# No women main characters?



## Jacko (Feb 27, 2013)

This is a bit of a stupid question but, i just finished my first draft and realised, I have no main characters, that are women, in my story. 

Its a action, adventure story and there are women in the story, they just don't play a big part. 
I don't want to add one just for the sake of it but in my other books, I always tend to have a woman hero or love interest character of some kind.

What do you think? Should rewrite one in?


----------



## Bruno Spatola (Feb 27, 2013)

Don't rewrite it just so you can shove a woman in there; that's worse than having no female MCs, in my opinion. It sounds like it didn't come naturally while you were writing, so leave it be I say.

There is a lack of women in main roles throughout most media, I think, but putting a woman in the role just for the sake of it is equally annoying. Do what you feel is right -- there's plenty of opportunities to have more women in your future stuff, if you so wish. Go where the plot takes you .


----------



## Jacko (Feb 27, 2013)

Yeah, your properly right. When I was writing it, the action scenes were the driving force and the character were developing on there own, a love scene just didn't seem right.

Seems like most stories have a love interest put in them just for the sake of it. Think I just feel pressured into following the sheep I suppose:smile2:


----------



## Sam (Feb 27, 2013)

The worst thing you can do is put a love story in just for the sake of it. 

If it's meant to be in there, it'll find a way to be in there. I say leave it alone.


----------



## shadowwalker (Feb 27, 2013)

Never add anything just because you think you have to. Add them because the story demands them.


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Feb 27, 2013)

As everyone said, no need to add one. I do wonder, however, if the lack of women really bothers you--if you look at the characters you've already got, do they _have_ to be men? Could one of them be reworked as a woman? This might or might not be possible, depending on backstory, relationships, needed abilities, etc., but it could be interesting. I'm not saying change the rest of the story, or add in some scenes with googly eyes, just that one of your band of three dudes (or whatever) could maybe undergo a little operation.


----------



## Bruno Spatola (Feb 27, 2013)

Yeah, I agree. There are more women in the world than men, after all; play the odds!


----------



## JosephB (Feb 27, 2013)

Split the difference and make one of your male characters gay.


----------



## Jeko (Feb 27, 2013)

Have you read The Lord of the Rings?


----------



## JosephB (Feb 27, 2013)

I made an attempt -- but no.


----------



## Nickleby (Feb 27, 2013)

When I create a character, and there's nothing to mandate gender, I'll flip a coin to decide male or female. It hasn't caused any serious problems yet.

The MC in my latest book is female, but I'll stop there rather than risk a spam flag. That one wasn't a coin toss, she's had a life of her own since the beginning, and she's, let's say, insistent.


----------



## Whisper (Feb 27, 2013)

Cadence said:


> Have you read The Lord of the Rings?



Way different time. If you notice in the movie versions, strong women characters were added.


----------



## Whisper (Feb 27, 2013)

Jacko said:


> Yeah, your properly right. When I was writing it, the action scenes were the driving force and the character were developing on there own, a love scene just didn't seem right.





So you're saying the only reason to have women in your story is so the guys have someone to have love/protect?

I'm guessing there is going to be a large demographic (and potential money source) that is not going to have a favorable view of your book.


----------



## Jacko (Feb 27, 2013)

Some of your replies really made me laugh. Broke back mountain meets lord of the rings lol. I suppose it could work.

Theres five men in the group, so theres a possibility one of them could have a little operation.

I'm going through a second draft now, so if any of the characters aren't strong enough, it defiantly gives me a option to change things up.


----------



## Jacko (Feb 27, 2013)

Whisper said:


> View attachment 4319
> So you're saying the only reason to have women in your story is so the guys have someone to have love/protect?
> 
> I'm guessing there is going to be a large demographic (and potential money source) that is not going to have a favorable view of your book.



Think your trying to twist my words.
 I'm not against main characters being women. It's a action/adventure book so she wouldn't be sitting around waiting to be saved. She would be fighting just like everyone else but naturally people fall in love when they share experiences with each other, so she would most likely turn into a love interest.


----------



## shadowwalker (Feb 27, 2013)

Whisper said:


> I'm guessing there is going to be a large demographic (and potential money source) that is not going to have a favorable view of your book.



Just because there isn't a female MC? I guess an awful lot of successful authors have really fooled their readers then...


----------



## Whisper (Feb 27, 2013)

Jacko said:


> I'm going through a second draft now, so if any of the characters aren't strong enough, it defiantly gives me a option to change things up.




So now you're saying women can't be as strong or stronger (physically or emotionally) as men?

EDIT: After a second read through, your statement could be read to say that changing a weak character to a woman could make that character stronger. If so, then insert happy picture of your choice.


----------



## Whisper (Feb 27, 2013)

shadowwalker said:


> Just because there isn't a female MC? I guess an awful lot of successful authors have really fooled their readers then...



how many successful "modern" writers are there that don't have strong female characters as either leads or supporting characters. Heck, even Bond is starting to put in strong female leads to appeal to the female demographic. 

Name me a modern bestselling book where all its females are only in it as eye candy.

If his book is set in the 1950s, I can understand. 

Not saying it can't be done, but he asked the question and i'm playing devils advocate. If he doen't like the heat, then don't ask the question.


----------



## Jeko (Feb 27, 2013)

Sorry, I was asking Jacko. Jacko; have you read The Lord of the Rings?

I'll also ask that little girl who keeps popping up. Have _you _read The Lord of the Rings?

Yes, there are almost no female lead characters in the original books, but some were added in for the movies.


----------



## Max22 (Feb 27, 2013)

This doesn't technically apply to your query but have you heard of The Bechdel Test? It states that in order for a story to pass it must



includes at least two women,
who have at least one conversation,
about something other than a man or men.

I'm guilty of this and I really try to stop myself from doing it. In response to your question, if no female characters came naturally, don't force them into it. If there is a spot where you think one would work, do it. What is your story about?


----------



## Jeko (Feb 27, 2013)

Oh no, not the Bechdel Test! Anything but that!


----------



## shadowwalker (Feb 27, 2013)

Whisper said:


> how many successful "modern" writers are there that don't have strong female characters as either leads or supporting characters. Heck, even Bond is starting to put in strong female leads to appeal to the female demographic.
> 
> Name me a modern bestselling book where all its females are only in it as eye candy.
> 
> ...



Of course one can write a good book without strong female leads. And as a female, I can attest to the fact that lack of a strong female lead will not make me angry or refuse to buy a book.

If the book needs a strong female lead, if it's possible to change one of the main characters from male to female (although the idea makes me cringe a bit, considering how "easy" some writers seem to think that is), then do it. But to stick a female in when the story doesn't need it is just pandering, and I find that much more insulting than not having one at all.


----------



## shadowwalker (Feb 27, 2013)

Cadence said:


> Oh no, not the Bechdel Test! Anything but that!



AGREE! Oh, sooooo agree!


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Feb 27, 2013)

shadowwalker said:


> If the book needs a strong female lead, if it's possible to change one of the main characters from male to female (although the idea makes me cringe a bit, considering how "easy" some writers seem to think that is), then do it.


Just to clarify, I don't necessarily think that would be _easy._ And I definitely think the change would have to involve more than surface characteristics. But depending on the character, the depth of the POV, relations to others, things like that--I think it could be done. And it would be a really interesting exercise, you'd learn a lot about your own ideas of gender in the process.


----------



## seigfried007 (Feb 27, 2013)

Jacko said:


> This is a bit of a stupid question but, i just finished my first draft and realised, I have no main characters, that are women, in my story.
> 
> Its a action, adventure story and there are women in the story, they just don't play a big part.
> I don't want to add one just for the sake of it but in my other books, I always tend to have a woman hero or love interest character of some kind.
> ...



No. Leave the story the story. You have lots of lady MCs in other stories; nobody's going to run out and brand you sexist. Story's must be what they are. Adding characters to fill some Affirmative Action point is just as stupid as Affirmative Action itself. Diversity is all well and good, but there are other stories for that.


----------



## Rustgold (Feb 27, 2013)

Next you'll have somebody complaining about how you portrayed your token main female character.  So there's 5 males, so what?  We have all male bands, all female bands, mixed gender bands.  Yes there's a case when (some) modern all boy bands sing like girls, but if all books were supposed to have the same stereotypical 2-3 males/1 female, then why don't we all just buy one book and reread it 100 times.


----------



## Jon M (Feb 27, 2013)

Just curious: the OP said there was a group of five men. What is the race and ethnicity of these five men?

Regarding women MCs, agree you shouldn't change to satisfy the PC Police, and you must certainly do whatever you feel is right for the story, but consider that people relate differently to other people -- how your men relate to each other might be different if a woman was one of the five. A character is not just an end in himself, but a way of understanding the characters around him. Luke and Han's relationship is different than Luke and Leia's relationship, and it is different from Han and Leia's as well. 

So including a woman character is not necessarily about meeting a story-quota, but about obtaining another angle of insight on the protagonist(s).


----------



## shadowwalker (Feb 27, 2013)

lasm said:


> Just to clarify, I don't necessarily think that would be _easy._ And I definitely think the change would have to involve more than surface characteristics. But depending on the character, the depth of the POV, relations to others, things like that--I think it could be done. And it would be a really interesting exercise, you'd learn a lot about your own ideas of gender in the process.



Sorry, didn't mean to imply _you _thought it would be easy. But I've seen other people urging writers to do this, with the strong implication that it wasn't much harder than changing the name and "he" to "she". Also, if, as the OP mentioned, one of the characters was weaker (as in weakly written) it might be easier to change than if they were all already strong characters.


----------



## Whisper (Feb 27, 2013)

shadowwalker said:


> Of course one can write a good book without strong female leads. And as a female, I can attest to the fact that lack of a strong female lead will not make me angry or refuse to buy a book.



I think, for you and I, and others who grew up in our generation, this may be true. We grew up in a different time with different rules (as unfair as they may have been). 

However, at the same time, let me also say a book with a strong female lead is more likely to make me buy the book, but if there isn’t I’m not likely to pass on a book that looks good (if that makes sense). I think strong female leads are more interesting and dynamic. For example, Conan is a great character, but Red Sonya is infinitely more interesting because she has to do more thing and things differently to acheive the same goal.

Nowadays, it’s different. I think girls and women are looking for stories they can identify with and stories with strong female leads or supporting characters are what they are looking for. It’s part of the reason YA is so strong right now and why Twilight (let’s not get started on how bad this book was) was a hit and her other book The Host and also The Hunger Games.




shadowwalker said:


> If the book needs a strong female lead, if it's possible to change one of the main characters from male to female (although the idea makes me cringe a bit, considering how "easy" some writers seem to think that is), then do it. But to stick a female in when the story doesn't need it is just pandering, and I find that much more insulting than not having one at all



I agree, but let’s be honest. What are we doing as writers? We write in the hopes that someone will like and buy our work so we can pay our bills and live the fun life. I don’t think there is a writer that doesn’t want (even secretly) to be a big time best seller in the hopes that their book will be made into the next big movie. If you’re not, then you are writing as a hobby (and even then they still want it). And most hobbies usually don’t pay the bills. If a person wants a book to be successful and make as much money as possible then, from a business standpoint, you must appeal to as wide an audience as possible without losing realism. I’m not saying that a book has to have every ethnic group represented, but background characters (at the very least) should reflect society. I also believe the most sucessful books are those that go against the conventional norm. Turning the subset on its head (i.e. making orcs the heroes).

Lastly, he asked the question if he should change one of the characters to female. Which in reality (to me) he’s asking if his story would be more successful and/or better if one of his main characters was female and in my opinion in both cases the answer is yes. So, I don’t think it would be pandering if he is already asking the question.


----------



## kunox (Feb 27, 2013)

Jacko said:


> This is a bit of a stupid question but, i just finished my first draft and realised, I have no main characters, that are women, in my story.
> 
> Its a action, adventure story and there are women in the story, they just don't play a big part.
> I don't want to add one just for the sake of it but in my other books, I always tend to have a woman hero or love interest character of some kind.
> ...




I actually had to reply to this. I think you should do what most suits your story on that note but on a litter note aI have a book with nothing but female as action/adventure role so much so that it past some feminist test{that I can't remember now.} plus there are game with female action/adventure characters so why not.


----------



## shadowwalker (Feb 27, 2013)

Whisper said:


> What are we doing as writers? We write in the hopes that someone will like and buy our work so we can pay our bills and live the fun life. I don’t think there is a writer that doesn’t want (even secretly) to be a big time best seller in the hopes that their book will be made into the next big movie. If you’re not, then you are writing as a hobby (and even then they still want it). And most hobbies usually don’t pay the bills. If a person wants a book to be successful and make as much money as possible then, from a business standpoint, you must appeal to as wide an audience as possible without losing realism. I’m not saying that a book has to have every ethnic group represented, but background characters (at the very least) should reflect society. I also believe the most sucessful books are those that go against the conventional norm. Turning the subset on its head (i.e. making orcs the heroes).



I'm going to disagree with most of this. Yes, we all hope to catch the ring, but I think any writer with their feet on the ground knows it's unlikely they'll be able to live off writing. Yes, we want to write books that a great many people will enjoy, but personally, I draw the line at tossing in characters or anything else _just because_ it might increase the number of readers. I'm not writing to please a particular demographic - I'm writing a story I want to tell and hope that a lot of people will enjoy reading it. 



Whisper said:


> Lastly, he asked the question if he should change one of the characters to female. Which in reality (to me) he’s asking if his story would be more successful and/or better if one of his main characters was female and in my opinion in both cases the answer is yes. So, I don’t think it would be pandering if he is already asking the question.



If one is asking if adding a female would make _the story_ better, that's one thing. If one is asking because they think it will make the book more financially successful, that's pandering.


----------



## Jacko (Feb 27, 2013)

shadowwalker said:


> I'm going to disagree with most of this. Yes, we all hope to catch the ring, but I think any writer with their feet on the ground knows it's unlikely they'll be able to live off writing. Yes, we want to write books that a great many people will enjoy, but personally, I draw the line at tossing in characters or anything else _just because_ it might increase the number of readers. I'm not writing to please a particular demographic - I'm writing a story I want to tell and hope that a lot of people will enjoy reading it.
> 
> 
> You took the words right out of my mouth there.
> ...


----------



## Whisper (Feb 27, 2013)

Jacko said:


> You took the words right out of my mouth there.
> 
> I get a lot of story ideas flowing through my brain on a daily basis. I won't deny it. Selling millions of copies and being famous for my writing would be amazing.
> But that's not why I write.
> ...



That's fine. We all write for different reasons. Having writen and been paid for it, I find I like it and would like to make enough money at it to pay my bills. Writing is fun, but it's also a business. Business is about marketing and selling your product. 


Say what you will, but we all pander to a degree. If you write a story with elves and dwarves your pandering to the fantasy crowd. Vampires, the Goth crowd and so on and so forth. The YA area wasn't real popular until recently and it's exploded with a bunch of writers hoping to cash in on the craze. Nothing wrong with that either.


----------



## Sam (Feb 27, 2013)

Whisper said:


> That's fine. We all write for different reasons. Having writen and been paid for it, I find I like it and would like to make enough money at it to pay my bills. Writing is fun, but it's also a business. Business is about marketing and selling your product.
> 
> 
> Say what you will, but we all pander to a degree. If you write a story with elves and dwarves your pandering to the fantasy crowd. Vampires, the Goth crowd and so on and so forth. The YA area wasn't real popular until recently and it's exploded with a bunch of writers hoping to cash in on the craze. Nothing wrong with that either.



That isn't pandering; it's writing what you know.


----------



## Whisper (Feb 27, 2013)

Sam said:


> That isn't pandering; it's writing what you know.



Tomato Tomoto


----------



## shadowwalker (Feb 27, 2013)

Whisper said:


> Tomato Tomoto



Not really. There is a difference between writing what you know and what you want to read, and writing something just because the market's hot for it at the moment. Writing may be a business, but I personally would hate to get to the point when that's the main motivation. I'd prefer to put on my business suit _after _the book is written.


----------



## Foxee (Feb 27, 2013)

I really can't stand reading a novel or watching a TV show or movie where a female character seems as though they're created simply to get a female into a role. If a female character makes sense in the role and has solidly realistic abilities I'm fine with it but some just ring false and I really don't care to be pandered to. I am fine with masculine characters if they fit the story better and I really don't need some kind of superior know-it-all superwoman thrashing the guys to feel better about myself or consider things to be 'fair'.

Just write the characters that you want to be there and if on second thought there should be a female character or you really think someone needs to be replaced by a female then do that but make her real.


----------



## Whisper (Feb 27, 2013)

shadowwalker said:


> Not really. There is a difference between writing what you know and what you wantto read, and writing something just because the market's hot for it at themoment. Writing may be a business, but I personally would hate to get to thepoint when that's the main motivation. I'd prefer to put on my business suit _after _thebook is written.



Really,
So when you write (and granted I don't know what you write) a story and you create a character you describe that character is finite detail so the reader has to adhere to your view of the character. Or, do you, as I've seen said in dozens of posts here when asked about character descriptions, give general descriptions so that people reading the story can more relate to the character thus making the story a better experience. How is that not pandering? How is that no different then changing a character to appeal to wider audience?

I'm sorry if my saying we as writers pander to our audience upsets people, but it's the truth. Anyone that says otherwise, is lying, deluded, or to young or too rich to care. Every time we writers set pen to paper or fingers to keyboard and write we are pandering our writing by adhering to certain literary rules. I've seen post after post telling people to follow this or that guideline and why, because it makes for a better story and thus making it more marketable. If you're not looking to publish your work and you're only interested in writing a story then why bother asking about guidance or literary rules. But then, if we write a story, hide it away and show it to no one, is it a story or merely worlds on paper?

There is not one person here who if they sent in a story and the publisher said, "hay I like it, but I want you to change this character to an, 16-year-old lipstick lesbian half-orc because it will appeal to a broader audience," will say "nope, sorry I'm not pandering my work." 

Yeah, most writers write what they read and are familiar with? But that's just playing it safe. If we as writers play it safe, stay in our comfort zone and write what the genre expects then how is that not pandering to the genre. We put books and stories in categories for a reason.

Okay, all done. Last post on the subject. Change the character or don't change the character. It's your story. However, I still contend you're story will be better both from a literary standpoint and a marketable standpoint if you do.


----------



## JosephB (Feb 27, 2013)

When anyone refers to writers as some amorphous “we” as if everyone wants and is motivated by the same thing, it’s a good bet I can safely ignore what follows.


----------



## shadowwalker (Feb 28, 2013)

Whisper said:


> So when you write (and granted I don't know what you write) a story and you create a character you describe that character is finite detail so the reader has to adhere to your view of the character. Or, do you, as I've seen said in dozens of posts here when asked about character descriptions, give general descriptions so that people reading the story can more relate to the character thus making the story a better experience. How is that not pandering? How is that no different then changing a character to appeal to wider audience?



I don't describe characters in finite detail because a) I don't care for it as a reader myself, and b) I want the reader to participate in the story. That's pandering? What dictionary are you using?



Whisper said:


> I'm sorry if my saying we as writers pander to our audience upsets people, but it's the truth. Anyone that says otherwise, is lying, deluded, or to young or too rich to care.



Which category should I be placed in? Am I a liar or deluded? Because I can assure you I'm in neither of the last two categories. Or it could be that your 'truth' is the delusion?



Whisper said:


> I've seen post after post telling people to follow this or that guideline and why, because it makes for a better story and thus making it more marketable. If you're not looking to publish your work and you're only interested in writing a story then why bother asking about guidance or literary rules.



Of course writers want their stories to be the best they can be. A story becomes more marketable when it's well-written, not because we pander to the current trend or some social pressure, and there are a lot more factors involved in that marketability. Writers ask for guidance because they want the story to be the best it can be. As to literary 'rules', there are none, unless you're speaking of grammar.



Whisper said:


> There is not one person here who if they sent in a story and the publisher said, "hay I like it, but I want you to change this character to an, 16-year-old lipstick lesbian half-orc because it will appeal to a broader audience," will say "nope, sorry I'm not pandering my work."



Well, sorry, but here's one. And frankly, I don't know what writers you've been talking to, because one thing the writers I talk with, on several forums, large and small, are consistent and insistent about - the story is theirs, and they will not make fundamental changes to the plot, characters, setting, or any other part that makes the story something other than what they originally intended it to be.



Whisper said:


> Yeah, most writers write what they read and are familiar with? But that's just playing it safe. If we as writers play it safe, stay in our comfort zone and write what the genre expects then how is that not pandering to the genre. We put books and stories in categories for a reason.



So you think writers should write stories in genres they don't like to read? That they have no interest in? Good grief. Other than that last sentenced, that whole thing makes no sense. You're taking this to extremes - everybody panders to everything!


----------



## Staff Deployment (Feb 28, 2013)

Wow, I hate coming into these discussions three pages in.

Anyway my main character is a woman, but she's not particularly strong in the traditional sense. Violent and unpredictable and scheming and passionate and hateful and loving and full of contradictions, like any protagonist should be, but not strong. Her eventual death is inevitable.

Would it work with a male character? No.

Basically, it's not any drive for equality that dictates the protagonist's gender, but rather what is essential to the telling of the story.

Man I am so drunk right now like oh my god.


----------



## Jeko (Feb 28, 2013)

> I'm sorry if my saying we as writers pander to our audience upsets people, but it's the truth.



Don't apologise. It's not the truth.



> But then, if we write a story, hide it away and show it to no one, is it a story or merely worlds on paper?



A story.


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Feb 28, 2013)

I've actually been thinking about this thread this morning, in connection with the general question of being a woman who tries to write from male characters' POVs fairly often. I don't know why, but I just have a tendency to write men, and I'm never all that sure if I'm doing it effectively. Nobody ever says I'm not. In any case, for me the interesting question is, what makes one character seem masculine? what makes another feminine? Other than the image in my head, obviously. 

I'd start a new thread but I fear it would be all gender war.

Whisper-- think your definition of "pandering" is too broad. Pandering,  to me, is doing something one knows to be stupid, in order to please  stupid people. It's not the same as, say, avoiding lengthy descriptions  because they're boring, or otherwise trying to improve reading  experience.



			
				Staff Deployment said:
			
		

> Man I am so drunk right now like oh my god.


 Ha.


----------



## JosephB (Feb 28, 2013)

In my novel, three out of four of my main characters are women. My short stories are all about men and women -- mostly about relationships. Although I usually write from a male POV, I've gotten plenty of positive feedback on my stories written from a women's point of view -- one with a pregnant MC and another from the POV of teenage girl. I don't do anything consciously -- it just seems to come naturally. Hard to put my finger on what makes my characters more feminine or masculine. But it seems to work, so I'm not going to over-think how I do it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.


----------



## shadowwalker (Feb 28, 2013)

I think one of the biggest downfalls of writers is over-thinking. Just tell your story the best you can. Some people will like it; others won't. That's life.


----------



## JosephB (Feb 28, 2013)

shadowwalker said:


> I think one of the biggest downfalls of  writers is over-thinking. Just tell your story the best you can. Some  people will like it; others won't. That's life.



I agree with that -- and on this topic, I think any knack I have for writing women characters just comes from a lifetime of osmosis -- it's not like I was raised on an island with no females. Of course I live with three of them now, so I'm pretty much outnumbered and outvoted on just about everything.


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Feb 28, 2013)

shadowwalker said:


> I think one of the biggest downfalls of writers is over-thinking. Just tell your story the best you can. Some people will like it; others won't. That's life.


And I think the term "over-thinking" is an oxymoron. Does not compute.  The thing is, if I write men and women, I am saying something about what differentiates the two. It's important to me to know what I'm saying.


----------



## JosephB (Feb 28, 2013)

Whatever you need to do. I don't really think about it at all. I just write the story -- what differentiates them just seems to come naturally to me.


----------



## Foxee (Feb 28, 2013)

JosephB said:


> I agree with that -- and on this topic, I think any knack I have for writing women characters just comes from a lifetime of osmosis -- it's not like I was raised on an island with no females. Of course I live with three of them now, so I'm pretty much outnumbered and outvoted on just about everything.


Wow, immersion research! You're hard-core. 

Observation of the opposite gender is probably most of the battle when it comes to writing from that perspective.


----------



## Leyline (Feb 28, 2013)

Whisper said:


> I agree, but let’s be honest. What are we doing as writers? We write in the hopes that someone will like and buy our work so we can pay our bills and live the fun life. I don’t think there is a writer that doesn’t want (even secretly) to be a big time best seller in the hopes that their book will be made into the next big movie. If you’re not, then you are writing as a hobby (and even then they still want it). And most hobbies usually don’t pay the bills.



Wrong. I don't write for any of those reasons and it's not a hobby to me. I'm also one of the few people on this forum who makes a (poor) living and pays the bills by writing -- and I do this by targeting a _niche_ market. 

Otherwise, my literary goals are entirely focused on _where_ I want to place stories, and those reasons are bound up in emotional desires that go back to earliest childhood and have nothing to do with money, audience, or having a wide spectrum of people like what I write.


----------



## shadowwalker (Feb 28, 2013)

JosephB said:


> I agree with that -- and on this topic, I think any knack I have for writing women characters just comes from a lifetime of osmosis -- it's not like I was raised on an island with no females. Of course I live with three of them now, so I'm pretty much outnumbered and outvoted on just about everything.



I've got just the opposite 'thing' - I grew up in a neighborhood filled with guys, worked in jobs that were mainly populated by guys - even the women friends I've had were the stereotypical 'tomboys'. I think I understand how guys work much, much better than I do women. Put me in a crowd and inevitably I end up talking with the guys, and listening to the women as if they were from some other planet. Heck, I couldn't sew a stitch until I started thinking of the pins as nails and the fabric as wood! :topsy_turvy:


----------



## Ariel (Feb 28, 2013)

If it is well written and interesting I will read just about anything regardless of the character's gender, the genre, and the race of the characters.  Those things are flavor, they contribute to what and how the characters and their stories will play out but I don't pick up a book simply because it's a Caucasian female as the main character.  Some of my favorite books are from the viewpoint of males or of someone of a different race/religion.  Similarity to myself is not required, in other words.

It is also absolutely something I couldn't see myself doing--changing the gender/sexuality/race/etc of a character because an editor won't publish if I don't.  If s/he likes the work then someone else will as well and I'll look for them.  If it really is just a bad piece of work then I don't believe that changing a character is going to rescue it.

Edit: I have re-written a story from the viewpoint of another character.  The second character rewrite actually made the story much much stronger but I didn't change the characters.


----------



## Angelwing (Feb 28, 2013)

I had the same realization for mine, but figured that trying to rewrite it just to try to be politically correct wouldn't be worth it in the end. I have some women in the story, but I don't try to make them the best thing since sliced bread. They do their jobs, just like a lot of male names in my story.


----------



## Jon M (Feb 28, 2013)

lasm said:


> I've actually been thinking about this thread this morning, in connection with the general question of being a woman who tries to write from male characters' POVs fairly often. I don't know why, but I just have a tendency to write men, and I'm never all that sure if I'm doing it effectively. Nobody ever says I'm not. In any case, for me the interesting question is, what makes one character seem masculine? what makes another feminine? Other than the image in my head, obviously.


This got me thinking about my last story where I wrote from the point of view of a nineteen year old girl. I never wondered during the writing if I was successfully pulling off the voice, but none of the readers ever mentioned it, so I'd just assumed so. I think, at times, we might just be relying on stereotypes, and other times including a lot of external 'tells', like clues, that build up our image of the character. I guess to answer the question satisfactorily you'd have to examine what masculine and feminine mean, and there again you'd probably be dealing with a lot of stereotypes.


----------



## seigfried007 (Feb 28, 2013)

Foxee said:


> I really can't stand reading a novel or watching a TV show or movie where a female character seems as though they're created simply to get a female into a role. If a female character makes sense in the role and has solidly realistic abilities I'm fine with it but some just ring false and I really don't care to be pandered to. I am fine with masculine characters if they fit the story better and I really don't need some kind of superior know-it-all superwoman thrashing the guys to feel better about myself or consider things to be 'fair'.
> 
> Just write the characters that you want to be there and if on second thought there should be a female character or you really think someone needs to be replaced by a female then do that but make her real.



I noticed this happening a lot in the 80's where a next-to-useless female was inserted into the story, usually just to get into trouble so the main heroes would have something to do. Lady Transformer never made any sense. April O'neil, now that I'm adult, is incredibly frustrating. Ditto for Cheetarah.


----------



## Lewdog (Feb 28, 2013)

Samantha Fox is playing April O'neil in the new TMNT movie.


----------



## Whisper (Feb 28, 2013)

Lewdog said:


> Samantha Fox is playing April O'neil in the new TMNT movie.



I think you meant Megan Fox


----------



## Staff Deployment (Feb 28, 2013)

I can't talk to dude-bros, so I very rarely write dude-bro characters. Most characters are in fact either very feminine, or socially awkward and introverted. Not to connect the two in any way of course, but just demonstrating that the company I keep influences the characters I write.

This is a good discussion, guys. I went to bed, woke up in the morning to see a phenomenal amount added.


----------



## moderan (Feb 28, 2013)

Whisper said:


> I think you meant Megan Fox


Definitely. Samantha Fox is a little old for the ingenue roles. Woulda been fine in the 80s. Same talent level too.


Staff Deployment said:


> I can't talk to dude-bros, so I very  rarely write dude-bro characters. Most characters are in fact either  very feminine, or socially awkward and introverted. Not to connect the  two in any way of course, but just demonstrating that the company I keep  influences the characters I write.


What's a dude-bro? Very evocative...but I need elaboration to understand.


----------



## Lewdog (Feb 28, 2013)

Yeah Megan Fox, not the bleach blonde singer from the 80's.


----------



## Whisper (Feb 28, 2013)

moderan said:


> Definitely. Samantha Fox is a little old for the ingenue roles. Woulda been fine in the 80s. Same talent level too.
> 
> What's a dude-bro? Very evocative...but I need elaboration to understand.



I think he means Bromance


----------



## archer88iv (Feb 28, 2013)

Affirmative action in fiction is one hell of an ugly thing.


----------



## Ariel (Feb 28, 2013)

Lewdog said:


> Yeah Megan Fox, not the bleach blonde singer from the 80's.



Way to ruin my childhood.  I always viewed April as a smart character who happened to be caught in things over her head.  She was persistant, dedicated, loyal to her friends, and curious.  None of which are bad traits.  Admitedly she wasn't exactly much deeper than a stereotype but it was a kid's show.


----------



## seigfried007 (Feb 28, 2013)

The only April I can stand (not including the more recent animated movie, which I'm not even sure if I can call canon), was from the first movie. She had 'balls', if we can it that. very brave, sassy, take no prisoner. I liked that. 

But the animated series and other movies? Curious but stupid. Really, her whole purpose was to glorify the good guy (which is true of most ladies who tag along with superheroes, when you think about it). You don't see them putting the heroes in their place on a martial, spiritual or moral level. I want to see women as equals on the individual level--meaning that they are worth as much as men--not better than them at anything or everything, not as a superpower trumps another superpower, but in terms of concrete worth. 

Yeah, April wasn't a ninja. I didn't want her to be. i didn't need her to have superpowers. I did, however, want to do something other than tag along and get kidnapped when I was playing Turtles at recess in first grade. Other than get in trouble, the character can't seem to do anything. She's always in the way and rarely adds anything as a person.

I wanted her to matter, to be an intrinsic, inseparable part of the story--not some hot add-in to please feminists and chauvinists at the same time (girls like her because she's a hot girl and, even as children, we all wanted to be hot girls; guys liked her because she's a hot girl and they wouldn't mind getting into her 2-D pants). I wanted her to surpass that, to be take-no-prisoners without having to kick anyone's butt or learn ninjitsu. She could outsmart someone. She could pull a trigger at an opportune moment. She could call in the cavalry. But I wanted her to matter and do more than get in the way and make trouble for the heroes. I wanted equal importance given to her and expected equal heroism from her. 

I don't feel that I got those from her.


----------



## Staff Deployment (Feb 28, 2013)

moderan said:


> What's a dude-bro? Very evocative...but I need elaboration to understand.


----------



## Kevin (Feb 28, 2013)

Whoa-Dude's little brother. I heard he's divorced now, and sells insurance. Never thought he'd make it past eighteen.


----------



## Lewdog (Feb 28, 2013)

If you try to force a female into your story an educated reader will know it, and call you out as fake.


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Feb 28, 2013)

Jon M said:


> This got me thinking about my last story where I wrote from the point of view of a nineteen year old girl. I never wondered during the writing if I was successfully pulling off the voice, but none of the readers ever mentioned it, so I'd just assumed so. I think, at times, we might just be relying on stereotypes, and other times including a lot of external 'tells', like clues, that build up our image of the character. I guess to answer the question satisfactorily you'd have to examine what masculine and feminine mean, and there again you'd probably be dealing with a lot of stereotypes.


I remember being startled that she was nineteen, but I figured it was past tense so the narrating voice could be older (plus years vs. mileage etc.). Don't recall throwing the page down and gasping, "She's a BOY!" or anything like that.

But yeah, I don't think there's any good answer, really. Probably best to just fall back on the old advice to try to write a person first and foremost, which is what I usually do.


----------



## DPVP (Feb 28, 2013)

archer88iv said:


> Affirmative action in fiction is one hell of an ugly thing.


we could be addressing the other side of the coin





ok all joking aside OP, who cares? if its good and well written it does not need to have characters inserted. if its not good and well written not amount of inserting characters will save it


----------



## Rustgold (Mar 1, 2013)

>



And then there'll be complaints from the PC group that the Asian is wearing glasses, or the black guy didn't get a big enough role, or why is the whitest guy in the centre, or something.  Don't laugh, just have a look at the PC claims against the Hardy Boys books.


----------



## Whisper (Mar 1, 2013)

*Jack Nicholson on how to write a good woman character in, How Good Does it Get, 

"How do you write women so well?"

Nicholson responds, "I think of a man and I take away reason and accountability."*


----------



## Nemesis (Mar 1, 2013)

This thread made me take a look at my female MC. Part of my difficulty with her is not making her a stereotypical kick butt female who falls in love with the male MC in a moment of female frailtly and ends up having to be saved by him, because really, a strong majority of female leads in current movies are exactly like that. I found The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo refreshing because the lead female took care of her own problems and she never really had to be rescued, she was the one to save the male lead in the end.


----------



## Ariel (Mar 1, 2013)

The April I most identified with was the one in the first movie.  She was the most complex and I wanted to be like her when I was a kid.  I didn't need a female ninja turtle either.


----------



## Tiberius (Mar 2, 2013)

In the movie ALien, there was nothing to indicate the genders in the script.  The character of Ripley, for example, was originally meant to be a male.


----------



## Ariel (Mar 2, 2013)

True, but in other forms of writing indications of gender aren't so easily identified by a picture of a person on a screen.  There's an instant gratification moment of seeing an actor and knowing that all those questions of gender are answered.  Yes, actions and speech will further define those characters but the work going into establishing a character's gender in a believable manner is greatly increased when it's not a screenplay.

Tilda Swinton constantly throws me because (even though I'm sure she's a lovely lady) she strikes me as asexual and my brain can't comfortably decide what gender she belongs to.  This is a very strong phenomenon for me in the movie "Constantine."  Even though Keanu Reeves delivers his infamous wooden acting I'm still incredibly distracted watching the film trying to decide the gender of Gabriel.  All the other "half-breeds" are easily decided upon as either male or female but not Gabriel.  Instead of brainlessly enjoying this film I'm stuck trying to settle this gender question.


----------



## Tiberius (Mar 2, 2013)

amsawtell said:


> True, but in other forms of writing indications of gender aren't so easily identified by a picture of a person on a screen.  There's an instant gratification moment of seeing an actor and knowing that all those questions of gender are answered.  Yes, actions and speech will further define those characters but the work going into establishing a character's gender in a believable manner is greatly increased when it's not a screenplay.



No it isn't.

Agent Johnson stepped carefully into the room, closing the door behind her with a loud thud.

There you go.  I just established that Agent Johnson is a female.  Easy.


----------



## Rustgold (Mar 2, 2013)

Tiberius said:


> No it isn't.
> Agent Johnson stepped carefully into the room, closing the door behind her with a loud thud.
> There you go.  I just established that Agent Johnson is a female.  Easy.



Only to be destroyed when he goes to the toilet standing up.  There are writings where you go 'there's no way that's a female', in spite of the author writing 'she' somewhere.


----------



## Tiberius (Mar 3, 2013)

Rustgold said:


> Only to be destroyed when he goes to the toilet standing up.  There are writings where you go 'there's no way that's a female', in spite of the author writing 'she' somewhere.



But what I wrote establishes that a character is female just as quickly and efficiently as a movie does when they show a female actor playing the role.  If the author writing is careless enough to establish a character as female like this and then state they go to the toilet with a penis, then it's down to the author being unable to keep track of things.  Barring the character doing something gender specific, this technique works and is quite unobtrusive.


----------



## Rustgold (Mar 3, 2013)

Maybe I didn't write my point clear enough, I don't know.

Take a book like Cirque Du Freak (by Darren Shan).  If the author wrote 'she' for the main character, it simply wouldn't have made the character a female.  You could have removed every 'male' identifier, and still, the character is so male in every aspect of his being, he could only be male.  It isn't writing 'he' or 'she' which makes a character male or female.


----------



## Tiberius (Mar 3, 2013)

Haven't read it.

I do understand what you mean, though.  But let's go back to what I was saying earlier about the movie Alien.  Ripley was meant to be a male.  They didn't change any of the dialogue when they cast Sigourney Weaver, as far as I know.  And yet, no one watches the movie and says, "Oh, that character is so obviously a male."

At the end of the day, I think that if the writer is skilled enough to have the gender of a character be obvious simply from that character's mannerisms, then how to establish the gender of a character is not going to be a problem.  The OP could take one of the characters, change "he" to "she" and use a different name, and it could work, like it did in Alien.  But then again, it might not, as in your example.

But my point was that, regardless of character traits, using the word "she" for a character labels that character as a female, just as showing a woman's face on a movie screen shows that the character in question is a female.


----------



## Kevin (Mar 3, 2013)

Tiberius said:


> Haven't read it.
> 
> I do understand what you mean, though.  But let's go back to what I was saying earlier about the movie Alien.  Ripley was meant to be a male.  They didn't change any of the dialogue when they cast Sigourney Weaver, as far as I know.  And yet, no one watches the movie and says, "Oh, that character is so obviously a male."
> 
> ...


 _Alien _is an example of when gender makes no difference. I think it's a rare case. The story has virtually no sexual undertones (except for _Ripley's _striptease, which is simply irrelevant voyeurism on _Ridley's _part) and set far enough in the future that she could have been anything and not been held back by some primitive societal prejudices.


----------



## Lewdog (Mar 3, 2013)

Come on now, the only reason the main character in "Alien" was a woman, was because they were killing the queen, and male on female violence would have brought lots of protests.


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Mar 3, 2013)

Kevin said:


> _Alien _is an example of when gender makes no difference. I think it's a rare case. The story has virtually no sexual undertones (except for _Ripley's _striptease, which is simply irrelevant voyeurism on _Ridley's _part) and set far enough in the future that she could have been anything and not been held back by some primitive societal prejudices.


As far as sexual relationships yes, but I think Ripley has a maternal role in relation to the little girl. And then there's a parallel with the alien's being a mother, trying to save its own babies. IIRC, been a while since I've seen that movie.


----------



## Bruno Spatola (Mar 3, 2013)

The little girl and Queen Xenomorph are in _Aliens_. It's just one of the creatures and Ripley in _Alien_, and the character could easily have been switched for a man, although I prefer a woman for that role, just because it hadn't really been done before to my knowledge -- having a woman who was a complete badass, I mean.


----------



## Whisper (Mar 3, 2013)

Bruno Spatola said:


> The little girl and Queen Xenomorph are in _Aliens_. It's just one of the creatures and Ripley in _Alien_, and the character could easily have been switched for a man, although I prefer a woman for that role, just because it hadn't really been done before to my knowledge -- having a woman who was a complete badass, I mean.



I think having Ripley a woman made this sci-fi/horror movie a great one. If Ripley had been a man, it sill would have been a good movie, but not as iconic as it is today. This movie was ground breaking in many ways, not the least of which it opened the era of strong female leads in sci-fi and/or horror.


----------



## Whisper (Mar 3, 2013)

Here's a nice little write up about Ripley and Alien/Aliens

John Scalzi - Ellen Ripley Paved the Way for Strong Female Leads - AMC Blog - AMC


----------



## Staff Deployment (Mar 4, 2013)

Lewdog said:


> Come on now, the only reason the main character in "Alien" was a woman, was because they were killing the queen, and male on female violence would have brought lots of protests.



Queen is the James Cameron one.

In the Ridley Scott's _Alien_ Sigourney Weaver kills a phallus-monster by blasting it to death with fire. In another scene a very human-like robot explodes into creamy white goop, spraying everywhere uncontrollably. I think you're overlooking some important subtext here.


----------



## Kevin (Mar 4, 2013)

That movie is so about images. They supercede the writing in so many instances that they become the writing.


----------



## seigfried007 (Mar 4, 2013)

I've often loved Alien for the Ripley character. Ripley isn't a man with a 'she' pronoun, she's a badass lady. It's not just that she is a woman, she's a she. There are too many aspects of her that make her mannish in a very feminine way. She doesn't care for her coworkers the same way a man would, I think. Plus, there are a lot of sexual metaphors that would make it less iconic and possibly gay if she had been replaced with a dude. 

She's a more modest personality than any man that might have been in the role--Ripley doesn't have the hero persona; she's thoughtful and cautious, quiet and protective, but more in the mother bear way, the sheltering hen. Don't mess with her chicks though, she'll rip your throat out. .


----------



## Morkonan (Mar 4, 2013)

Jacko said:


> ...What do you think? Should rewrite one in?



I think you should have more squirrels in it. Alien squirrels with rocket launchers, that's what it needs. Definitely. Oh, and it needs more mention of bottle brushes. Bottle brushes are often ignored in fiction, so you had better include a few of those, just to be safe. So, squirrels, alien ones, and bottle brushes. Rocket launchers! (Almost forgot.)

Please tell me why you don't have alien squirrels with rocket launchers in your book as well as why there is a conspicuous absence of bottle brushes?

I am very serious.

Answer that question. When you can answer that question correctly, then you will have the full answer to your own.


----------



## Staff Deployment (Mar 5, 2013)

Morkonan said:


> I think you should have more squirrels in it. Alien squirrels with rocket launchers, that's what it needs. Definitely. Oh, and it needs more mention of bottle brushes. Bottle brushes are often ignored in fiction, so you had better include a few of those, just to be safe. So, squirrels, alien ones, and bottle brushes. Rocket launchers! (Almost forgot.)
> 
> Please tell me why you don't have alien squirrels with rocket launchers in your book as well as why there is a conspicuous absence of bottle brushes?
> 
> ...



Bottle-brush alien RPG squirrels do not buy books. They are not a target market.

That was easy. Ask another one.


----------



## shadowwalker (Mar 5, 2013)

Staff Deployment said:


> Bottle-brush alien RPG squirrels do not buy books.



They would if there were bottle-brushes and rocket-launching alien squirrels in them...


----------



## Staff Deployment (Mar 5, 2013)

The idea is that if he's going to use a slippery-scope argument it might be better to avoid exaggerations so he doesn't parody himself. It's like an anti-gay-marriage advocate saying that the gays will eventually start marrying water coolers. It becomes a joke at the expense of legitimate discussion.

A more valid analogy would be, why aren't we including more black people?

Because the thread is about women characters, as per the title. But more seriously, though my main character is a black woman, she wasn't originally in earlier drafts (her race was unspecified). Her personality and mannerisms remain the same, however, as there would be no legitimate reason to change them based on nationality, unless you're a comically racist old fart.

However, if she were a man, much of the story would either be aggressively homoerotic or completely nonsensical, which would distract from an otherwise relatively sombre piece. Gender is a much more difficult character trait to manipulate, and doing so (as has been pointed out numerously in this thread) can easily be poorly done, much more so than accomodating more superficial aspects of a character like skin colour or body weight or whatever.

So essentially, the answer to Morkonan's question is in fact "because it's frivolous." We should be less concerned at the moment with accomodating various underrepresented minorities, because we're talking about male and female characters. Besides, as I vaguely pointed out, women buy a lot of books. Very many books. They aren't a niche group to be catered to.


----------



## shadowwalker (Mar 5, 2013)

I think the point was that the type of characters one has in a story should depend on what the story needs, not on some social/political group thinking they need to be represented.


----------



## DPVP (Mar 5, 2013)

Staff Deployment said:


> Because the thread is about women characters, as per the title. But more seriously, though my main character is a black woman, she wasn't originally in earlier drafts (her race was unspecified). Her personality and mannerisms remain the same, however, as there would be no legitimate reason to change them based on *nationality*, unless you're a comically racist old fart.



so im guessing you have not dealt with many people of a different nationality?
or hell even people from different regions of a country?
personally im a transplant, i do/ did things different then locals. i also eat and drink, some different things dispute the difference was only a few hundred miles. i go back and i get weird looks now for some of the things i picked up. their is even a difference in how people talk, and this is not west vs east cost. granted im smart enough not to ever mention baseball because then it would be:


----------



## Staff Deployment (Mar 5, 2013)

The point is that she's a character first. She wouldn't be a different character if she was German or Texan or Indian. She would be if she was male, though.


----------



## seigfried007 (Mar 5, 2013)

I think that underestimates the differences between nationalities, religions, locations. Ethnic background has next to no appreciable difference unless also paired with that culture or as fighting against a racial prejudice. 

For instance, if you have a black lady raised by an older white couple in a white neighborhood, she'll probably act 'white', unless she's encountered a racial prejudice, develops a feeling of insecurity based on being different, or something of that nature. Those adverse circumstances, however, won't make her 'black'; they'll just be adverse, character-building circumstances. 

However, if you allow the black community to raise their own daughter, she'll act more the 'norm' for that group. The behavior is not inherent to the race.

A German, an Indian and a Texan will have different approaches based on the native culture and be different people--more so than any mere racial designation would allow. Every culture and location has its own brand of norms for a character to embrace and become or reject and/or destroy. Race alone will not account for any of those deep issues of characterization and back story.


----------



## Rustgold (Mar 5, 2013)

Staff Deployment said:


> The point is that she's a character first. She wouldn't be a different character if she was German or Texan or Indian. She would be if she was male, though.



If it makes no difference, then why bother with it?  Many of my characters don't have a race for this reason.


----------



## DPVP (Mar 5, 2013)

Staff Deployment said:


> The point is that she's a character first. She wouldn't be a different character if she was German or Texan or Indian. She would be if she was male, though.


Take a Indian, Texan, and a German of the same gender that grew up in the same economic bracket and had similar experiences and they will be very different people. i would venture to say more so  a male and female German( or Indian or Texan) that had the same background as each other.


----------



## Staff Deployment (Mar 6, 2013)

Rustgold said:


> If it makes no difference, then why bother with it?  Many of my characters don't have a race for this reason.



I bother because it's crucial to the plot. It gets really complicated, and it wasn't a trivial decision at all.

However, they are characters first, race second. If a character is very quiet and neurotic and can't stand conversation, that's just who he is, not who his race dictates he is. If someone is very outgoing but also very selfish, you can't say that's because they're black, or hebrew, or Peurto-Rican, or Czechoslovakian, or a citizen of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. That's just who they are.


----------



## Ariel (Mar 6, 2013)

Tiberius said:


> Haven't read it.
> 
> I do understand what you mean, though.  But let's go back to what I was saying earlier about the movie Alien.  Ripley was meant to be a male.  They didn't change any of the dialogue when they cast Sigourney Weaver, as far as I know.  And yet, no one watches the movie and says, "Oh, that character is so obviously a male."
> 
> ...



No, but for years there have been rumors that Sigourney Weaver is transgender because of that movie.


----------



## Whisper (Mar 6, 2013)

amsawtell said:


> No, but for years there have been rumors that Sigourney Weaver is transgender because of that movie.



Really? I'm a sci-fi nut, visit blogs, read mags and never head that before.


----------



## Bruno Spatola (Mar 6, 2013)

Well, some people are borderline brain-dead, so it wouldn't surprise me if some believed Sigourney was/is transgendered. They see a strong jawline and bang, the gates of the internet are flung open. 

Some people don't deserve broadband. There have been similar theories about Lady Gaga, Jodie Foster, Jamie Lee Curtis, short-lived R'n'B star Ciara, etc. People would love it to be true -- something to talk about in their meaningless lives, eh?

Anyway.


----------



## Ariel (Mar 6, 2013)

Yes, I've come across that rumor in a documentary of all places.  It's blatantly not true.

The point is that gender is a lot more than pointing at someone and saying "male" or "female."


----------



## Man From Mars (Mar 6, 2013)

To the OP: if you envisioned an all male main cast and the story works in that capacity, then don't feel obligated to change it. Like others have said, you might be making more problems for yourself in trying to force it.

I've actually been thinking about female characters recently. Captain Janeway from Star Trek: Voyager seems to be the quintessential strong female lead because she is both in a powerful leadership position and nurturing to her crew as a maternal figure. A lot of other female characters are either "strong" female characters, or strong "female" characters. Giving a woman a gun and an abrasive demeanor doesn't instantly make her a strong female character. I think I'll write a whole post on this later once I get all my thoughts down.


----------



## Staff Deployment (Mar 7, 2013)

There's already quite a large bibliography of articles and literature on the topic of a "strong female character," and from what I've read (which admittedly is a small sample size) I've found that the term is so ill-defined it is basically meaningless, generally morphing itself to fit whatever point the author would like to make.


----------



## Whisper (Mar 7, 2013)

Staff Deployment said:


> There's already quite a large bibliography of articles and literature on the topic of a "strong female character," and from what I've read (which admittedly is a small sample size) I've found that the term is so ill-defined it is basically meaningless, generally morphing itself to fit whatever point the author would like to make.



Welcome to the study of History


----------



## GonneLights (Mar 11, 2013)

Hahaha, no no, for the reasons everyones already said. But; this is about representation, right? You feel the urge to represent women and not just men, to not contribute to Sexist Media, or, to not be a Cliche. Whatever your motive. I've been trying this for a long time - because of the lack of representation anywhere else, whenever we get ideas, it's always about white men. The writer will always write about what he sees, you can never change that. So, you have to come at it from different angles. The majority of my characters are either European (post-Colonists) or part of some evolution of the African Diaspora (post-Slaves). And, it takes that level of analysis - what would, say, a Haitian mulatto, experience? Rather than a Greco-Roman Superman. I pick on ideas from different periods of time - Harlem's New Negros, say, or a French Impressionist. You automatically get a lot of character, because first of all it's unusual, and second of all, it's a _character. _It's interesting and fun that way, to write from those angles, and you automatically represent, as accurately as is within your scope, another angle that you don't normally.  

As for women, well. I usually only have one character per book, so it's either a man, woman, or something else. Genderqueer characters are great, they're brilliant characters to write about, because nomatter where they go they're a pariah. A maverick in their own flesh. But, as for Women, it's not the same as playing with races, their culture isn't distinct to men's. Just think of, you know... Get inside a woman's head. Not like, as a whole, that's far too varied. A particular character who is a woman. Or, like... Make a male character, and then just make him female, and never tell anybody he started out as male. Because you'll perhaps naturally develop a male character more than a female one - that's a problem with me. For a lot of men, it's their ideal women who they wanna lay with. For me, it was the ideal girl I wanted to _be, _and so they were all vague avatar-reality Me's, in different drag outfits, basically. That's what men's default male characters are like, usually, ahaha. 

Anyway, I'm getting off topic. Just, if the work calls only for men, Men Without Women (heh heh) then there's no reason to fight that. I have a lot of all-male stories. Some fantastic, _counter-culture _works, like On The Road, are almost all-male. But, if you want to represent a character that isn't traditional to you, build an angle, and come at it from that angle consistently.


----------



## Ariel (Mar 11, 2013)

I think the reason why I dislike the idea of changing a male character to a female one is that, generally, so many writers will change the character but never take into account that there are dialogues that occur differently if a woman is present in a group of men or if a man is present in a group of women.  The whole dialogue of sex changes, and the interactions between that character as a man interacting with a male friend may completely change if suddenly it's a female interacting with a male friend.


----------



## Arcwood (Mar 11, 2013)

these questions may have been asked. but
*
How long is the story?
what is the major conflict?

what is t5he largets female roel int he story thus far?
*
if you can answer these I would suggest whether or not to rewrite the entire peice. I feel female characters are key, and they are even more interesting if they are not love ionterests of the main charcters. Such as she loves a character who dies.


----------



## Terry D (Mar 11, 2013)

I don't choose the sex of my characters.  They are who they are.  If I tried to manipulate that, or create a character just to fulfill some arbitrary 'quota' in my head, the story would become contrived.


----------



## DPVP (Mar 11, 2013)

amsawtell said:


> I think the reason why I dislike the idea of changing a male character to a female one is that, generally, so many writers will change the character but never take into account that there are dialogues that occur differently if a woman is present in a group of men or if a man is present in a group of women.  The whole dialogue of sex changes, and the interactions between that character as a man interacting with a male friend may completely change if suddenly it's a female interacting with a male friend.



so true, i went hiking with a bunch of my buddies today. the presence of a single female would have changed the dynamic and the topics. as would have adding in different friends. i think diversifying just to be diverse is a bad idea that hurts the story. this is a story not our portfolio.


----------



## Foxee (Mar 12, 2013)

This is one of those questions where I'd really like to break down the answer to: "Just write the story."

Too simple, I know.


----------



## Morkonan (Mar 15, 2013)

Staff Deployment said:


> Bottle-brush alien RPG squirrels do not buy books. They are not a target market.
> 
> That was easy. Ask another one.



As shadowwalker correctly guessed, it's what your story is about and what it "needs" that should determine what's actually in it. If you want to write a story targeted towards bottle-brush alien RPG toting squirrels, you'd probably include a few characters they could identify with, like windsurfing walruses wearing white wimples with wandering wrathful whales who... Too many "w's".

You don't take a story meant to be told one way and then just add salt&pepper in order to match the polls for a target audience. You *write* a story for a target audience and if you must include certain mechanics, you make sure they're already included in the story.


----------

