More gender/scifi thoughts

[itsallovernow]

loligo raised a really interesting question here which lead me to more thoughts about feminism and gender and identity and science fiction. And storytelling, I guess. Because ultimately, it all comes down to storytelling, whether we are telling our own histories, or spinning out our imaginative wanderings, or following the path of someone else's characters.

One of the thing's that loligo posits is that as a feminist in this day and age (and I'm applying this largely to people around my generation. I honestly have no idea how women 10 or 15 years younger than I am, women in their teens or early 20s feel about this issue), it's difficult to reconcile some traditional female choices with the ideals we were brought up to embody, the chains and traditions we were taught to reject or at least knew we had the right to reject. Many of us are facing the ideas of marriage and motherhood, and are at a loss as to how those things relate to our ideals, to the things we thought we would be doing at this age, at this stage. We want the option of choice, and yet hate the idea of falling into a role so long held by women, so defined by a male dominated society's expectation of what women should be and do.

And it makes me wonder if that dichotomy doesn't lend itself to a lot of harsh criticism towards genre heroines and children. Now, I'll say straight off that it seems exceedingly difficult to do a baby/kid storyline well, and I acknowledge that openly. However, the bulk of the responses I see to any hint of a storyline involving a strong female character having a child are overwhemlingly negative.

Is it a fear of a story told poorly, a story that doesn't reflect the myriad complications of having a child, of bearing a child, let alone dealing with that child being some sort of alien hybrid, or savior, or "special" gift. Or is it instead a disappointment that our heroines are being forced to take on a role that we ourselves have intellectual doubts about? Does it feel like forcing this traditional choice on someone who is part of our collective story/mythology instead of allowing that woman to exist without children and still be a fully realized person? Many of us have or want children, adore those children, but still loathe the portrayals of mothers and women with children in our genre shows.

I think there is a division between what we want to see as fantasy and what we want to live. Okay, I know that's true. I don't want to live on a space ship, or shoot people, or wear leather pants (because I've done that and they are not comfortable!!), but I do want to have a sort of effortless confidence in my skills, in my ability to take care of myself and those I love. I distinguish the fantasy from the reality, taking the reality of those qualities and following them up with squee at the visual representation of the fantasy (and the visual representation of my fantasy's life's partner who looks much better in his own pants than any of my own partners:)

There's something about that choice, about the idea of having children and finding a partner, and finding a place in the world, but mostly about having children that hits most of us where we live. And it causes a visceral reaction to see this represented in our entertainment. In part because the representation can be so false and facile, can end up totally obscuring the mother and in fact robbing her of character status in favor of "mother" status, something that I think many of us fear in real life (at least it's something I see friends who are new mothers struggling with). And in part because it puts a weight and life on pregnancy and childrearing that is definitely realistic, but without all of the other things that go along with becoming a parent - without the fears or doubts or anger, without the exhaustion and glee and stupidity and awe. And more than anything, I think adding a child or pregnancy to a story puts an element of realism into that story that robs it of the power of the fantasy, of the story itself. Because putting a child in danger is serious business. Poor decisions can't be excused in the same way they can be when dealing with adults. And women run the risk of appearing unsympathetic if they don't want children, don't like children, and it seems necessary to somehow sway them over to the side of finding their maternal instinct. Which forces us into a no win position as female viewers, of products of feminism.

Because women should have the right to have children or not, to want them or not, without risking judgement from society. And it's hard enough to face that judgement without having our heroines confront it as well, without having writers eager to force a new facet onto a story force that choice, or lack of choice onto the characters we follow because their lives are not our own.

That being said, I do think the potential to do a pregnancy storyline right is there. I (being notoriously non-critical and acknowledging that fact) liked (mostly) how Farscape handled their baby storyline because in a lot of ways it made sense for the development of the characters. And I'd have been willing to ignore many things for the exchange in PK Wars when Aeryn expresses reservations about the whole having children thing, when she admits that she wants the kid because of John, to keep him close. Family is something Aeryn had to define for herself, and she did, and she's sticking to it. I loved her entire reaction to the pregnancy - the things she did that made no sense, as well as the ultimate act of giving birth in the middle of battle. And I think The X-Files could have handled their baby storyline better if they'd never let Scully have a baby. Because the idea of a woman who was isolated, who was struggling with her own sense of self, with her faith, with science, with so many things and who wanted a child, but had the choice taken from her was a much more interesting story than a miracle baby. I also like that Boomer is determined to have a say in what happens to her child, that she is part of something greater, but she's also figuring out how to be who she is, whomever that may be.

As we struggle with our own definitions of identity, we need our characters to stay strong in theirs, to maintain those things which drew us to them, and it's difficult to see that when their identities get obscured by storylines that have more to do with soap opera than dynamic development. We want something larger than life that makes us appreciate what we have, and it's difficult to do that when our heroines are obscured by the same forces that we face.

Comments

[somedaybitch.livejournal.com]

i'm going to ask you to expand on two things, if you don't mind. and i do so because i completely don't get the controversy, if you can call it that, which may be too harsh a word but at the same time i don't think so.

the first is this:

Does it feel like forcing this traditional choice on someone who is part of our collective story/mythology instead of allowing that woman to exist without children and still be a fully realized person? Many of us have or want children, adore those children, but still loathe the portrayals of mothers and women with children in our genre shows.

my question to both statements is "why?" why is giving a strong female character a child somehow making that character less than fully realized as a person? and why are women who have or want children loathe to see the portrayals in genre shows?


and this:

As we struggle with our own definitions of identity, we need our characters to stay strong in theirs, to maintain those things which drew us to them, and it's difficult to see that when their identities get obscured by storylines that have more to do with soap opera than dynamic development. We want something larger than life that makes us appreciate what we have, and it's difficult to do that when our heroines are obscured by the same forces that we face.

so is it, then, the characters/storyline that are the issue, or those identity struggles themselves, now projected on to characters?

maybe the key, or the source of my not getting this, is "heroines". i don't distinguish between "hero" and "heroine". they are simply "characters", and the "good" ones are collectively referred to as "heroes". also, possibly, is the implication by "heroines" that women are looking for them, and i, myself, am not. i'm just looking for good characters.

further thoughts, if you don't mind my picking your brain?

[thassalia.livejournal.com]

I don't think that giving a strong female character a child makes that person less than fully realized, but I think the potential is always there to turn that charachter into a concept of mother isntead of the same character who is figuring out how to be a mother. And it's something I see on a regular basis in everyday life, how easily women are obscured into mother once they have a child instead of remaining themselves and having parnethood added to their personalities.

I think (on a personal level) it's the fear of seeing a beloved character stereotyped or lessened or obscured. It doesn't have to happen, but we've all seem it, and the risk is always there.

And I think I'm asking the same quesiotn. Is it the character/storyline, or is it the personal identity struggles or a combination of both? I don't know. I'd like to have other people provide their own answers or thoughts.

And when I say heroines, it's a lazy way of saying strong female characters. Because I don't have an issues with the gendering of that title (especially when I'm being lazy). And personally, yeah I am looking for strong female characters. I am looking for women of strength and character to like and admire.

[somedaybitch.livejournal.com]

I don't think that giving a strong female character a child makes that person less than fully realized, but I think the potential is always there to turn that charachter into a concept of mother isntead of the same character who is figuring out how to be a mother.

i like that distinction. a lot. and i think it's what never bothered me about the characterization of Aeryn, as you discussed earlier.

And I think I'm asking the same quesiotn. Is it the character/storyline, or is it the personal identity struggles or a combination of both? I don't know. I'd like to have other people provide their own answers or thoughts.

i don't know that i can answer that for myself, because characters are so genderless to me. if i don't like them, it's not that it's a weak female that i'm not liking, it's that the character blows. the female is weak because the character is badly drawn, not because it's a female that is weak.

if that sentence even makes sense.


And when I say heroines, it's a lazy way of saying strong female characters. Because I don't have an issues with the gendering of that title (especially when I'm being lazy). And personally, yeah I am looking for strong female characters. I am looking for women of strength and character to like and admire.

interesting. and i'm just looking for strong characters. it's not crucial which way their plumbing routes.

that said, i am *always* grateful to see strong women characters but i think that's because a large majority of writers have been male, so when they get it right that pleases me...but it pleases me on the same scale as someone getting a cop show right pleases me. it's not terribly complicated but does require a lot of research and work.

it indicates to me, not an interest in gender parity but an interest in character depth. if you *truly* care about writing your characters as fully realized and multi-dimensionally as possible, it won't matter the gender of either writer *or* character.

[coffeeandink.livejournal.com]

Very quickly: I think when pregnancy arcs come up, it often becomes evident that the primary writers of TV stories are men--and that pregnancy seems to be the thing that breaks their ability to conceive of women as subjects and not objects.

And I think a lot of what you say is interesting, but I'm uncomfortable with how you go from your own experience to "our" experience.

[thassalia.livejournal.com]

think when pregnancy arcs come up, it often becomes evident that the primary writers of TV stories are men--and that pregnancy seems to be the thing that breaks their ability to conceive of women as subjects and not objects.
Agreed, strongly.

And yeah, I think much of this probably relates far more to my own experience than a collective experience, but I'm also interested in how much of a collective experience this discomfort is. It never serves anyone (and I'm frequently guilty of ignoring that) to assume a collective, when I'm talking about a personal response.

I would love to see other responses - visceral and intellectual responses to this concept, to the question that Loligo raises.

[monanotlisa.livejournal.com]

I don't want to live on a space ship, or shoot people, or wear leather pants (because I've done that and they are not comfortable!!)

Space ships are not comfortable..?

::ducks::

In part because the representation can be so false and facile, can end up totally obscuring the mother and in fact robbing her of character status in favor of "mother" status, something that I think many of us fear in real life (at least it's something I see friends who are new mothers struggling with).

Totally obscuring the mother's original personality, yes. This rings very true.

And women run the risk of appearing unsympathetic if they don't want children, don't like children, and it seems necessary to somehow sway them over to the side of finding their maternal instinct. Which forces us into a no win position as female viewers, of products of feminism.

Yes. Absolutely.

As we struggle with our own definitions of identity, we need our characters to stay strong in theirs, to maintain those things which drew us to them, and it's difficult to see that when their identities get obscured by storylines that have more to do with soap opera than dynamic development.

I generally agree, but just think of strong shifts of identity, as with Buffy, for example, who went a long way from Slayer Girl who craved the white picket fence to Woman Warrior embracing and sharing her powers. Admittedly, there was nothing soap opera-ish about this, so it doesn't really apply to the developments you had in mind.

We want something larger than life that makes us appreciate what we have, and it's difficult to do that when our heroines are obscured by the same forces that we face.

Hmm. This is, perhaps, truer for sci-fi -- and urban fantasy -- than other shows, even mystery shows where real life troubles may be just the element to add new layers. I agree that watching Aeryn and John have a discussion about, say, diaper-changing duties is a strange image, but then again, wouldn't these two be exactly the ones to enable a transfer the other way round -- to infuse our own lives, the forces we face, with the honour, courage, and humour that's there but that we don't always see?

[thassalia.livejournal.com]

I generally agree, but just think of strong shifts of identity, as with Buffy, for example, who went a long way from Slayer Girl who craved the white picket fence to Woman Warrior embracing and sharing her powers.

Oh, I'm very fond of strong shifts of identity. I love dynamic characters. What I mean here is that sometimes the whole baby concept can obscure a characters identity instead of becoming part of it.

I agree that watching Aeryn and John have a discussion about, say, diaper-changing duties is a strange image, but then again, wouldn't these two be exactly the ones to enable a transfer the other way round -- to infuse our own lives, the forces we face, with the honour, courage, and humour that's there but that we don't always see? That'd be the ideal, yes. But I think I as a viewer have some trepidation about seeing that happen in most televised drama.

[apathocles.livejournal.com]

There are lots of reasons why I'm not particularly fond of baby storylines. ;) A few, off the top of my head:

--They simply don't interest me.

--Like you mentioned -- the danger factor. I don't want the characters constantly having to worry about what they can and can't do.

--Realism: constantly having to change nappies, feed them, et cetera. Not exciting for me to watch.

--Lack of realism: ignoring all the stuff in the previous point, and thus pissing me off, because I hate a lack of realism. (Why, yes -- I am impossible to please. *g*)

--Babies with SPECIAL POWERS. Spare me.

--All the inherent characterisation issues, et cetera.

--This type of storyline inevitably impacts on the women far more than upon the men. And, okay, duh, but seriously. I honestly think the FS storyline should've been more about John, albeit in a completely different way than with Aeryn. John totally strikes me as the stay-at-home mum (moreso than Aeryn, anyhow), and... he just pissed me off so much in s4. You know this. ;) Totally in love with the concept of the baby (and Aeryn as mother), but I never got the impression that he thought of it as a person, at least not up until the end. The relationship dynamics bugged the hell out of me. (One of my biggest problems with later-seasons FS was that the writers seemed unwilling to acknowledge that a lot of unhealthy behaviour was, in fact, unhealthy. I don't want the characters to be saints -- far from it -- but I want the writers to let us know that they know this is the case. I can't actually remember precisely what it was about s4 FS that struck me this way, but I definitely had that reaction on more than one occasion.)

--As mentioned in an earlier comment: these stories are generally written by men. 'Nuff said.

--The inevitable rabid 'shipper flailing. Gack.

--I don't want to see a freakin' baby take up screentime that could be better put to use with my favourite minor characters, damnit. ;) Especially since babies tend to become incredibly central -- not just to the parents, but to everyone. Other characters and storylines get shoved into the background, and my favourites generally get little enough attention as it is.

--I want sci in my fi, damnit! If I want to see babies, I'll watch a soapie. (Which is one of the many, many reasons why I don't watch them.) I'd rather see a metaphor, thank you very much. Metaphors are what sci-fi does best.

I could probably go on, but I'll spare you. *g* Suffice it to say, I'm a cranky bitch who a) wants to be entertained (and for me, that doesn't include babies), and b) doesn't like to see characters become All About The Baby, whatever the gender.

I will say that I adored the living crap out of the Talyn storyline, however. Giving a newborn heavy weaponry and a personality disorder some form of independence goes a long way, with me. Plus, you don't get the inevitable 'ooh, so KYOOOOOT!' cooing, and the nursing, and whathaveyou. (Although, I did think that Talyn was pretty frelling cute. Aww.)

[thassalia.livejournal.com]

Hee - all of those are excellent reasons for disliking a baby storyline:) And reasons I'm guessing many fellow viewers share!!