Should female characters be allowed to screw up more?

[Anthony W]

Cyke, io9 is a Gizmodo site. I'm not being cynical enough. Well will you look at that, the author of the piece has a project! Do the characters just happen to line up with the spirit of the piece? They do.

[Wiccan]

Should they? Yes. Do most of the comics audience aka straight dudes actually want that? They may say yes, but they don't really mean it. Whenever a female character screws up, they're immediately crucified by the same people who otherwise calls them mary sues.

[Harbinger19]

I feel like in action movies specifically there’s sometimes a hesitancy to put female characters through the ringer like they do with even Gary Stu figures like James Bond.

Like that scene in Die Hard where John McClane (arguably not a Stu in the first few movies IMO) gets his feet shredded by broken glass.

I see it a lot in anime too, where male characters will smash each other with fisticuffs but rarely deliver the same physical damage and death to the females.

Some movies have gotten better about it in recent years; both John Wick films were pretty equally violent given the circumstances and though I didn’t love The Last Jedi overall, Rey getting Force-punked by Snoke made her feel a lot less invincible to me (though she doesn’t overall struggle physically to the same degree Luke did.)

It’s hard though because if you show really painful violence against female characters you can get accused of salaciousness; I’ve seen people accuse The Legend of Korra’s writers of “getting off on” her poisoning at the end of Book 3.

Maybe there’s some happy medium of acceptable media violence, but I think most people are going to be more sensitive to depictions of violence against female characters for the foreseeable future just due to natural and cultural conditioning. It’s always made more sense to preserve female life from an evolutionary perspective; so maybe that’s part of it.

I don’t know though...just kind of spitballing.

[Jackalope89]

I feel like in action movies specifically there’s sometimes a hesitancy to put female characters through the ringer like they do with even Gary Stu figures like James Bond.

Like that scene in Die Hard where John McClane (arguably not a Stu in the first few movies IMO) gets his feet shredded by broken glass.

I see it a lot in anime too, where male characters will smash each other with fisticuffs but rarely deliver the same physical damage and death to the females.

Some movies have gotten better about it in recent years; both John Wick films were pretty equally violent given the circumstances and though I didn’t love The Last Jedi overall, Rey getting Force-punked by Snoke made her feel a lot less invincible to me (though she doesn’t overall struggle physically to the same degree Luke did.)

It’s hard though because if you show really painful violence against female characters you can get accused of salaciousness; I’ve seen people accuse The Legend of Korra’s writers of “getting off on” her poisoning at the end of Book 3.

Maybe there’s some happy medium of acceptable media violence, but I think most people are going to be more sensitive to depictions of violence against female characters for the foreseeable future just due to natural and cultural conditioning. It’s always made more sense to preserve female life from an evolutionary perspective; so maybe that’s part of it.

I don’t know though...just kind of spitballing.

Future Trunks didn't exactly hesitate to blast 18 when he returned to his timeline...

But back to the topic at hand; yes. Female characters should be allowed to fail. To not be perfect. To have flaws. To learn as they grow.

You know, like any main character should be.

[Powerboy]

I think it's kind of a mixed blessing. With female characters, you can get away with writing emotional scenes and romantic scenes and ones where a character makes mistakes based on emotion, etc., and (since we are talking about the super hero genre primarily here with a huger male audience) get away with it because "It's a woman". Try to write a male character like that and you better present it very carefully or he's a wuss or a boring romance character.

I think that, for the male audience, it's tougher to write female characters in the action hero mode where the character plans for everything, almost never makes a mistake (or makes one mistake in the entire story) and is physically and mentally unmatched.

[Agent Z]

I feel like in action movies specifically there’s sometimes a hesitancy to put female characters through the ringer like they do with even Gary Stu figures like James Bond.

Like that scene in Die Hard where John McClane (arguably not a Stu in the first few movies IMO) gets his feet shredded by broken glass.

I see it a lot in anime too, where male characters will smash each other with fisticuffs but rarely deliver the same physical damage and death to the females.

Some movies have gotten better about it in recent years; both John Wick films were pretty equally violent given the circumstances and though I didn’t love The Last Jedi overall, Rey getting Force-punked by Snoke made her feel a lot less invincible to me (though she doesn’t overall struggle physically to the same degree Luke did.)

It’s hard though because if you show really painful violence against female characters you can get accused of salaciousness; I’ve seen people accuse The Legend of Korra’s writers of “getting off on” her poisoning at the end of Book 3.

Maybe there’s some happy medium of acceptable media violence, but I think most people are going to be more sensitive to depictions of violence against female characters for the foreseeable future just due to natural and cultural conditioning. It’s always made more sense to preserve female life from an evolutionary perspective; so maybe that’s part of it.

I don’t know though...just kind of spitballing.

I've seen action movies were female characters get tortured, maimed and killed far more often than their male counterparts. Bond movies included.

[Username taken]

Yeah, I think any fictional character should be allowed to screw up, irregardless of gender. However, not every compelling or well-written character needs to be a screw-up in the conventional sense. I've also found that a lot of "female characters aren't allowed to screw up" arguments seem poorly reasoned out or have an ulterior motive. Case in point, to anyone who thinks the new Star Wars movies have perfect female characters who are not allowed to fail or screw up, all I can ask is: "What the frak movies were you watching?"

Quoted for truth.

Lots of people online tend to equate capable female with "Mary Sue". An example is Star Trek Discovery where the main character was introduced with a massive personal failure that nearly ended her career but because she's been a capable hero since then (no more or less capable than previous Star Trek protagonists) she's labelled a Mary Sue.

Now, we are hearing similar complaints with Captain Marvel who has also been shown to be somewhat capable (going by the trailers) but people are already up in arms about her when we've never even seen her in a full length film.

[Username taken]

I feel like in action movies specifically there’s sometimes a hesitancy to put female characters through the ringer like they do with even Gary Stu figures like James Bond.

Like that scene in Die Hard where John McClane (arguably not a Stu in the first few movies IMO) gets his feet shredded by broken glass.

I see it a lot in anime too, where male characters will smash each other with fisticuffs but rarely deliver the same physical damage and death to the females.

Some movies have gotten better about it in recent years; both John Wick films were pretty equally violent given the circumstances and though I didn’t love The Last Jedi overall, Rey getting Force-punked by Snoke made her feel a lot less invincible to me (though she doesn’t overall struggle physically to the same degree Luke did.)

It’s hard though because if you show really painful violence against female characters you can get accused of salaciousness; I’ve seen people accuse The Legend of Korra’s writers of “getting off on” her poisoning at the end of Book 3.

Maybe there’s some happy medium of acceptable media violence, but I think most people are going to be more sensitive to depictions of violence against female characters for the foreseeable future just due to natural and cultural conditioning. It’s always made more sense to preserve female life from an evolutionary perspective; so maybe that’s part of it.

I don’t know though...just kind of spitballing.

James Bond films have an ugly, cruel tendency of throwing away and killing female side characters especially after Mr Bond has had his way with them

Quantum of Solace, Casino Royale and even Skyfall (this was the most egregious) had female counterparts murdered off screen (in Casino Royale and Skyfall it was on screen) in pretty terrible fashion.

[Harbinger19]

Future Trunks didn't exactly hesitate to blast 18 when he returned to his timeline...

Hence why I said “tendency” and “rarely,” not “always” or “never.”

James Bond films have an ugly, cruel tendency of throwing away and killing female side characters especially after Mr Bond has had his way with them

Quantum of Solace, Casino Royale and even Skyfall (this was the most egregious) had female counterparts murdered off screen (in Casino Royale and Skyfall it was on screen) in pretty terrible fashion.

Sure, I was more referring to main characters like McClane and Rey/Luke rather than Shapeshifter/Femme Fatale supporting character archetypes.

[Killerbee911]

It is a lose lose thing. If female mess up people will say you are making them weaker than the male heroes, Females don't mess up she is Mary Sue or someone is pushing a feminist agenda.Honestly I rather females shown as capable and deal with fall out of some thinking she is too perfect than females messing up and being viewed as lesser heroes.

[dreyga2000]

From everything I have heard about the Captain Marvel movie it sounds like Carol Danvers is going to be the ultimate Mary Sue.

Huh?! How did you come to that conclusion? The trailer shows her falling and getting back up a million times. The message here is that she keeps trying even after she fails.

[ed2962]

Huh?! How did you come to that conclusion? The trailer shows her falling and getting back up a million times. The message here is that she keeps trying even after she fails.

He didn't, but a fair number of random people on the internet have decided based on no evidence whatever ( other than "SJW Marvel" ) that this film will present Carol Danvers as a "Mary Sue." They also think that this will be the movie that ruins the MCU.

[WebLurker]

Quoted for truth.

Lots of people online tend to equate capable female with "Mary Sue". An example is Star Trek Discovery where the main character was introduced with a massive personal failure that nearly ended her career but because she's been a capable hero since then (no more or less capable than previous Star Trek protagonists) she's labelled a Mary Sue.

Not up on the show yet, but that sounds like a double standard through and through. Of course, there were racist and sexist people up in arms about the lead not being a white man and how having a woman as a captain broke canon. Obviously bigoted "fans" don't know the franchise half as well as they think, given that there were previously two non-white male leads in prior shows and canonically there were female captains before DSC's timeframe.

Now, we are hearing similar complaints with Captain Marvel who has also been shown to be somewhat capable (going by the trailers) but people are already up in arms about her when we've never even seen her in a full length film.

From my observations, a lot of the people complaining about the character already had an ax to grind in one way or another. Case in point the online community that must not be named on this forum have been really scrapping the barrel trying to manufacture ways to justify their hating the movie and character and slandering Brie Larson. I mean, how sick in the head do you have to be to attack a charity to score points with your fellow cultists? I'm really hoping the movie is a smash hit. I'm sure the haters will find some way to try and justify themselves and "prove" that it would've been more successful had they been pandered to in some way, but I don't think reality cares what they think at the end of it all.

[mogwen]

James Bond films have an ugly, cruel tendency of throwing away and killing female side characters especially after Mr Bond has had his way with them

Quantum of Solace, Casino Royale and even Skyfall (this was the most egregious) had female counterparts murdered off screen (in Casino Royale and Skyfall it was on screen) in pretty terrible fashion.

But that's a trope of the James Bond films the femme fatale with a fatal ending, the problem with the last James bond films isthat they repeat the formula hence Severine in Skyfall repeats the Solange Demetrios character of the sacrificed "créature de rêve" in Casino Royale. There are lots of James Bond girl types they could experiment on!

[mogwen]

He didn't, but a fair number of random people on the internet have decided based on no evidence whatever ( other than "SJW Marvel" ) that this film will present Carol Danvers as a "Mary Sue." They also think that this will be the movie that ruins the MCU.

No, they don't think, they want the film to fail!

From what I saw there's a sadist joyful glee to their idea of the film failing, as if this movie is a symbol and it's their duty to destroy it! As if it was a revenge ! The "not smiling enough" was just the beginning, brace yourself for some particularly injust critics, this movie seems to focus all the hate the internet crowd is capable of!