multifaceted female characters in fandom

[tielan]

eta: It would probably help if I could spell "multifaceted"! *FACEPALM OF DOOM*

In a discussion of the hackneyed line "there aren't any well-written female characters in canon" as an excuse for why people ignore, deride, and bitch about female characters in fandom, I had an interesting conversation with dknightshade about the inability of fans to get the idea of multifaceted women into their heads. (The whole post is found here.)

I'm beginning to think that the problem is only half with the writers of shows - the other half is fans' reluctance to attribute anything more than a single ability or aspect to a female character.

So I'll start with this question for the Atlantis fans: How many times have you heard from your f-list or yourself thought that Teyla's "just" the tits and ass of the Stargate Atlantis outfit?

The fact that Teyla has a kind of telepathy based on her Wraith DNA that has saved the members of the expedition more than once (Siege III and Submersion immediately spring to mind), or that she picked up the use of Earth weaponry (and Wraith and Genii) in less than three months and seems sufficiently proficient in it that none of the military men around give her a second glance when she's wielding it, or that Ronon defers to her authority while challenging almost everyone else's, or that it took her all of ten seconds to make an assessment of Rodney's work on the "Shadows" machine in Phantoms and tell crazy-visions!Sheppard to "pull that plug now!" doesn't seem to register on these peoples' radars.

No, the only thing that matters is that her clothing shows her belly button (omg! my eyes! a belly button!) and the curves of her breasts (dear god, what are those things? dirtypillows! cover them up!).

Hyperbole? Maybe a little - but not all that much from the attitudes I've seen around fandom.

Have you ever noticed that the definition of women on TV starts with their clothing? Moreso than male characters, a woman's clothing defines her. So if female characters dress "like men" then they may have a claim to being worthwhile characters - Sam Carter, Elizabeth Weir, and most of the female complement of Atlantis fit into this category. But Teyla Emmagan and Vala Mal Doran? If Teyla dresses skimpily (and there are some interesting thoughts on Teyla's clothing in friendshipper's LJ), then fans are far more inclined to dismiss her as mere eye-candy for the masses and without any other purpose or function within the show.

Female characters who aren't "dressed appropriate to western standards of modesty" start off hampered by the assumption that they're eyecandy (and in the world of television pretty, they may be - but no more than Cameron Mitchell, John Sheppard or Ronon Dex) and are summarily dismissed by most fans thereof. Anything they try to do is thereafter ignored or offensive to said fans.

The perception of one-dimensionality in female Stargate characters doesn't stop with Teyla, and isn't limited to appearance. Does anyone remember the kerfuffle when Sam showed an emotional preference for Jack O'Neill in Stargate? "Outrage! Offense! It makes her weak/pitiful/stupid/useless/[insert derogatary term here]!" Part of that was related to fan identification and shipping wars, but bringing Sam out of the box of merely "the soldier providing the technical solution" caused conniptions in fandom.

The idea of Sam as a soldier/scientist and a woman blew fandom's brains. The idea of Teyla as a primitive alien who is yet capable and trusted enough to be left in charge of the city has received similar dismissal. And I recall (somewhat vaguely - it was back in S1) this conversation with a group of people who believed Elizabeth was a pacifist because she'd been a negotiator/diplomatic figure on Earth.

A strong woman cannot love a man without appearing weak; just the same way an alien from a primitive culture cannot learn to use computers; or a negotiator would never use a gun as a weapon of last resort (or first resort). Fandom has quite a bit of trouble assigning more than one characteristic to women.

We seem to carry the madonna/whore dichotomy into our perception of feminine ability. Female characters must be either this or that, they cannot be both.

A woman cannot be good and flawed. She cannot be emotionally strong and show weakness. She cannot show skin and be intelligent.

John Sheppard may be a military man with a geekish side, but Teyla cannot be both a woman from a primitive culture and capable of running the city in the two weeks of Elizabeth's absence.

And it works with flaws and weaknesses as well: Rodney can be a brilliant astrophysicist and an arrogant ass when he blows up five-sixths of a solar system, but Elizabeth can't be a steel-balled power-monger in her head-games with the IOC and still be an idiot when she walks into a room with Buggy!Shep and closes the door behind her after being warned twice!

Why do we do this to female characters - boil them down to a single feature or a single aspect, as though every woman who ever lived was a cardboard cutout? Why must we pick one female character, give her all the graces of the universe and then make every other woman inferior to her? (Mary Sue-ism - whether Mary-Suing a canon character, or creating our own self-insert Mary Sue.)

Is there any way to persuade fans to stop it?

I applaud gehayi and the people participating in the femgenficathon, as well as the people running comms like samcarter_gen, and encourage fans to get involved there (although the femgenficathon is about to conclude for 2007) - they're great places to start.

Anyone got any other thoughts on how to work at developing a greater acceptance of multifaceted women in fanon?

Comments

[saeva.livejournal.com]

For the record, I think the view of Elizabeth as a pacifist comes from the fact that she is established as anti-arms in SG-1. Now, mind you, a person -- especially a negotiator -- can be anti-arms for a lot of reasons without pacifism playing into it but I think that's what gets people started on that track.

- Andrea.

[tielan]

Aha.

I never saw Elizabeth in SG1, so I don't know how she was played there. I figured it was a kind of holdover from Daniel in SG1, who, for years, was portrayed as weapons-incompetent, if not refusing outright to touch a gun.

Also, maybe it's just my perception, but "anti-arms" seems rather vague. Was she anti-any-kind-of-weaponry-at-all, believing that all problems should be solve diplomatically? Anti-arms-race, feeling that the current state of "my weapons are a match for yours" is pointless machoism? Or does she 'merely' believe in gun control?

[saeva.livejournal.com]

For you, I looked up the direct quote related to it

---

WEIR
Well, frankly Sir, I have absolutely no idea what you want from me.

HAYES
You've brokered a dozen of the most sensitive international treaties in modern times. You speak god knows how many languages.

WEIR
Just five.

HAYES
Five.

[He nods his head, pausing.]

HAYES
I suppose your aversion to the military will be an issue.

WEIR
What are we talking about, exactly.

HAYES
You running the Stargate program.

---

Hayes refers to the then newly inaugurated President Hayes. Striking a deal with the to-be IOA and putting a civilian leader in charge of SGC is basically his first SGC-related act in office. Elizabeth is chosen in part because of her aversion to the military, it was a good compromise when considering who to replace the recently promoted General Hammond (former leader of the SGC).

So, she is established as having an "aversion to the military" and later cited as prefering peace over war, which is what causes her aversion to the military -- she feels they're too quick to war.

Anyway. I didn't say that in the first comment, but except for that little bit a big word to what you're saying. And you should check out verstehen's recent post on older women in canons. We came up with a list of over 45 women over 40 in canons with fandoms. Here (http://verstehen.livejournal.com/331359.html) it is. You might be interested.

- Andrea.

[tielan]

See, "aversion to the military" can mean a lot of things - and for an international negotiator, somehow I don't think it means either "pacifist" or "anti-weapons" - but that's my take on it.

(Thank you so much for going to look that up!)

Tah for the link. I remember it from skimming the f-list yesterday, but was too busy on the metafandom links to do more than glance over it.

[ryf.livejournal.com]

I figured it was a kind of holdover from Daniel in SG1, who, for years, was portrayed as weapons-incompetent, if not refusing outright to touch a gun.

That's more of a fan-perception than actualy writing, IMO. He very, very wuickly gets used to carrying a gun and shooting and is also not a pacifist when it comes to his actions, only when it comes to his words.

[tielan]

Oh, I know Daniel's helplessness is entirely a fan perception; but in the same way, Elizabeth was perceived by a number of fans I encountered to be all "oh, icky, nasty, evil guns!" While in S2 and S3, she's handling them like a pro. Infrequently, granted, but still using them with an apparent degree of comfort.

The thing is, I don't see a conflict between her "dislike of the military" in (what I presume is) New Order I & II and her comfort in wielding of a gun: it's just layers and complexities.

[ladyjax.livejournal.com]

Gah! I have to run but I'm going to come back to this so I can read it more closely.

[ladyjax.livejournal.com]

However, I will leave you with this thought: I always ask myself if the women who so deride women characters even like being women themselves. I mean really like who they are and what they can do as women, as people.

[greenconverses.livejournal.com]

Really, to truly change fandom's perceptions, we'd have to change society's first. Like you said, certain people just can't accept that a woman can be multifaceted and that really has to do with society's standards and messages. A woman can't be a good mother and be a successful working gal at the same time. If a woman doesn't want a family, there's something wrong with her. And, of course, if a woman shows too much skin she's stupid and a whoreslutskank.

But that's not going to happen any time soon, not when it's still a Man's World, as unfortunate as that is. Yay sexism. Le sigh.

I'd say one way to work toward greater acceptance is to write more fic focusing on the female characters without a pairing. The SGA fandom seems to be extremely lacking in that area. The problem would be convincing the rest of fandom who aren't fans of the characters that it would be worth their while to read these fics. Maybe (if there already isn't one) an awards group for only female character fics can be started to draw attention to the good fem!fics?

Or maybe we could just write a politely worded letter to Joe Mallozzi and Paul Mullie and beg for a female writer on staff?

[tielan]

The problem would be convincing the rest of fandom who aren't fans of the characters that it would be worth their while to read these fics.

I'm not sure we can. And even between fans of the female characters, there's a divide. I doubt that you'll ever get some of the rabid Elizabeth fans to admit that Teyla's of any worth as a character - just as there are some fans of Teyla who feel Elizabeth's useless. There are moderates in the middle, people who like both characters, but they're not loud and proud - they tend to be quiet and dispassionate about the show.

Or maybe we could just write a politely worded letter to Joe Mallozzi and Paul Mullie and beg for a female writer on staff?

We could. :) I just wouldn't hold my breath waiting for anything to be done. :(

[greenconverses.livejournal.com]

I just wouldn't hold my breath waiting for anything to be done.

Unfortunately. Although they at least recognize that they haven't been giving Teyla the time she deserves. In the most recent GW article I read, one of them said that they knew Teyla got pushed to the side a lot in S3, that it wasn't done intentionally, and that they'd be fixing that in S4. So at least they've noticed that - not so sure about inconstant characterization though.

Also, incidentally (because I am a creepy comment reader), I think Elizabeth's "pacifist" characterization could also possibly come from a TPTB statement that Elizabeth would never hold a gun. On one of the first season DVD commentaries that Martin Wood said that Elizabeth's the only character who will never carry a gun and I think I've seen some other comments in that similar vein. From that, I formed the view that she's just anti-gun and will only use one when absolutely necessary. Refusal to carry arms could easily been seen as a "pacifist" stance, but Lizzie's not exactly against bombing the hell out of the Wraith and using weapons in the general, is she?

[tielan]

because I am a creepy comment reader

That's not a bad thing. I've often wished that people would comment to each other in my LJ, start a dialogue with other fans!

I think Elizabeth's "pacifist" characterization could also possibly come from a TPTB statement that Elizabeth would never hold a gun

Ahhh. Light dawns. Although it's still a bit of a long bow drawn at the idea that 'never holding a gun' means a pacifistic stance.

And, yeah, I think JM's been aware that they've been skimping Teyla (and Ronon) for a while. There are reasons/excuses of course - they were running two shows at the same time and it was easier just to write for the characters they were familiar with and which didn't make them think...

Still, it's good to see that they're trying to rectify that, if only a little.

[missyvortexdv.livejournal.com]

I don't think there's anything to be done, except keep writing fic etc for female characters and encourage those who have no problem seeing women as multifaceted to do the same. Can;t really be fixed in fandom without first fixing it in wider society. :(

[tipper-green.livejournal.com]

Hiya--I know I'm new to your LJ, but I'm hoping you don't mind me commenting.

The interesting thing about this discussion is that, as someone said, it's definitely a societal thing. This isn't fandom, it's people in general. I'm not defending it, just pointing it out. The best example I can give for this currently is, for Americans, watching how the press discuss Hilary Clinton in her bid for the Presidency. Almost every single description of Hilary's performance after the first debate began with her clothes and her hair. Honest to God, and some news orgs focused on nothing else about her. There was a lot of discussion a little later on Salon.com and some of the other independent news websites about how badly the news media acted, because they made what she was wearing more important than what *anyone* was saying. (There was also discussion about whether calling her "Hilary" instead of "Clinton" in the media was sexist). Now, regardless of whether you personally like Hilary Clinton, or believe in her politics, it is horribly depressing that she is called out on her clothes before anything else. Maggie Thatcher dealt with that same crap. Yet, also, clearly, it is a fact of life. Clothes play a huge part in how people perceive other people, and more so in women, because women stick out when surrounded by a room full of men.

So, I guess what I'm saying is, I don't think there is anything we can do about the fact that people make judgments based on clothing before looking at the character. The fandom is only human. Of course, if you can change fandom, you'd be taking a step in changing the world, and I'm all for that. :)

All that being said, I do agree with you that women characters in general are rarely multifaceted. Drives me up the wall. Teyla has no flaws, really, and that's a shame. But I think TPTB did something amazing when they created Vala. To me, she's the first female character to feel real to me on Stargate right off the bat--as you say, multifaceted. As multifaceted as the men. It took Sam years to be allowed to become multifaceted. Vala was good and flawed, emotionally strong and showed weakness, and she showed skin and was intelligent--everything you said you wanted. She was also funny, and I can't remember the last time a woman was allowed to be funny on a sci-fi show. So...I don't have a point. Except, I guess, to say that it is possible. I just hope more come along.

[tielan]

Comment away! The LJ is set so anyone can comment - my f-list isn't always on the chatty side when it comes to meta anyway. :)

I can see what you're saying: as out in the real world, so in fandom.

However, fandom allegedly prides itself on being more open-minded. Open-minded when it comes to personal sexuality, open-minded when it comes to race and gender, open-minded when it comes to political spectrum.

So to see a bunch of supposedly open-minded people dismiss a character because of what she wears? Not quite as open-minded as people like to think themselves. And when the character hasn't actually done anything sexual - she doesn't flirt, she doesn't go around kissing the boys, she hasn't had any on-screen sexual liaisons. I don't think she'd even had a line of innuendo yet. The most we've heard is that there's someone she's interested in, but hasn't yet made a move on.

I'll say now, while I like Vala, her kind of "funny" doesn't always appeal to me - a little too "this line was designed to be funny *nudge-nudge* *wink-wink*". Although, from a few episodes I've seen, she does get some highly amusing 'deadpan' moments.

At present, I don't think Teyla's had enough development to have any major flaws shown. The closest thing to a character flaw would be her sense of pride in S1 - first in Suspicion when her people are being held accountable for the Wraith attacks, then in The Gift when she gets mad at John for "telling on her" to Heightmeyer, then in Siege I when she punches Bates for believing her to be in collusion with the Wraith.

Hopefully they'll expand on her considerably in S4.

[rory-elizabeth.livejournal.com]

Another Lost City quote to shed light on Elizabeth's political leanings, if it helps:

JACKSON: Like why someone like you is here?

WEIR: Someone like me?

JACKSON: Yeah, someone who started their career as a political activist. Lobbying against the government spending on the military.

WEIR: And how I end up working for those I was criticising? I know, but I've decided that the best way to stop the proliferation of weapons is to try and end the need for them. So I'm going to be the voice of reason to whoever will listen.


Now that bit of background could easily be viewed as pacifism, but labeling her such is such a generalization. She lobbied against military spending, perhaps because she was passionate on allocating the funds elsewhere, like education or welfare, or the environment. We lack more specific background, but we do know what her roots are.

That said, I do appreciate your entry and have been incredibly impressed with Teyla these past three years. Hell, even Elizabeth got a love interest on this show before Teyla did! And she's still blown off as the skimpy alien chick. Honestly I can understand why; in past sci-fi shows like Andromeda (which I loved until it turned to crap), women in skin-tight, skin-revealing clothing weren't written to be much more. Frankly, Sam Carter was a phenomenon in a good way; before her, there weren't many woman written to be smarter than the guys who could hold her own with an automatic weapon and lead a team. After her, that character prototype is popping up more and more.

A little progress is a little progress. We can only hope it gets better. And honestly, one of the best sci-fi writers for women in my opinion was Joss Whedon, and many female writers screw up just as bad as men do. I don't think getting a female in the writing office would be an automatic fix, but it would just be nice to see women getting some more opportunities in the script-writing business in general. :)

[tielan]

Honestly I can understand why

I understand the inital knee-jerk reaction. What I don't get is the persisting belief, three years later, that Teyla is "just" anything. Particularly in the realm of the 'tits and ass' accusation, when Teyla has been anything but the sex siren or flirty female of the show. (Actually, if anything, Elizabeth gets the show prize for female flirt.)

Carter was a reasonably new kind of female character in a sci-fi show. (I didn't watch much cult sci-fi before Stargate, or since.) And, yes, a woman who can hold her own in sci-fi/fantasy is becoming a little more common - in part thanks to Carter and in part thanks to Buffy and the Whedonverses. I'd say that BSG has taken it even further, to the point where the female characters consistently and repeatedly drive the action, the plot, and the character dynamics.

However, I think that, if Teyla is not 'front and centre' as far as Atlantis goes, she's still capable in a broad variety of areas that fandom and fans don't seem to give her credit for. Fans are willing to say that Rodney or Elizabeth are complex and intriguing characters, but dismiss Teyla out of hand.

Maybe it's just a matter of refusing to see "I don't like" as equating to "boring and one-dimensional".

[rory-elizabeth.livejournal.com]

Actually, if anything, Elizabeth gets the show prize for female flirt.

I would so agree with this. Elizabeth does have a flirty nature (and I love that about her!), and Teyla very clearly said in "Sunday" that women in Athosian culture aren't supposed to be flirty or make the first move.

Fans are willing to say that Rodney or Elizabeth are complex and intriguing characters, but dismiss Teyla out of hand.

Honestly, I think just as many fans dismiss Elizabeth as they do Teyla. Elizabeth is taken by many fans to be a hateful bitch while Teyla is a goddess. It seems many are incapable of liking both women, which is very odd to me.

Maybe it's just a matter of refusing to see "I don't like" as equating to "boring and one-dimensional".

I think you hit the nail on the head right here. Frankly, Teyla doesn't get a lot of screen-time or plot development (which I'm glad to hear is changing for season 4). Thus, she probably isn't a favorite character to many fans. And so she's painted as such and cast aside.

[beanie-j.livejournal.com]

How many times have you heard from your f-list or yourself thought that Teyla's "just" the tits and ass of the Stargate Atlantis outfit?

Someone actually said that on my journal in a comment to a poll I ran regarding S4. It was totally unrelated to the tone of the poll and created an upsurge of people quite willing to make nasty comments about Teyla as a character. An unfair assessment in my eyes. I'm perfectly fine with people not liking a character but the reason has to have substance. The 'tits and ass' mentality is as shallow as the people who propagate it.


I'm not sure it is down to the fandom's inability to see a woman as more, because I've never really seen the problem in fandom of people compartmentalising women - however, I don't tend to go looking for it. I'll be honest, I don't think your argument is totally restricted to women in the context of SGA as a canon entity. The fandom excuse of 'they can't write women' really doesn't wash with me any more. It seems to me more fandom's way of hiding the writer's penchant for exploiting the use of the 'shtick' - whereby each character actually doesn't have that much dimensionality and fen of a particular character attempt to bury their character's lack of dimension by maligning another. (I've noticed in the SGA fandom in particular that this behaviour also extends to the actors in various forms as well.)

The 'tits and ass' argument draws an interesting parallel to the 'Shep!whore' one, whereby "OMG, pretty woman. Sheppard must have a tent in his pants because he's so easy". It all comes down to diminishing character in favour of one's own. I think that is what most comments of this type in fandom come down to.

In fiction and fanon, I think it is largely an unconscious act - people tend to write their favoured characters better and don't really strive for the same level of characterisation for any others in their story, who regardless of their place in canon often become secondary. Unfortunate yes, but intentional? Maybe it is in some cases, but largely, not really. And to be fair, when the canonical writing is so appalling at times, and this is where the basis of fanon lies, what is to be expected???


Anyone got any other thoughts on how to work at developing a greater acceptance of multifaceted women in fanon?

You want me to be honest? Don't bother. Most of this fandom is not worth the time and effort of your attempts to elevate their thinking. All they are concerned about is the McShep show. Attempts to elevate people's thinking with regards to 'People of Colour' and their place in fanon heralded nothing - if anything, I've noticed a downturn in writing Teyla and Ronon since that.

[tielan]

I've never really seen the problem in fandom of people compartmentalising women - however, I don't tend to go looking for it.

Since I'm a big Teyla fan, I notice her absence more, both in fic and in canon. I've encountered fanfic authors who "didn't know what to do with her" because their story didn't include the Wraith, and so her Wraithgene wasn't of any use. Or writers who set Elizabeth up purely as the "antagonist" to anything Sheppard wanted to do (no matter how risky or stupid the act) - granted, that's a canon fault as well - and sent John and Rodney in to manage a situation that Elizabeth or Teyla could have dealt with - both women having had diplomatic and negotiating experience, while John and Rodney have neither.

I understand having favourite characters that are easy to write, but a lot of "Mary Sue-ishness" in characters (male and female) seems to be related to a fanauthor saying "I want [situation] to happen, and my favourite character is Character X so I'm going to write them into [situation], never mind that Character A would be better suited to deal with it."

Which I personally find extremely lazy writing. In such a story, I'd opt not to go for [situation] at all - either learn to write Character A, or pick a situation that fits Character X's personality and skills better.

I've noticed in the SGA fandom in particular that this behaviour also extends to the actors in various forms as well.

Given how obsessive some parts of the fandom are about their favourite characters and actors, that doesn't surprise me much.

if anything, I've noticed a downturn in writing Teyla and Ronon since that.

I'd point out that one factor is probably because a lot of the people who used to write Teyla were also Elizabeth fans, and most of them have turned completely against the show (and Teyla) in regards to the S4 spoilers. The kerfuffle over Elizabeth hit the stands around the same time as the fandom stoush over skin colour and fandom's biases.

There were several people I know who used to like and write Teyla well enough, but when the S4 cast changes hit the fan, they became totally Elizabeth-focused and Teyla got dropped like a hot potato.

Most of this fandom is not worth the time and effort of your attempts to elevate their thinking.

Ouch. Although I'm becoming inclined to agree.

*sigh*

[beanie-j.livejournal.com]

While I agree with your comments on fic in context, I think it depends on the author's motivation for writing fic in the first place. On could argue that an attempt to give Character X a job better suited to Character A that you are trying to expand their skill set. If someone writes to expand canon then there are always parameters of each character that aren't established to be tapped into. Fandom does seem to have a lot of tics when it comes to the roles of SGA's characters though.

I think problems arise when people intend to write X into A's job but effectively write A in X's body for the sake of writing a fic where X is in a particular situation.

Not finding a use for a specific character doesn't actually bother me - I'd rather a character was omitted than badly written if there honestly isn't that much of a requirement for them to be there, but there are sub-types in fanfic where characters being absent does bother me a lot. Team-fic where the team are divided off and there isn't a good balance between characters is one example.

To be honest, I generally tend to write John character fics, or John/not!Rodney slash, and my reading is generally restricted to that and a few other things I like. I like good team fic, but team fic written in a balanced way is difficult to find. Het I only read if it is written by certain authors (of which you are one) and in certain pairing combinations - unless it is Sheppard/Heightmeyer. Het especially has a tendency to be badly written I find, since many authors are women, and rather than writing a character, they write themselves in the role of the woman.

Given how obsessive some parts of the fandom are about their favourite characters and actors, that doesn't surprise me much.

Surprise, no. Digust, yes.

I'd point out that one factor is probably because a lot of the people who used to write Teyla were also Elizabeth fans

See, that hasn't been my experience in fandom. I've often found when it comes to Elizabeth and Teyla, people are usually on one side of the coin only. Though most of my dealings with Elizabeth and Teyla fans have been with rabid shippers who spend their time bitchfitting at each other how their ship is the right one.

Ouch. Although I'm becoming inclined to agree.

While I'm not saying it's true of all, my experience is full of people who have no respect for your opinion unless they agree with it, and who have no desire to attempt to understand why you feel that way.

I don't waste my breath nor my time on such people. I will not validate their way of thinking by getting pissed off. Which leaves only one course - do nothing.

[tielan]

If someone writes to expand canon then there are always parameters of each character that aren't established to be tapped into.

Oh yes. Writing for Teyla, there's a lot of untapped possibilities in what she knows of Atlantis and Earth technology after three years with the expedition. It was implied that she knew more than they showed - at least up until Phantoms when she studied Rodney's work for maybe thirty seconds and then knew what to do to shut it down.

One of the most difficult and yet enjoyable (to write) stories I ever did was 'Winners And Survivors for last year's femgenficathon. That stretched me as far as how I perceived Teyla's technical and people-managing skills and how I wrote them, and I'm pretty satisfied with the result. I don't know if it was believable to most of the fandom, but in the light of S3 episodes, I don't think it's that far off.

I've often found when it comes to Elizabeth and Teyla, people are usually on one side of the coin only.

Early on in fandom, I think I crossed swords with various LoveTeyla!HateElizabeth! and LoveElizabeth!HateTeyla! individuals and we strongly disagreed on various points of characterisation and shipping. So I haven't bothered with them and they haven't bothered with me. It works out well. *g*

But with the S4 spoilers, a lot of the LoveElizabeth!LikeTeyla! crowd seem to have turned into LoveElizabeth!Couldn'tCareLessAboutTeyla!

Team-fic where the team are divided off and there isn't a good balance between characters is one example.

I've noticed this happens a lot: usually in the Shep/McKay crowd, where John and Rodney then go on to solve all the issues at hand while Teyla and Ronon twiddle their thumbs or lie unconscious or sit around sexxing it up. *grimace*

Granted, such writers get encouragement from the show on this point. Hopefully not too much more in S4.

[smittywing.livejournal.com]

I saw this on the noticeboard and really wanted to leave a comment because I've been thinking about women in fic a lot lately. I'm haven't entirely parsed out my thoughts, so I hope you'll forgive any rambling. :)

One of the things I say about Elizabeth a lot is that I like her character as we're TOLD she is, not as she's portrayed. For instance, she's supposedly brokered dozens of tough treaties, but can't get John and Rodney's representatives in The Game to sit at the same table for ten minutes. In The Long Goodbye, they say that she's the only person who knows the city as well as Sheppard (or is that vice versa?) and yet it's very rare to see her outside the control tower. I don't know if that's a barrier to wanting to write such characters or not.

I've seen people say that they like writing men because it allows them to escape the social restrictions of being female. I've also seen people hate on certain female characters (Allison Cameron from House, MD is the one that comes immediately to mind) because they're portrayed with faults and weaknesses, and a general lack of strength and/or judgment. It's interesting that a lot of writers seem more comfortable taking apart a topic like homosexuality than women's issues.

Sometimes, I'll write something and then worry what people will think of it, that I've "made" a character weak and somehow damaged her in some way. But at the same time, I think without challenges or flaws, characters just aren't interesting. I'm guilty of not writing female characters as much as I could but I've been writing them more recently and this is what I'm finding.

I've done two challenges with Teyla and while I don't think either of the stories are bad, I have a hard time figuring out her motivations. The whole Stargate, "Alien cultures don't use contractions," thing is hell on dialogue. And I'm comfortable with saying that Teyla is passionately committed to her people and picks up new concepts and ideas quickly (Epiphany is one of my favorite examples of that) but when I actually sit down to write it, I have problems coming up with ways to illustrate that. (The latter more than the former.) So I don't feel like either of those stories have really done Teyla the justice I've feel that I've done for other characters.

Which provides no answers for you, but I did want to add that I think ladyjax had a good point. It might not even necessarily be that writers don't like being women, but that they're unwilling to deal with the same frustrations in their hobby.

[horridporrid.livejournal.com]

I'm really, really new to SGA fandom. So I'm probably missing a lot of issues that have already been discussed. Think of me as a clean slate. :) (Hee! Or would that be blank?) However, I'll say that my block to getting into SGA was Elizabeth. In a very casual way (breezing into the room while the show was on) I found myself actively disagreeing with just about every choice Elizabeth made.

But I wonder, is there an expectation of what Elizabeth should be rather than looking at the character for what she is?

One of the things I say about Elizabeth a lot is that I like her character as we're TOLD she is, not as she's portrayed.

See, maybe the character should be dealt with as she's portrayed. Maybe Elizabeth wasn't supposed to be as wonderful a leader (which is a bit different from a diplomat, I'll grant) as she looked on paper.

I'm watching the show now from the beginning (it's being played on one of our channels) and I'm eager to see how all of the characters, but especially Elizabeth develops. Because in the first couple of episodes (though I missed Rising part 1, unfortunately) she seems genuinely over her head. Which makes sense, I think. It's very different advocating for a world super power and trying to keep a small community on the brink of destruction together.

Anyway, sometimes I think the block with female characters is letting them be weak, letting them make bad decisions, etc. I'm very curious to see if Elizabeth does grow into her leadership role. But if she doesn't, I think that's okay. I mean, does she have to be a role-model?

Sometimes, I'll write something and then worry what people will think of it, that I've "made" a character weak and somehow damaged her in some way. But at the same time, I think without challenges or flaws, characters just aren't interesting. I'm guilty of not writing female characters as much as I could but I've been writing them more recently and this is what I'm finding.

Exactly. With Teyla, I think interest would come from something she's struggling with, instead of her being kick-ass all the time. It's when a character fails at something (and then maybe perseveres, but then again, maybe not) that they're interesting. But unfortunately, it sometimes seems like allowing a female character to be weak is taken as hating on women in general or that particular character.

Which, yeah sometimes it really, really is. But unless you allow some weaknesses, the strengths won't really shine. Imo, anyway. :)

[tielan]

You've got a point with allowing strengths and weaknesses.

With female characters, though, I think they have to be shown strong first and then they can 'be allowed' to have failings. And I admit to being antsy about some people writing "failings" in where the failings just end up showing the characters in a bad light without any leavening.

Hopefully, I don't do that to any of the characters. (I've been wondering about my tendency to portray Rodney as the comedic relief in my stories.)

[horridporrid.livejournal.com]

With female characters, though, I think they have to be shown strong first and then they can 'be allowed' to have failings.

Hmm, I can see how it'd be possible to create a female character that starts off as the sum of her weaknesses and then either develops or reveals her strengths. (Cordelia in BtVS, for example.)

Though in the medium of a tv series you need to hit your character points right from the get go. And with SGA specifically... You're dealing with a certain type of genre (action/adventure, I guess) within the sci-fi umbrella that isn't so much about character development as much as fast paced story-lines.

I'm not sure where I'm going with this... I do think Elizabeth's weaknesses get oddly highlighted in the early episodes (contrasted with Teyla whose strengths are shown). Which is interesting within the show itself. (Shouldn't Elizabeth be the fearless leader?) And I'm curious to see where it ends up.

And I admit to being antsy about some people writing "failings" in where the failings just end up showing the characters in a bad light without any leavening.

Oh lord, yes. :) I remember back in the day with X-Files it was so easy to pick out the Scully haters (and Mulder haters and Skinner haters etc., etc.). And I can totally believe it goes on in SGA fandom, too. Writers doing more a caricture than anything. It's human nature. (Though I agree it's fun to try and figure out why the hate.)

Heh. I suppose the way I'd try and check any such tendency for myself is to write a story with the hated character as the protagonist. Write it sympathetically, I mean. Playing up the strengths, understanding the weaknesses (where they come from, etc.).

Honestly, part of the reason I'm so interested in watching Elizabeth throughout the series now is because I'm trying to figure out why I so disliked the character when the show first aired. I know my feelings were very much based on snap judgments and I'm curious to see if an in depth look will support or undermine my first impression.

[tielan]

I think that, as far as motivations go, the best way to work with Stargate is to take each episode as it comes and then, once you have several seasons worth of data, work backwards.

So at first Elizabeth thought she could do this 'cut off in another galaxy' thing. Then when she encountered John's initial refusal to "play it safe" and had the Wraith woken up. At this point, she realised she didn't have any backup, and her authority was marginal in an expedition which had suddenly turned into an isolated outpost in a war. So she dug in her heels and went to her safe place, societally blockading the Atlantis expedition and presenting a polite-but-unwelcoming face to the Athosians (who she initially sees as responsible for the situation they're in) while learning to deal with just Teyla as representative of her people.

"Playing it safe" with the Atlantis expedition constantly oriented to 'face Earth' (without really focusing on the native peoples of the Pegasus galaxy, where they are) has henceforth influenced all interactions in the Pegasus galaxy.

[tielan]

Ramble away!

One of the things I say about Elizabeth a lot is that I like her character as we're TOLD she is, not as she's portrayed.

Yeah. I get that. It's a key problem with both Elizabeth and Teyla: we're told what they are, but rarely shown it (mostly because the show tends to showcase people running around playing the hero, or technical skill, and everything else takes a second-seat to it).

And yes, I see that as contributing to a writing problem - but I don't see it as an insurmountable barrier.

It's interesting that a lot of writers seem more comfortable taking apart a topic like homosexuality than women's issues.

The cynic in me wonders if it's because when it comes to women's issues, the problems are so innate in women as well as men, that to confront it would require confronting one's own prejudice and bigotry - the same way that the SGArace!wank descended into everyone defending their right to continue to write exactly as they were writing before without so much as a skerrick of self-examination.

I have a hard time figuring out her motivations

A lot of people have said this, and...well, that does confuse me a bit because Teyla's one of the easiest (and most interesting) characters for me to write. Ultimately, everything is about her community - whether that is her people (the background of everything she does), Atlantis (as the people she's living among), or her team.

Maybe that's why people have such trouble writing for her: she rarely acts for herself - there's a community-mindedness to her actions and goals that our individualistic society might have trouble comprehending.

Heh. New meta: Teyla Emmagen And The Hive Mind.

[parisntripfan.livejournal.com]

Coming here via the newsletter


First off, great post. You make a number of great points. It is very frustrating and what is even worse is that most of this seems to be coming from women.

While I haven't heard about Teyla being there just for the T&A, I have heard people say that many thought that Teyla was there to provide a ship for Sheppard, which is just another way of dismissing her to my mind. Instead of the character being "the alien", (providing the outsiders point of view on Earth), a diplomat in her own right with knowledge about some of the other people in the galaxy and lets not forget kick Wraith ass, was not even considered. In that regard very little as changed.

I am not sure there is a way to stop it. Part of it I think stems from the idea that some female fans take what happens to the women characters or how the woman characters are shown as a comment on all woman instead of an individual character. For them Sam having romantic feelings towards her superior officer is bad not because it is Sam in love with Jack, but they see it as a throwback to the days when it was thought the reason a woman went to in the military was to get a husband.

When we saw Jean Miller (McKay's sister) there were some fans who were upset by the idea that she had left dropped out of school to become a full-time mom (like there was something wrong with that) when they could have it be something half way. Never mind that Rodney had, up until then shown the same type of all or nothing thinking, just making the opposite choice (work instead of family). These woman were upset because they thought the character should be a better role model and maybe show that a woman can have family and a career. Again never mind that this is a minor character that we may see once a season, she can't be seen to have a flaw.