Guide: Writing Strong Female Characters

[PiquoPie 28]

Originally a blog by totallynotabrony

My Little Pony has a lot of in-your-face ladies.  Since most of the cast is female that's to be expected, but why don't we take a closer look?

Rainbow Dash and Applejack are clearly the stereotypical take-charge type of characters that this trope probably goes for.  They are both tomboyish and less girly than the rest.

But is "butch-feminist-don't-need-no-man" the definition of strong female?  Let's look at at a few examples of another type of character.  Rarity is very girly, but she threatened to tear some dragons apart if they hurt Spike.  Twilight Sparkle is a princess, has a pretty tiara, and loves books, but she's pretty much the most magically powerful pony anywhere.

Pinkie Pie and Fluttershy don't fit the same mold.  Pinkie is random and silly.  Fluttershy is a doormat.  But we can argue that they are both well developed, high quality characters that are capable of driving their own storylines.

Yes, this means we have to define "Strong Female Character."  Is it a strong female personality, or a strong character who happens to be female?

Here's a quote from Neil Gaiman:
  

"I always feel like the wrong person to be asked when I get asked that question because people say, ‘Well how do you write such good female characters?’ And I go, ‘Well I write people.’ Approximately half of the people I know are female and they’re cool, and they’re interesting, and so, why wouldn’t I?  I think the big thing to point out to people is, you know, possibly they should go and hang around with some women. And also, it’s worth pointing out that people, unfortunately, misunderstand the phrase ‘strong women.’ The glory of Buffy the Vampire Slayer is it was filled with strong women. Only one of those strong women had supernatural strength and an awful lot of sharpened stakes. And people sort of go ‘Well yes, of course Buffy was a strong woman. She could kick her way through a door.’ And you go ‘No, well that’s not actually what makes her a strong woman! You’re missing the point.’"

Writing what you see in reality should be a good starting place for developing characters.  Everyone has flaws and strengths.  Richard Nixon did illegal things in the Watergate scandal, but he sent the United States to the moon and got us out of Vietnam.  Genghis Khan killed millions of people, but you can't take over most of the world without seriously good military skills.  Those examples are pretty extreme, but the point is that nobody in real life is ever truly without detail to flesh out their character.  

Strong characters are important.  Their gender is another matter.  People are sexist.  We make a big deal out of things.  The first woman to do anything is lauded on the news and there are more than a billion internet search results for the phrase "first female."  The media skews things unrealistically.

Guys have a save the girl mentality.  This is fuel for the damsel in distress trope.  A damsel in distress, if she could be easily replaced with an object to be saved, comes across as flat and uninteresting.  Instead of being objectified, your female characters have to do something.  Hermione, from the Harry Potter series, is a fine example of a strong character.  Ron and Harry once had to rescue her from a troll, however, that wasn't her only contribution to the series.  She wasn't just a damsel to be rescued.

Nobody talks about strong male characters.  There are not many "dude in distress" stories, probably because they would be criticized as feminist by the media.  This doesn't seem right.  Equality is a two-way street.

An often-quoted standard of female equality is the Bechdel Test, which originated from Alison Bechdel, the creator of the comic Dykes To Watch Out For:



(I think we can all agree that Ellen Ripley is a strong female character.)

To summarize: the story being tested has to have at least two women who have a conversation that is about something other than men.  This is a loose set of rules that establishes female characters as something other than a plot point.  Another test is the Mako Mori Test, named after the character in the movie Pacific Rim.  It states that a story has to have at least one female character who gets her own narrative arc that is not about supporting a man’s story.

Neither of these two tests is perfect.  The Bechdel Test started out as a joke.  The Mako Mori Test is failed by the very movie it was inspired by.  Only about half of modern movies pass the Bechdel Test, and only about one in five pass both tests.  Still, the tests can give an indication of having interesting, useful female characters while while the story itself can be something not girly at all - like Pacific Rim's epic robot fights.

Ultimately, that's the best takeaway from this.  To be a strong character, they can't be useless in the story - no matter what the story is.  Strong female characters have a slightly different set of rules to play by, modern gender relations being what they are, but they are strong characters first, female second.

Going too far can result in an unrealistic, unlikable Mary Sue character who unbalances the story just by being there.  There's nothing wrong with a female badass, but she has to have a personality to go with it.

So where does this leave us for My Little Pony?  The Mane 6 are all female.  Some are more Action Girl than others, but all are vital to the story.  Someone did their homework to establish a group of personalities that balance and complement each other, and feel real (if, admittedly, slightly more exaggerated than real life)

Write what you know.  Write who you know.  There's no better way to create strong characters than portraying the real people in your life - not gender stereotypes.

[Wind Chaser 4,768]

This is a good read, I do draw from real life in my portrayals, and I like the philosophy that some have come up with as looking at the characters as characters first, not letting their gender define them.

 

Nobody talks about strong male characters.  There are not many "dude in distress" stories, probably because they would be criticized as feminist by the media.  This doesn't seem right.  Equality is a two-way street.

 

Which really isn't right here? Is it the concept of "dude in distress", or the fact that it would be labeled as "feminist", or that no one ever talks about strong male characters? I do agree with equality being a "two-way street", but an issue I generally raise with this show is its portrayal of male characters as either dumb, servile, or unlucky with few exceptions, and it's why I'm opposed to Snips and Snails; because of the potential of such concepts to propagate negative stereotypes toward boys.

[PiquoPie 28]

I'm not entirely sure I understand what you are saying but I will try to address it.

 

The way many girls in distress are traditionally portrayed would create what many would describe as a pathetic man. The kind of man who would be made fun of. Put in the role of "in distress" and you have what I would consider a negative sexist image.  And unfortunately, negative images of men are often associated with feminism as, at one point, a notable percentage of feminists were quite vocal about men in a negative way. True both genders have their tropes when they talk of each other. But depicting another and commenting on another are of vastly different degrees. And the idea of depicting a weak helpless man being rescued would offend some.

 

 

 

because of the potential of such concepts to propagate negative stereotypes toward boys.

 

And thus we get to the sexist depiction of men. It's much like the sexist depiction of women. Even when men are rescued they are often displayed as strong at other points in the story.

[Wind Chaser 4,768]

The way many girls in distress are traditionally portrayed would create what many would describe as a pathetic man. The kind of man who would be made fun of. Put in the role of "in distress" and you have what I would consider a negative sexist image. And unfortunately, negative images of men are often associated with feminism as, at one point, a notable percentage of feminists were quite vocal about men in a negative way. True both genders have their tropes when they talk of each other. But depicting another and commenting on another are of vastly different degrees. And the idea of depicting a weak helpless man being rescued would offend some.

 

And thus we get to the sexist depiction of men. It's much like the sexist depiction of women. Even when men are rescued they are often displayed as strong at other points in the story.

I get it now. The "dude in distress" wouldn't really offend me if male bashing wasn't so prominent as it has been over the past couple of decades, with tropes such as the bumbling father and "girls rule, boys drool", etc.

 

I'm just saying that MLP is guilty of negative male portrayals and people are usually quick to give it a pass because "it's a girls' show" or some other BS excuse. One good example would be how Spike has gotten treated as a narrative punching bag way too much this season, Big Mac is never really allowed to say anything, they just make him shut up and work rather than open up every once in a while, and Shining Armor actually referenced how he played the "dude in distress" twice in "The Crystal Empire" (though personally I'm willing to give that one a pass because he and Cadance were in it together both times and both are otherwise strong characters).

 

Don't even get me started on Snips and Snails. I gave sexism as one of the reasons why Derpy gets shut down and Snails gets a pass.

Edited March 10, 2014 by WindChaserPegasus

[Revolver Bobcat 45]

I don't like the sound of strong female characters. Scratch that, i don't like the sound of strong caracters at all. It fells like they're somehow superior to normal writen characters or something. Personally im more into "Believable Character". But that's besides the point.

 

There's something i think is missing here and that's the part of being part of a gender. Sure, your characters are characters first and being a man or a woman are (Or should) be second, but the gender is still part of the character. No, i won't rant about male/female tropes or about how a man or woman should behave. It's about how genders are portrait and treated regardles of what is right or wrong or what you think.

 

Sure, you can like MLP and be a man, there's no problem about it, but say that in pub or in your classroom. At best you're shrugged with a few odd looks at your direction. At worst (For example) they'll laugh and then kick the shit out of you. Whether is right or wrong, society expects from you to "Act like a man" eating nails for breakfast and sixtynine-ing chicks all day and night (or punching other dudes, i don't know). And whether you like it or not, this will change you as a character. It maybe a big change or small change, but it will shape your character in some way.

 

For the looks of it, equestria has other expectations but none are gender based (Except all male military i guess?). Like, for example, you have to follow your cutie mark, whether you like it or not (But they all like it, except in that MMC episode i guess). It's justified since its another realm altogether and it doesn't has to have our same set of rules.

 

Also, this might be a radical idea, but i think men and woman... are... diferent.

 

*Cue world wide Gasp and Booing*

 

I know, i know, just hear me out.

 

What i meant is that we're physically diferent. Women, whether they like it or not, are more prone to mood swings, they have to deal with menstruation and, of course, birth (which is a 9 month thing not just the moment when they give birth). It may not be something were you should be taking into acount the whole time but it is part of who your character is.

 

In the end the question you should be asking is "How being a woman changes someone?", It could be anyone, how did it change your mother? or your sister, girlfriend, aunt, or any woman?

 

I can't answer that.

 

But, like you said, this is secondary, your character's features should be first, then the gender.

 

----------------------

 

Another thing i think it deserve some time is the confusion between "Strong character" and "Badass character".

 

First you don't have to come with a badass female to make a strong character, which you may think is obious, but it's not, really, i saw it a lot. They think making a strong character they NEED to have some kind of badass moment or something.

 

Let's say Rarity, she is a refined person with a lot of talent and likes the fine things that life has to offer. That said, when she is invited to an event where she might get dirty and sweaty of couse she will say no at first but her sister is more important that her fobias so in the end she says yes. She isn't a strong character becouse she stood up against 3 dragons she's a strong character becouse you think she could be a real person. Same with Fluttershy an Pinkie Pie. They have their personalities and journeys and they act accordingly.

 

Also, Power =/= Badass. Ellen Ripley wasn't badass becouse she killed the alien queen, she was badass becouse she put her own life on the line for someone else's. It's what you do with the power not the power itself.

 

And maybe im wrong in this one. The thing is when i think of "Strong Characters" i think of characters that makes sense. If a princess that has never seen battle, or even a sword or a lance, and then one day she has to face battle i can only think of 2 outcomes:

 

1- She runs away.

2- She tries to pull out a fight and fails miserably.

 

And in my opinion that doesn't make her a bad or weak character, heck, i can't pull out a fight but i sure can run fast!Then again, not all female characters have to be princesses.

Edited March 10, 2014 by Revolver Bobcat

[PiquoPie 28]

I don't like the sound of strong female characters. Scratch that, i don't like the sound of strong caracters at all. It fells like they're somehow superior to normal writen characters or something. Personally im more into "Believable Character". But that's besides the point.

 

 

I both agree and disagree with this.

 

Let tell you a story about my experience with how most people percieve this though. When I was in 8th grade part of our science class was on sex ed which included social issues arround dating. We were asked different questions and if we agreed with statment A we would go to one side of the room and if we did not agree we would go to the other side.

 

When asked if we wanted to be the strong parter in a relationship only me and a person who misunderstood which side to be on went to the side that did not want to be the strong person in a realtionship. When asked why I explained that everyone has their own strengths and weakenesses and if you are "the strong one" that implies that you are better than the other person in everything. I wanted someone that was better than me at some things, and that I was better at in other areas.

 

And thats how people see the world. Stong people and weak people. It's an easy way to organize the world into different schema. However I would say that some people are just better than others at whatever group of tasks they are presented in. Some people would unanimously be considered strong people. And that means that sometimes you need strong characters.

 

Now, getting back into gender.

 

 

What i meant is that we're physically diferent. Women, whether they like it or not, are more prone to mood swings, they have to deal with menstruation and, of course, birth (which is a 9 month thing not just the moment when they give birth). It may not be something were you should be taking into acount the whole time but it is part of who your character is.

 

Back when they were developing the DSM 3 (I think it was 3) they wanted to add menstration with a list of commonly accepted list of behaviors to the list of mental conditions. Well, this didn't go over so well and two women did some studies and found that men and women have the same effects commonly associated with menstration on the same schedual if they removed the phisical ailments from the study. This lead to the eventual theory, that I believe still stands, that people slowly loose sleep, about an hour each night, until they take some time to sleep in. It's the lack of sleep that causes the bahavioral issues assosiated with menstration.

 

So even our commonly held perception of differences betwen genders isn't always what it seems to be.

 

Another thing i think it deserve some time is the confusion between "Strong character" and "Badass character".

 

First you don't have to come with a badass female to make a strong character, which you may think is obious, but it's not, really, i saw it a lot. They think making a strong character they NEED to have some kind of badass moment or something.

 

Agreed. Though I also think men and women would describe stong in different ways. Thus men often thing of strong as badass so they write badass women when they want strong women.

 

 

 

One way to write strong characters is to write confident characters. Even a character who is constantly weaker and has to only flee can be strong if they seem in control.

[Revolver Bobcat 45]

I both agree and disagree with this.

 

Let tell you a story about my experience with how most people percieve this though. When I was in 8th grade part of our science class was on sex ed which included social issues arround dating. We were asked different questions and if we agreed with statment A we would go to one side of the room and if we did not agree we would go to the other side.

 

When asked if we wanted to be the strong parter in a relationship only me and a person who misunderstood which side to be on went to the side that did not want to be the strong person in a realtionship. When asked why I explained that everyone has their own strengths and weakenesses and if you are "the strong one" that implies that you are better than the other person in everything. I wanted someone that was better than me at some things, and that I was better at in other areas.

 

I think when they said "Strong" they really meant "In charge". In a perfect world the one in charge would be reliable and confident but also humble to be able to swollow its pride when she/he doesn't know what to do.

 

 

Back when they were developing the DSM 3 (I think it was 3) they wanted to add menstration with a list of commonly accepted list of behaviors to the list of mental conditions. Well, this didn't go over so well and two women did some studies and found that men and women have the same effects commonly associated with menstration on the same schedual if they removed the phisical ailments from the study. This lead to the eventual theory, that I believe still stands, that people slowly loose sleep, about an hour each night, until they take some time to sleep in. It's the lack of sleep that causes the bahavioral issues assosiated with menstration.

 

So even our commonly held perception of differences betwen genders isn't always what it seems to be.

 

Eh... maybe? I don't agree in taking out the physical ailments i mean that's like taking out fever as a symptom for a cold, i would be on the edge of breakdown if i would feel a continous kick in the balls for who-knows how much time. Plus, have you been with a pregnant woman 24/7? it can get silly real fast.

 

 

Agreed. Though I also think men and women would describe stong in different ways. Thus men often thing of strong as badass so they write badass women when they want strong women.

 

Personally i think of Strong qualities as Noble or Admirable qualities. When a think of Fluttershy i think of a character that needs to be dragged around a lot but she has a lot of admirable traits, compasion and kindness being a few of them.

 

 

One way to write strong characters is to write confident characters. Even a character who is constantly weaker and has to only flee can be strong if they seem in control.

 

Not necessarialy, fighting itself can be irresponsable and even if it wasn't fleeing isn't that bad, facing the problem head-on is not always the best solution.

[PiquoPie 28]

Not necessarialy, fighting itself can be irresponsable and even if it wasn't fleeing isn't that bad, facing the problem head-on is not always the best solution.

 

It was an example. The idea I was trying to convey is that the character could loose, be wrong, or display any other form of being weak, but if done right they could still be strong.

 

Lets create an example. A teen girl is abused by both parents (could be verbal, but endures and even encourages the abuse so that her little sister and little brother don't have to suffer. If done right, because that could easily be done wrong, you could have a character in a very weak situation, but she is still strong and is even protecting others. She could be meek, shy, pretty much any weak descriptor, but she would still be strong.