Bonedagger
First Post
It's their willingness to get physical.
Edit: Said without trying to stray into offensiveness or sexism
Edit: Said without trying to stray into offensiveness or sexism
Last edited:
Ashtal said:What I really like is that these 'tough' women come in a lot of different styles, personalities and strengths. Real characters. Real people. 'Bout time!![]()
It's nice to see a rise in female characters who are not just girlfriends, damsels needing rescuing, and all the other wussy stereotypes.
Furn_Darkside said:
Perhaps it is just my own Cyrano/Don Quixote/white knight preference- the romantic notion of fighting for the one you love.
FD
Leopold said:
can't women do it to? This is after all the new millenium..why can't women go after the men in distress?
no i am being serious! funny thinking of it, but could happen!
This sort of gets at the crux of my question. Yes, it's good that women aren't passive victims and the like, but this uniformity of interest in women who for some reason must be physically superior to men is what I'm curious about. In some circles, the focus seems to be on the fact that you want this woman, and she can beat you up, and that's why you want her. I've seen the phrase in several genre publications, "Best of all, she can kick your ass!"Ashtal said:For me, I look at the shows I watch. Buffy, Angel, Alias - we've got lots of different kinds of women (not just the title characters) shown in a variety of different ways with their own unique personalities. THAT'S what I'm talking about. They aren't cookie cutouts. They have goals, fears, and personalities that affect how they do what they do. That's what's appealing and what's been missing from the fairly standard roles always given to women - saint, whore, lover, damsel - but 9 times out of 10 entirely secondary to the male hero's journey.