What do they mean by Claremontian women?

[sabongero]

Guys I'm not a regular X-Men reader with the exception of reading a few trade paperbacks from the library like the one by Warren Ellis a couple of years ago, and another by Whedon, and another by Yost.

As the question implied, what did they mean by that. I hope those that have read the Chris Claremont run a couple of decades ago can shed some light on this for me.

[MrMcMuffin]

I think the term refers to the strong, powerful, sometimes Amazon-like women he liked to write. Examples of these include storm, psylocke and rogue. It could also include the lesbian subtext some think he wrote in his run between many of his female characters.

[Tim Drake]

Part of the reason of why Claremonts original run on X-men is my favorite x-run is because of the way he wrote such compelling and complex female characters. I LOVED the way he wrote Storm.

[sabongero]

Part of the reason of why Claremonts original run on X-men is my favorite x-run is because of the way he wrote such compelling and complex female characters. I LOVED the way he wrote Storm.

If I may ask, how did he writer Storm back then?

[ChronoRogue]

If I may ask, how did he writer Storm back then?

Like that.

Claremont is responsible for a lot of the iconic X-Men stories (Dark Phoenix, Inferno, Mutant Massacre) and wrote the definitive (base) version of a lots of characters. Storm, Rogue, Psylocke, Shadowcat, Marvel Girl, etc... A lot of what the X-Men is based on was built by Claremont.

[Deer God]

I always took it as he wrote women to be broken down just to be built up bigger, better and more badass because of the experience. Claremont had no issue putting them through hell but he didn't seem to do it to potray them as a victim. Storm is a great example. She was kidnapped, beaten, stripped of her identity and constantly abused by enemies and peers but always came out stronger. She never fell into the victim stage.(Well once, but Callisto smacked that out of her.)

They always seemed like sexually liberated women who didn't need a man but were equals. He never wrote them as prizes for the male heroes. The women rescued the men as often, if not more, than the men did the women.

And as stated before there seems to be a-sometimes not so-underlying lesbian tone.

[Psychic_Totality]

I always took it as he wrote women to be broken down just to be built up bigger, better and more badass because of the experience. Claremont had no issue putting them through hell but he didn't seem to do it to potray them as a victim. Storm is a great example. She was kidnapped, beaten, stripped of her identity and constantly abused by enemies and peers but always came out stronger. She never fell into the victim stage.(Well once, but Callisto smacked that out of her.)

They always seemed like sexually liberated women who didn't need a man but were equals. He never wrote them as prizes for the male heroes. The women rescued the men as often, if not more, than the men did the women.

And as stated before there seems to be a-sometimes not so-underlying lesbian tone.

Essentially this.

[Kizzmyblakazz]

No damn lesbian tone. Sheesh. Just wrote strong women.

[DDD]

They are faced with challenges which they overcome with strenght, intelligence and willpower. Contrast with Sailor Moon, dozens of incompetents that need Tuxedo Mask to accomplish everything for them.

[Fifolet]

Claremazons was a term that fans of the comic came up to describe how Claremont wrote a lot of the female x-men. He wrote them as powerful and independent as the men, without sacrificing their feminine allure. As Ser Pounce said, they were truly equals regarding their roles in the team as well as their weight in the stories. Storm is probably the most Claremazonian character of all.
Today, more female characters are portrayed as such, but at the time that was a relatively fresh take.

[Panic]

They would often spontaneously develop martial arts abilities, adopt a bad-ass attitude, and wear a lot of leather.

[DDD]

I disagree, I stil think he distinguishes himself.

[ChronoRogue]

No damn lesbian tone. Sheesh. Just wrote strong women.

Oh yes, no lesbian undertone at all.

[Optic Rage!]

No damn lesbian tone. Sheesh. Just wrote strong women.

Are you serious? The lesbians tones were about as subtle as Blob's ass to your face. As well as the S&M fetish + His colonial Storm fetish. Aside from my cringe factor hitting overdrive when he still does it today, you have to give the guy major props as he was the first writer in mainstream super hero comics to give his female characters some serious balls. Esp important considering at the time the market was way more anti-female than it is now(and it's still pretty anti-female).

[cwatz]

He wrote women on the same level as men, in a time when it wasn't common to do so, while still keeping those feminine aspects. Character wise, they feel pretty unique too, not just a common "ultimate generic ninja woman" mold or something.