on female characters "not being good enough" for main male characters

[tielan]

Thoughts by bookshop on "Why can't a woman be more like a man?":

Oh, and let us not leave out Gwen/Arthur, and Gwen/Morgana. Everyone loves Gwen/Morgana. I love Gwen/Morgana. But if we love Gwen so much, why aren't we happy to see her and Arthur so happy together in S2? Don't we love Gwen enough to enjoy her stepping into her role as main character? Or do we only love her enough to shunt her off to the side to be happy with Morgana, so we can all enjoy the lovely Merlin/Arthur slash.

I want to address the main-male, main-female, secondary-male "triangle" that tends to form a pattern in fandoms.

There are any number of people who defend their love of female-with-anyone-but-male. Which is fine...except that this happens a lot. And it almost always happens that the characters involved are the primary female and the main male. TPTB get them together, or show them attracted to each other, and all hell breaks loose in fandom.

So here's my question: Why is it that the primary female character(s) in any canon are never good enough for the main male character?

The female character is permitted, allowed, acceptable, so long as she doesn't fall for the main male character (whom fans have generally shipped with the secondary - read, geeky - male character).

Teyla is a lovely character and people love her...unless she's paired with John Sheppard. Then it's just bad writing, uninteresting, the dynamic just doesn't work.

Sam is a great, kickass career woman...as long as she's not 'chasing after' Jack O'Neill. The instant she shows any care about him, the character is a betrayal of everything she stands for.

Gwen is a sweetheart, a compass of the heart for Merlin and Arthur both, and an anchor for Morgana. But when she falls for Arthur (and more importantly, Arthur falls for her), she's a slag, a slut, a whore, a stupid bitch who doesn't know her place (or her mind).

Uhura? Is fantastic, an intelligent woman of colour in a world without race or gender biases (allegedly). But the instant she kisses Spock, she becomes reviled, abhorrent, discomforting.

Maybe you really don't like the dynamics between John/Teyla, Sam/Jack, Arthur/Gwen, Uhura/Spock and prefer John/Rodney, Jack/Daniel, Arthur/Merlin, and Kirk/Spock. But if preferring two main, white, male characters in a homosexual pairing always comes at the expense of the canonical male/female het pairing, then isn't that an issue? Doesn't that become a kind of erasure of female characters from the relevance of the story - all the story, both the personal and character-driven arcs of relationships, friendships, and romance, as well as the customary functional elimination of a female character in these shows?

This is a pattern for us (fandom 'us') - go to any fandom and take a look at the fanfic.

Perhaps we should start asking ourselves why - without the excuses and the "but I do like Teyla/Sam/Gwen/Uhura, just not with..."

It's not the individual examples that discomfort me - well, they do, but that's because I love these pairings and I want others to love them, too - it's the fact that these are patterns that get repeated in fandom after fandom, show after show. It's the fact that fandom doesn't do this once, they do it again, and again, and again, and again. And each time, the same excuses get recycled:

"She's just not strong enough to be paired with the male lead."

"She's just not interesting enough for me to care about her."

"She's just doesn't have chemistry with the male lead."

Maybe the individual character of this show isn't your type. Maybe the dynamic just isn't your thing. Maybe it's innocuous, innocent, and entirely unintended. Hooray! No need for this feminist guilt claptrap, break out the beer and lets go sit on the pier with our best buds and be manly men in a subtextual way (except for the part where 99% of us are women)!

Still. There's a pattern in fan behaviour that says a woman is good enough to be paired with anyone 'secondary', but only a male will do for the main male character.

And isn't that sexist?

eta: This post was initially focused on looking at fannish reactions to canonical male/female pairings, and then how that translates into fannish behaviour and attitudes. Also, if your OTP or preferred pairing isn't one of these, it's not a criticism of your pairing preferences, it's a look at why fandoms react in such a viciously negative manner to these specific types of m/f pairings.

Comments

[tielan]

I'd think that ultimately, the companionship angle is the end-of-the-day dynamic for many fans.

You're probably right there. Except that what I see as companionship probably isn't the same as what you see as companionship.

Incidentally, Brennan/Booth on Bones comes across as very Mulder/Scully to me. Sure, there's an ensemble cast, but the show is more about Brennan and Booth's relationship to each other and how it endures - how they play off each other and balance each other out, help each other, and are there for each other. (Season Two - oh, SEASON TWO! My favourite season of Bones, ever.) The other regulars are important, but their relationships aren't in the same league as Brennan and Booth - the A-plot is always about the dynamic duo. In that sense, it doesn't quite fit the ensemble show paradigm.

okay, I'm a lot more John Sheppard. ;)

This kinda worries me. Because John's a bit of an emotional cripple in my mind. He passes pretty well on the surface, connects with people on an upper layer, but beneath the surface, it's major scar tissue. That doesn't seem very much like you to me! :)

Incidentally, that's is probably why I ship him with Teyla or Ronon (and occasionally Radek thanks to artaxastra) - because those two are the only ones I could see being able to cope with him and his scar tissue.

[monanotlisa]

Except that what I see as companionship probably isn't the same as what you see as companionship.

Yeah, this. Parallel journeys are a key concept to me, but of course, the mind sees patterns where it wants to see them.

the A-plot is always about the dynamic duo. In that sense, it doesn't quite fit the ensemble show paradigm.

Good point, and I completely agree - just, at any point of Bones, you could still find Booth slashed with various other guys, if little else (I really wish there were Bones/Cam fic!), whereas before Krycek, you could not possibly pair up Mulder otherwise, let alone Scully - sheesh; I think the only stories on the net are the handful of Dana Scully/Marita Covarrubias and Scully/Reyes. Too many dicks on the dancefloor syndrome, much as I adore the show (and think it holds up well, their chemistry, oh wow).

Because John's a bit of an emotional cripple in my mind. He passes pretty well on the surface, connects with people on an upper layer, but beneath the surface, it's major scar tissue

Oh, I completely agree with this characterisation, and also over-dramatised. But not in all aspects! *g*

Incidentally, that's is probably why I ship him with Teyla or Ronon (and occasionally Radek thanks to [livejournal.com profile] artaxastra) - because those two are the only ones I could see being able to cope with him and his scar tissue.

I cannot envision John in any sort of sexual relationship with Ronon (and feel like a racist heel for that) but can totally see the John/Teyla working, baggage-wise and communication-wise too.

[yvi]

whereas before Krycek, you could not possibly pair up Mulder otherwise, let alone Scully - sheesh; I think the only stories on the net are the handful of Dana Scully/Marita Covarrubias and Scully/Reyes

I am waving m small Scully/Skinner flag here :) We exist and Scully/Skinner and Mulder/Skinner even existed back then :)

[monanotlisa]

Your icon is AWESOME!

But, err, yes! You existed! It's true! :P

(I'm actually quite fond of Skinner, especially upon rewatching, which I did last year with Ciderpress.)