|
Women
Apr 21, 2009 21:18:09 GMT -5
Post by happyshep on Apr 21, 2009 21:18:09 GMT -5
While reading through the "Your Favourite Character" thread the first thing that I noticed was that the characters coming up were always male. I would like to present you with a segment by Camille Bacon-Smith from a book called Enterprising Women published in 1992. It's a fairly long quote but I just want you to skim through it and write down any comments or objections which come to your mind. [Pgs 142 and onwards] "I found that increasingly women in the fan community were turning away in their fiction from the ideal of marriage and family for complete fulfilment. Female characters... who had once satisfied a need for women characters of strength and purpose next to their male source counterparts, fell into the expanding category of Mary Sue. In dismissing their own female creations [the Mary Sue], fan women were left with a dilemma: what is the strong woman?” “Members often perceive strength in each other; they know that they are stronger in their community than they are outside of it. But the models offered up for inspection in the media and in their own products fall short of an ideal they have not yet formulated.” “Star Trek [The Original Series] promotes the belief that the system works for everyone, but shows few examples of women acting with strength and independence.” “Few stories in the fanzines I have seen since 1987 feature women characters (other than the villainess Servalan) in any but infrequent subordinate or romantic roles… [this] signals continuing dissatisfaction with the options available to women characters and to women in society… An overwhelming number of fan readers and writers continue to believe at some level that respect, honour, and happiness should come to them with a fulfilling career and… [extended matriarchal] family. “At the same time experience teaches them that… they will pass through lives not of their own making, often with less than interesting jobs and with families in which they are the dependant, not the powerful, member. Not yet ready to take on the role of woman warrior, they have grown bitter and cynical about the only other model they have [the Mary Sue].” So what do you think? Outdated, semi-relevant or completely incorrect?
|
|
|
Women
Apr 21, 2009 23:11:44 GMT -5
Post by stealthdragon on Apr 21, 2009 23:11:44 GMT -5
Hmmmm... Personally, I feel this a bit overanalytical. I know many writers and readers whose favorite characters are women. I know of one writer in particular who is a huge fan of Teyla from Stargate Atlantis. There's even a genre of female slash known as femslash. And though I will admit that those who are fans of the female characters are rare, the reason why people like or dislike the characters they do vary greatly, and just because a female character isn't the number one favorite doesn't mean it's because fans are dissatisfied with her. I do agree, though, that I do find it hard to relate to a lot of female characters on TV, because they are portyrayed as too perfect, too strong, too ideal. You never see women characters who are into comics or sci-fi. You never see many women make the same goofy, dorky mistakes men make. In some cases (i.e. shows), the female characters don't even seem to have a personality. They're too cold, too much. Sometimes, it makes them really hard to like and impossible to relate to. It's the same reason for the dislike of Mary Sues by readers. Only the one who created the Mary Sue likes them - with a few exceptions now and then. After all, the Mary Sue is supposed to be an avatar of the writer, made too perfect and too awesome then plugged into the author's favorite fandom for the canon characters to love and praise and realize how aweseom he/she is. Most who read fanfiction come for the canon characters, not for the author's creation, and a lot of Mary sues have the bad habit of taking over the story and eclipsing the existing characters. It ends up being an incredible frustration for those readers interested only in the canon characters. I myself have few favorite female characters. Abbey from NCIS, because she is very much the untypical female TV character. Ziva, also from NCIS, because she makes the occasional dorky mistake and her fellow agents call her on her occasional coldness. Teyla from SGA, because she's kind, caring and understanding - she puts up with her male counterparts rather than treat them like immature idiots - attributes some writers feel they need to get rid of in order to make the female character tough. Stella from CSI:NY, who isn't trying to prove herself because she doesn't need to. Mind you, the above are my personal opinions of these characters, so I understand if others don't agree. But my number one favorite characters are male because, well, I'm a women and they're hot but that's only a small part of the reason. There've been plenty of attractive male characters that I've been indifferent to, usually because their personalities didn't appeal to me. I'm incredibly picky, so it takes a lot for me to really like a character, be they male or female.
|
|
|
Women
Apr 21, 2009 23:58:27 GMT -5
Post by mpbrennan on Apr 21, 2009 23:58:27 GMT -5
Uh, oh, you got me talking about anti-feminism. Sit back and prepare to read for a while.
I would agree with much of what the author stated, particularly the part about women being disappointed by the the models they are presented with, both in the media and in fan creations. The Mary Sue model was rejected for a number of reasons--largely because it was considered unrealistic. Of the many traits ascribed to them, the ones considered most eggregious seem to fall into two areas: talents so vast and varied as to be unbelievable and a "heart of gold" personality that endears the Sue to everyone she meets. While neither trait makes for interesting storytelling, IMO, I find it a little strange that the "Sue-bashers" of the fandoms choose to harp so long and hard on these qualities.
I have seen fans get violently angry at the idea of an original female character defeating Boromir in a sword fight. The "Warrior Sue" and "Mage Sue" types are vocally rejected, even in fandoms where warriors and mages are not unheard of. The idea of a female who is smarter than all the other characters or more powerful than all the other characters seems to incur so much ire. When pressed, a basher will say that it's not "realistic." Authors are told to "give the OFC's flaws," "make them human," ect. But isn't fic so often about extraordinary people? People with skills and traits that we can aspire to? One of the members commented in the "Favorite Character" section that John Sheppard is her favorite character precisely for this reason; because he's the best, the smartest, the most noble. And yet, to imbue an original female character with these traits is to commit a crime against the fandom. I am all for realistic storytelling, but why can't creative, inexperienced, mostly teenage girls write fun adventure stories about powerful women without incurring the wrath of the angry mob? We tell authors to give them "flaws," but what is often meant is "make her weaker, make her more cowardly, stop letting her be the leader of the group." At what point does that stop being a campaign for realism and become just another way to tear women down? Sorry if I'm harping a bit, but this is one of the things that turned me off to the LotR fandom.
Now that my little Sue-Bashing rant is over, a qualification; I don't entirely agree with the author's statement that women in fic are a dying breed. Ignoring, for the moment, the large class known as "Suethors," I have seen many excellent fics involving strong female characters, both canon and otherwise, who have flaws. This is more prevalent in fandoms like BSG that have a wide assortment of strong females in canon. I was still learning the alphabet in '92, so I can speak for trends, but while female-centric fiction is most definitely underutilized, it still produces many well-received fics. I have, however, noticed some disturbing trends. Female-centric stories tend to focus on so-called "female issues"--namely romance, pregnancy, children, rape, marriage, ect. Romances, or "Shipper fics" are more prevalent than any other genre. The trend is such that a community on LiveJournal has been created to fight it; writers in the "femgenficathon" may write about any canon female they choose so long as she was born female and may write about any topic they choose so long as it does not focus on the aforementioned female issues. The moderator noticed that females in non-romantic contexts are vastly underutilized. I'm disturbed because it seems like we've backtracked even from the bitter cynicism of '92. In this "post-feminist" world, many don't even try to imagine strong female characters as counterparts to the male heroes. Many simply fall back on the "true love, marriage, and babies" approach, and while there's nothing wrong with that, it severely limits the roles women fill.
Not that fic is solely to blame. The media hasn't given us a whole lot to work with. I was intrigued by the "Prison Break" fandom until I realized that strong females were an endangered species there. The female doctors on "House" put up with what amounts to sexual harrassment week after week for the amusement of the audience (yes, Lisa Edelstein has a chest. Now can we, as a society, move on?).
Other shows may start with strong female characters only to have them meet quick and usually violent ends. My beloved BSG takes the cake on this one: in its final season, this show that had been lauded as groundbreaking for women in sci-fi killed off ten female characters. Every single woman in the main billed cast and a hell of a chunk of the secondary cast and extras faced her death at one point or another (but, to be fair, two of the main cast played several characters, some of whom survived . . . long story). Another culprit, "Lost," spawned what I like to call "the Ana Lucia effect." Simply put, a woman who acts like a man is quickly called "a bitch" and soundly hated by a large and vocal group of fans. Ana Lucia did nothing that was more cruel or cold blooded than many of the actions of the show's "heroes" (a group that includes several murderers, a con man, and a torturer/hit man). Yet, she was the one hated, ridiculed, and violently killed off. In fact, the effect was such that when she died, she took another woman down with her--producers felt that she wasn't "sympathetic" as a character, so in order to villify the man who gunned her down in cold blood, they had him accidentally shoot a more "sympathetic" woman only seconds later. That was three seasons ago. To the best of my knowledge, the hit man is still alive and kicking with a broad fan base.
Coming off my soapbox and getting back to h/c for a moment, happyshep should take into account a few things with regards to the "Favorite Characters" discussion. For one, that question also asked us about h/c and whump and how we like to see this character hurt/healed. In that particular context, I chose a male as my favorite largely because it is easier to write h/c for a male. While female-centric h/c certainly exists, as a whole it is one of the more male-dominated genres. It is more painful for me as an author to write female-centric h/c. Like another member mentioned, I tend to overidentify with female characters, which causes a problem if I'm planning to take a character through hell and back. When I do write women in these types of situations, I tend to emphasize their strength in the face of adversity so as to avoid the "snivelling female" stereotype. In the same situation with a male character I might feel more free to test his emotional limits. I think most societies still have stigmas attached to "hitting a girl." It is simply more disturbing than hitting a man. It doesn't feel like fantasy--possibly because violence against women is such a real problem (slowly backs away from another soapbox).
'Kay, I'm done for the moment.
|
|
|
Women
Apr 22, 2009 1:01:19 GMT -5
Post by azalea3 on Apr 22, 2009 1:01:19 GMT -5
I knew the 'Mary Sue' question had to be coming up next especially after the fanfiction addiction question. I want to answer this but I've got to pull some old fanzines to do it. Specifically Menagerie and Warped Space. It's going to take me awhile. Oddly enough yesterday I was on line trying to read 'Enterprising Women' but now the press only allows access to two chapters, when I last looked it up
|
|
|
Women
Apr 22, 2009 1:15:48 GMT -5
Post by azalea3 on Apr 22, 2009 1:15:48 GMT -5
(sorry I sneezed and hit the wrong button here is the rest of my entry.)
when I last looked it up, I was able to read the entire book. I'm not sure what I'm going to say has much relevance to H-C, but I can at least share my understanding of some of the very complicated interelationships between seventies feminist polemics, new wave SF and why fanzines went the way they did.
I have a copy of 'Enterprising Women', lost amid the junk, I did manage to find my copy of 'Textual Poachers" and I'm still looking for the Fiedler book. All have interesting things to say about early fandom.
|
|
|
Women
Apr 22, 2009 4:13:14 GMT -5
Post by happyshep on Apr 22, 2009 4:13:14 GMT -5
Thank you for your replies stealthdragon and mpbrennan. I have printed them out and written notes in the margins but I'll wait for more comments before sharing my ideas.
I am always excited to hear what you have to say, Azalea, and I really appreciate all the time and thought which you've put into your responses. I am very grateful for your support and I hope that my final product won't dissapoint you. This topic doesn't have all that much to do with H/C but I believe that this is very important nonetheless. I am thinking that H/C will probably become one of the sub-headings of the final work rather than the driving point, and alongside it will be the changing nature of women as reflected within fandom.
I have also made extensive notes from "Textual Poachers", however I found it less useful than "Enterprising Women".
|
|
|
Women
Apr 22, 2009 13:26:45 GMT -5
Post by lockea on Apr 22, 2009 13:26:45 GMT -5
I think part of the problem is that our model for "Strong Female Character" is really out of whack from what strong female character should probably be. Women are still limited by their appearance into who they are in the story. A so-called strong female character is still only a male fantasy. She's limited to being beautiful, maybe a bit smart, and supposedly independent despite the fact that she's always the heterosexual male fantasy and usually ends up acting as the male's counterpart. Very, very rarely is there a female character who acts without a male in a tough role. When they end up in that role, though, writers often throw away any traces of femaleness in the character, making her nothing more than a guy in all but reproductive organs. In fandom, however, men have wildly varied appearances and definitions as a "strong" character. We have everything from the sexy to the nerdy, appearance wise, old to young, intelligent to physically strong (though, admittedly, physical strength is still marketed as the ideal for men), and so much more variety than what we see of women. So, if women are a male fantasy and men are just men, it really comes as no surprise to me that, in the female dominated world of fanfiction, men are more often the characters being written about. If I, as a viewer, cannot identify with the character (because she doesn't look/act like me or anyone I know), then I'm certainly not going to write about her. Though, when I write originals, I write primarily female characters who are like the women I know in real life. However, thanks to the overabundance of the male fantasy version of the Strong Female Character, I think many readers are jaded to who the female fantasy version of a Strong Character -- Female is. To explain it better, I will now point you in the direction of Over Thinking It, where there's an article on why the so-called Strong Female Character is bad for women. As far as Mary Sue goes... I think we're reluctant to trust the female character because of what the Mary Sue's prevalence in both canon and fanfiction has done to the reputation of women. Men, despite the fact that Marty Stu is on the rise, still offers that safe haven where flaws are safe and acceptable without being deemed as weak and not-worthwhile. The exact depth of our dislike for female characters is not so much rooted in misogyny, I think, than it is in annoyance. When I find female characters I love, I will follow them to the ends of the earth, but those female characters that I actually like are just so far in between. Though, to bring the topic back to hurt/comfort, I'm not sure why I prefer to write H/C with male characters than I do with female ones. I feel like, if I were to read/write the same story with a female character in the main role, it would just be too horrifyingly terrible. I don't know why, but it's true. I could never read a story where a woman went through all the crap I put male characters through. Sexist, yes, but true.
|
|
|
Women
Apr 22, 2009 18:34:56 GMT -5
Post by listyfox on Apr 22, 2009 18:34:56 GMT -5
Ah, the "Sue" problem. I have an original character I have been writing since I was 12, and she started out a terrible Sue. I would like to think now 20+ years later she is a much different, well developed character (though she does still have the annoying tendency to flirt with my favorite male characters). She is my favorite literary creation and I love her very much (in fact, I find I get depressed when I am forced to put her aside for a while), and I have whumped no one more than her, in horrible ways. Sometimes she has overcome it well, other times she has had some real emotional issues. But I live in a sort of terror that she is still a Sue, and she is one of the main reasons I keep my crossover private, despite the fact that she is far from perfect, and steps aside for the canon characters when she can. I think the Sue phenomenon is typical of what we as female writers want to portray: the woman we want to be, who faces challenges and overcomes them as we would like to. A Mary Sue is the shallow version of this: beautiful and perfect. But the definition has expanded to include almost every original character inserted into a story to interact with the characters regardless of quality, and we are so scared now of creating a Sue that female characters end up generic and lacking in personality. Yet, female characters are often necessary due to the lack of personality (or at least variety) among the few women we find in many of our fandoms. There are exceptions to the rule, but I know from searching for a female character to write into a certain role or play in a game that it is almost impossible to find the sort I want. Those who do stand out are generally disliked (Captain Janeway springs to mind). It is really frustrating sometimes. In fact, I can't think of one fictional woman I really would like to emulate, besides my own character. There are many I like and admire, but none I want to be. This can't be said for the male characters: there are several I would love to be, if only for a day. I don't know what this says about me, or if it is typical of female fans. Perhaps it is a positive thing--As a woman, I want to be myself (if a bit idealized), rather than Ellen Ripley or Dorothy Catalonia. I hadn't actually looked at it that way before, and have a funny feeling that's a whole Pandora's box right there. As for the hurt/comfort aspect, my biggest "Sue" fantasy is comforting the hurt, damaged male character. In fact, that is exactly where it all started: the Sue I mentioned was initially created to be there for the emotionally crippled Scott Bernard from Robotech. Of course, as her character developed over the years she went off and did her own thing (which included comforting Fushigi Yuugi's Chichiri, but uh...that's neither here nor there ).
|
|
|
Women
Apr 22, 2009 22:34:54 GMT -5
Post by stealthdragon on Apr 22, 2009 22:34:54 GMT -5
More of my own thoughts on Mary Sues...
It's been my personal experience that when a reader asks an author to give her OFC flaws, it's not that they're asking to make her weak, they're asking the author to "tone it down a little". What's unrealistic is how many traits and abilities these characters sometimes have, traits and abilities that clash. For example, in the SGA fandom the favorite Mary Sue is often a Major in the Air Force, an awesome pilot with awesome Kung Fu and medical skills, and is only in her twenties.
Except no one in their twenties can be a major (and, yes, I did read a story with this very character.) And she's either an awesome doctor or an awesome pilot, but can't be both because she wouldn't have time for both, especially at her age.
There's nothing wrong with making a character awesome, but making them realistic shouldn't be taken lightly, either.
Then, of course, there's what I mentioned in my first post about the OFC - or even OMC - overshadowing the canon characters. And I mean really overshadowing. I've read stories where not only is the OFC better at everything than everyone else, the canon characters are written as idiots or jerks. Even if the OC is likeable, no one appreciates it when their favorite canon characters are bashed.
But I agree that the bashing of Sues has gotten way out of hand. There's the unrealistic, too perfect character. Then there's the OC. And OC does not automatically equal Mary Sue. One of the best OCs I ever read was a strong, courageous woman who single-handedly took care of two injured male canon characters. She was interesting, likeable and the author managed to tell her story without diminishing the presence of the two canon characters. And Fanfic is about self-gratification, not pleasing others. We may not like those uber perfect OCs, but it's the author's right to create her or him and write something that makes them, the author, happy without getting horribly flamed for it.
On the flip side, neither should any author think themselve above constructive criticism (and I emphasize "constructive," as in helpful, as in pointing out the good as well as the flaws in a friendly manner and offering suggestions) - if they're looking to improve, that is. If they're just writing for fun, not really interested in improving, then I guess it doesn't really matter.
|
|
|
Women
Apr 23, 2009 3:16:02 GMT -5
Post by happyshep on Apr 23, 2009 3:16:02 GMT -5
I apologize for setting up that little mousetrap. By the nature of my question of course everyone was going to list a male character as their favourite in the previous thread, and I shouldn't have used that observation as a transition into this discussion. However I don't regret that mistake because in pointing this out a few of you have agreed upon something which I think is important; When you can respect and relate to a female character, it causes you pain to see her abused -- but this is not the case with our favourite male characters. Nor does it seem to be difficult to whump our own Mary Sues, who are avatars of the writer and considering this you would expect Sue’s pain to resonate most strongly with the one who created her. And I don’t think that I would agree if you said that it’s all about the comfort, unless you had some evidence to suggest otherwise. In an interview with Bacon-Smith, fic writer Lois Welling said: “I think they just like the comfort, and the hurt is an excuse to get there”. But today (and probably also in the past? I do not know) it is very easy to find fics solely consisting of abuse and torture with little relief at the end (although how many of these feature Mary Sues I couldn’t know). We seem to relish the pain and humiliation which these characters go through. Firstly, is there a difference between whumping a male canon character and whumping a Mary Sue/Marty Stu? I would assume that the role of the Sue is to allow the writer (unable to distance themselves from the source) to enter the story and experience the healing first hand. But why is it so enjoyable to watch the canon characters being comforted? Do you place yourself in this character’s shoes or are you merely observing with a maternal desire to nurture and protect those who are needy and injured? For me it seems to be a combination of both. Secondly, if it is so common to see the female Mary Sues being hurt and comforted, why, for some of us, is it so difficult to see a woman being abused? Because we identify more strongly with them? (Well what about Mary Sue? The writer certainly identifies with her). Mpbrennan stated that it is partly because “violence against women is such a real problem”, and I agree with this, but I sense that there is something more. Maybe I’m just fortunate to live in a time and place where sexism is virtually unheard of, but it seems to me that violence against anyone is more of a real problem. I get the shivers whenever I watch the news because it grieves me to see men, women, children and animals of any race or species experiencing great suffering and trauma every day. But I don't mind if it’s my favourite male character in a H/C fic (unless the abuse is sexual). These ideas are coming to me in a jumble so I’m sorry if I seem unclear. I don’t really understand what I’m trying to say myself. Also, can the male canon character in some ways become an extension of yourself when you write them? We don’t seem to enjoy writing characters who we don’t understand or don’t identify with (one of the reasons why I never write from the perspective of Rodney McKay). Stealthdragon mentioned that “Fanfic is about self-gratification, not pleasing others”, and as much as I think many of us would have reason to state otherwise, to a certain degree (I know for myself it is a large degree) this is very true. Fiction is fantasy, and a self-written fantasy is very individual. I’ve seen different depictions of a familiar character emphasise or neglect certain aspects of his personality, creating an end product which, although unique, must also be very personal to the reader. Partially in order to make one’s favourite character even more attractive. But could this also serve to make him easier for the writer to relate to – not only in order to depict him with understanding and empathy, but to slip into his role and receive the same comfort which he is being given? Mpbrennan, you said that Stargate had been “lauded as groundbreaking for women in sci-fi”. Would it be correct to go further and wonder if science-fiction, for whatever reason, was a genre in which there seemed to be a good environment for strong female leads to come to the fore, more so than other genres? Thank you very much for that link Lockea. I find all of this extremely fascinating. Here is another quote which I feel is very relevant. Again, Camille Bacon-Smith, Enterprising Women, 1992: “Members ignored traditionally ‘feminine’ soap operas, with their interconnected structures, for episodic action-adventure that offered few females role models… The community draws in women who engage the masculine cultural model of active agent, and who are looking for a way of understanding that vigour and integrating it into a female lifestyle.” Just thought I’d throw it in there.
|
|
|
Women
Apr 23, 2009 13:04:32 GMT -5
Post by mpbrennan on Apr 23, 2009 13:04:32 GMT -5
I was actually speaking out of my experience in Battlestar Galactica (the new series, not the '78 version with Athena in a skin-tight leotard). While I've heard similar comments about Stargate, I haven't yet had a chance to see much of that universe (though, you people are making me curious!). There's actually a raging debate concerning BSG. If you're curious, here are a few blog articles addressing both sides of the issue. hubpages.com/hub/battlestargalacticafeministwww.slate.com/id/2213006/io9.com/5165920/the-men-who-make-battlestar-galactica-feministI don't completely agree with any one of these articles, but each has relevant points. As far as sci-fi in general, I think it has great potential to honestly portray strong female leads. Because it allows us to envision a completely different world, gender equality can be portrayed without the tension of "political correctness" that would crop up in realistic fiction about the modern world. Sci-fi allows us to create an "enlightened society" where that type of prejudice simply isn't an issue anymore. At the same time, every piece is to some extent a reflection of our "unenlightened society," so stereotypes can creep in despite the best of intentions. Strong females have been making inroads. I would trace much of this back to Star Wars and Leia "somebody-has-to-save-our-skins" Organa. As much as people gripe about her gold bikini, those movies took the damsel-in-distress trope and stood it on its head, and in so doing created one of the most remarkable and memorable characters in popular culture. It's easy to lose ground, though. Case in point: Natalie Portman's "Padme" in the Star Wars prequel trilogy saved the day by begging the Gungans in the first movie, played the full-time damsel in distress in the second, and actually DIED OF A FLIPPIN' *BROKEN HEART* in the third. Still last few decades, have given us the women of Buffy, Firefly, Stargate, BSG, Babylon V, and probably more that I'm not familiar with, so there is much that is good. I think what's most lacking at this point is a truly female-centric sci-fi show. The shows I listed were great, but with the exception of Buffy, they all featured a man as the main protagonist. Star Trek has given us Captain Janeway, but many of the fans I've talked to identify "Voyager" as the weakest of the Trek franchise. I'd like to see a strong sci-fi show that relies on a female protagonist who is independent (and *stays* independent). I have hope for "Dollhouse" but only time will tell.
|
|
|
Women
Apr 23, 2009 15:03:36 GMT -5
Post by stealthdragon on Apr 23, 2009 15:03:36 GMT -5
I'm glad you brought up comfort possibly having something to do with maternal instinct. It's my own theory as to why the comfort aspect of H/C is so appealing to us comfort junkies I'm probably going to get a lot of virtual tomatoes thrown at me for saying this, but I'm going to say it anyway - as women, we are inherantly (and I may have just spelled that wrong) nuturing *refuses to duck tomatoes*. We are, get over it. It's part of who we are; an aweomes part, IMHO. Aren't people always saying that one of our problems in the world today is that no one cares? We don't have to listen to that part of ourselves, don't have to act on it, but it's still there. Back on topic, I think it's that nature that makes the comfort part so appealing, expecially for women. As for the hurt part being appealing - and though I really don't want to get into this myself as it makes me a tad uncomfortable but may offer some insight to explore... oi - I've heard people theorize that it's a sexual thing. People get "turned on" by the hurt, so hurt the characters they find the most attractive. That's just one theory to explore if you want. Being a comfort junky myself, I know that's not why hurt appeals to me. Though I like to be creative as I can with the hurt, I'm more interested in the aftermath.
|
|
|
Women
Apr 23, 2009 18:03:09 GMT -5
Post by space1traveler on Apr 23, 2009 18:03:09 GMT -5
I can't speak towards the side of the coin, about 'Mary Sue/Marty Stu'.
I have always in my mind fallen for the handsome hero. I admire Teyla very much, but even though I would like to emulate her I would never be able to tell my friends that she is my favorite character. Why? I just realized that I would not want them to think that I was lusting after another female.
I read a summary that said "John is stuck in a jumper..." My heart thumped and I could not get to the story fast enough. If it had said "Teyla", I would have read it but not with the same anticipation as with John.
Something else comes to mind. I am dumpy, fat, walk with a cane and even though in my wildest dreams I aspire to be like John Sheppard, I know that I will never be cool, male and strikingly handsome. I could aspire to be like Teyla, but why jump out of fantasy into torture. Teyla is bigger than life and so out of my league... Yes, I did purchase bantu sticks, but have not gotten the instructions on how to use them (go ahead, laugh).
Maybe this doesn't apply, but it's what I felt bubble up when I read the other responses.
|
|
|
Women
Jun 16, 2009 10:46:25 GMT -5
Post by happyshep on Jun 16, 2009 10:46:25 GMT -5
I may re-open this topic later if necessary, but for now I feel that the question has been sufficiently answered so I'm going to close this topic to channel a bit of traffic into the new ones.
|
|