways to fight the problematic associations of “heroine” as lesser than “hero”. Some writers, women included, prefer to use gender-neutral language as a way to screw the binary. To them, women and men are both heroes, and there is no need for a term that distinguishes the gender. And by applying the term “hero” to female characters, they’re chipping away and the more masculine connotations of the word. And some want to reclaim “heroine” as something explicitly female, and just as valuable at that. I think it was you, Flutie, who sad that you make a point of telling coworkers to not call you “dude,” and I think it was also you who posted an article about reclaiming the term “gal”. I’ve fought with myself internally about this issue a lot. When pledging for my co-ed fraternity, I had a semester-long mental debate over whether upon crossing I would take the title of Brother or Sister. Our pledge class, composed of ten women and one man, split pretty evenly in that regard. Several of the women chose to be Sisters, and several chose to be Brothers. The Sisters wanted to embrace and represent their femininity in a co-ed fraternity. I struggled with the decision for a long time, but finally decided to go by Brother as a way to chip at the gender binary, because that was what I was more comfortable with.

What I hands down agree with you on is the matter of Isabela. I can’t even begin to talk about how much that character helped me heal and grow and a person (that’s a long post I’ve been meaning to do for some time) but we absolutely need more Isabelas on television, in video games, in comics and books. Because that is a woman who is sexual for herself and not for men, who is aware of her faults but doesn’t let anyone else shame her for them, and who can own up to errors in judgment because she knows that they make her who she is. And because she is comfortable with the person that she is, she owns it all - her mistakes, her emotions, herself.

Reblogging for the excellent commentary. I never thought about it that way, using the word “hero” as a gender-neutral term. I’m not sure I buy it — as you predict, I have as much unease with using “hero” as an all-encompassing term as I do “dude”. Still, it’s an interesting take on the conversation, and one I hadn’t considered.

It’s interesting you bring up Inara, because if I had to choose, I’d say either she or Cordelia are as close as Whedon’s ever gotten to believable strong female characters. Both are “strong”, in that they are physically and mentally competent, emotionally resilient, and brave in the face of their fears; and both exhibit what our society considers typically “feminine” traits, such as intuitive genius or a tendency toward creative pursuits. (Note that I’m not saying these ARE feminine traits, in that they have a biological basis; only that this is just what the current paradigm associates as “feminine”.)

I don’t mindlessly hate Whedon’s writing—in fact, I’ve enjoyed his work quite a bit—but I do take issue with the reverence he’s afforded within the geek community, especially given the way he continues to write his women (to say nothing of his abysmal track record with POCs and minorities). What was once revolutionary in 1999 feels almost quaint in today’s media environment, and his character development, in my opinion, hasn’t evolved to keep up.

nothing in particular to add.  just watching all the pretty brains.

:o)

Same here :) and Isabela love always gives me warm fuzzies.

My favorite part of this movie is that it just accepted that it made no fucking sense, and completely rolled with it.

(via bamftastik)