Those pesky women
Sep. 24th, 2008 06:25 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lyoreGAH. Been trying to write a post about recurring female characters and recurring male characters in SPN all night, and every time I try it ends up longer than War and Peace and impossible to put in any kind of coherent order.
It all boils down to the fact that, all other things being equal, as an audience we expect the young, hot, FEMALE recurring character to have been introduced primarily as a love interest for one of the male characters. But, as an audience, we expect the young, hot, MALE recurring character to have been introduced primarily for plot reasons, and further that it is extremely unlikely that the main purpose of said male character is to be a love interest for one of the male leads.
And how this is always going to colour how fans reaction to a character, even if they don't have any invested interest in shipping the main characters. Especially in a show where the introduction of canonical romance is likely to have a significant effect on the core structure of a show.
And how this isn't actually always a sign of misogyny on the part of the fans; how sometimes it's a 'I don't trust the PTB to balance the new love interest with the relationships (platonic or otherwise) I signed on to see in the first place', or even a 'I'm sick of every significant female character always having to be framed in terms of a potential love interest', or maybe just 'I really like the show the way it is and don't want to see drastic changes in focus'. AND HOW ALL OF THESE REACTIONS ARE PERFECTLY LEGITIMATE.
And how the audience expectation of significant female characters of the right age to be primarily love interests is a product of years of experience, and not some figment of fan's over-involved imaginations. And how wanting to see female characters existing as their own people and not merely a potential love interest may also have nothing to do with shipping but simply a desire to see female characters who aren't defined by who they are (or aren't) sleeping with.
And how ideas of studio interference in search of delivering the "right" demographic (ie not us), and ideas of "'natural' creative processes" being interfered with, and the always uneasy relationship between (largely) female fen and (largely) male creators and studios all feed into the above.
And how all of these things are going to combine and lead of different reactions to new male characters and new female characters, and maybe it isn't enough to just sweep it all under the carpet of "fannish misogyny".
(And all that said, I have seen some truly vile reactions to female characters that I DO believe are rooted in misogyny. All I ask is that people accept this isn't always the case - that sometimes people have valid reasons for their reactions, even if you don't agree.)
It all boils down to the fact that, all other things being equal, as an audience we expect the young, hot, FEMALE recurring character to have been introduced primarily as a love interest for one of the male characters. But, as an audience, we expect the young, hot, MALE recurring character to have been introduced primarily for plot reasons, and further that it is extremely unlikely that the main purpose of said male character is to be a love interest for one of the male leads.
And how this is always going to colour how fans reaction to a character, even if they don't have any invested interest in shipping the main characters. Especially in a show where the introduction of canonical romance is likely to have a significant effect on the core structure of a show.
And how this isn't actually always a sign of misogyny on the part of the fans; how sometimes it's a 'I don't trust the PTB to balance the new love interest with the relationships (platonic or otherwise) I signed on to see in the first place', or even a 'I'm sick of every significant female character always having to be framed in terms of a potential love interest', or maybe just 'I really like the show the way it is and don't want to see drastic changes in focus'. AND HOW ALL OF THESE REACTIONS ARE PERFECTLY LEGITIMATE.
And how the audience expectation of significant female characters of the right age to be primarily love interests is a product of years of experience, and not some figment of fan's over-involved imaginations. And how wanting to see female characters existing as their own people and not merely a potential love interest may also have nothing to do with shipping but simply a desire to see female characters who aren't defined by who they are (or aren't) sleeping with.
And how ideas of studio interference in search of delivering the "right" demographic (ie not us), and ideas of "'natural' creative processes" being interfered with, and the always uneasy relationship between (largely) female fen and (largely) male creators and studios all feed into the above.
And how all of these things are going to combine and lead of different reactions to new male characters and new female characters, and maybe it isn't enough to just sweep it all under the carpet of "fannish misogyny".
(And all that said, I have seen some truly vile reactions to female characters that I DO believe are rooted in misogyny. All I ask is that people accept this isn't always the case - that sometimes people have valid reasons for their reactions, even if you don't agree.)
no subject
Date: 2008-09-24 12:32 pm (UTC)(Also, have I mentioned how gorgeous your banner is? Let's start introducing some of THEM as love interests for the heroine, what do you say? Yes, even Alec Guinnes! ;))
no subject
Date: 2008-09-25 09:20 am (UTC)(But now I have a sudden urge for Mon Mothma/Obi-Wan fic.)