Erasing the Feminine
Recently, I was reflecting upon the female characters that men (especially straight men) enjoy, and I realized something: Most of the female characters that men praise aren’t very feminine. Take, for example, all of the characters that men laud as “strong” or “badass.” Usually, this list includes characters such as Ripley from Alien, Lara Croft from Tomb Raider, or Selene from the Underworld franchise--but rarely will you see more feminine-coded characters like Padme Amidala make the list. Even more feminine-coded male characters such as Anakin Skywalker are usually seen as whiny or weak by some male fans, especially those who dislike the Prequels.
Now, please don’t misunderstand me. I’m not saying that you can’t be a female/femme and have more masculine qualities; people have the right to express their gender in whatever way they please. Neither am I saying that the characters that the “badass” female characters are bad characters. In fact, I enjoy masculine-coded female characters such as Ripley or Furiosa. But what bothers me about masculine-coded female characters is the underlying implication of these characters. By approving of masculine-coded female characters and disapproving of feminine-coded characters (both male and female), we are essentially declaring that masculine is the ideal, and that femininity is to be avoided and stamped out. We are also suggesting that in order for women and femmes to be competent or admirable, they must be masculine. Worse still, we imply that women and femmes shouldn’t even want to be feminine. After all, if masculinity is superior to femininity, shouldn’t all women/femmes want to be masculine?
I think the assumption that femininity is inherently inferior to masculinity is also why most female heroines are masculine-coded. After all, if masculinity is better than femininity, why would we want a hero to be feminine? In order for Ripley to save the day in the Alien franchise, she has to be hardened, mostly emotionless, and tough; she can’t be soft, vulnerable, or display her emotions. A more feminine character such as Padme, however, can’t possibly be considered a hero from this viewpoint because she’s compassionate and kind-hearted, vulnerable with a man, and isn’t afraid to show her emotions when she wants to.
Now again, don’t misunderstand me. I am not suggesting that all female heroines are masculine-coded. Nor am I saying that men only approve of masculine-coded female characters. Characters such as Wonder Woman, Ahsoka Tano, and Battle Angel Alita are all more feminine-coded characters, and all of these characters are lauded by most men, including the subset of men who sneer at the term “strong female character.” What I am saying is that, in general, people have an implicit bias against the feminine that is revealed in the way we treat our female or femme heroines. The feminine attributes of love, compassion, and vulnerability are often written out of the stories of heroic women and femmes, as well as out of the stories of heroic men and people who identify as masculine. In the place of these feminine attributes are violence, vindictiveness, and stoicism, suggesting that only people who possess these characteristics can become heroes. And since these qualities are more typically (but not always) embodied by men, a woman or femme can expect to only ever be a cheap imitation of a hero.
But is this really what we want for our heroes? Masculinity does have its place in a hero; for example, it’s helpful for people of all genders to possess the masculine characteristic of determination. But, as with all things, there should be a balance. Our heroes should be both resolute and compassionate, courageous and vulnerable, warrior and healer, fighter and lover.
