4 thoughts on “Ponder time”

  1. Hmm. Good article. And, i agree with it completely, in as much as i’ve thought it through so far.

    I think it’s the general fakeness of characters that bugs me. Gender isn’t the only factor, or even the major one. It’s mostly lack of authenticity.

    Kind of symptomatic of a lot of the general population, really. A truly genuine person is kind of rare.

    And, i ramble. anyway. Thanks for the article.

  2. That was a great article! Definitely food for thought; I’ll have to pass it on to my sisters.

    I had been thinking along the same lines, especially with the latest Indiana Jones movie. I am a HUGE fan of the Indy movies, and I’ll always love them, but looking back on them, I really disliked how most of the women were portrayed. Even the “strongest” woman, Marion, ends up in a little slinky dress and offered as a slave in the first one. In the second one the woman pretty much screams and pouts her way through the movie. In the third, the woman seems strong and driven, yet somehow she HAS to sleep with both Indy and her father. It’s like, you can be a woman and go on adventures too, but somewhere along the way you’ll end up scantily clad, kidnapped, screaming, and probably have to sleep with someone.

    Ha ha @ the pictures they posted of Megan Fox leaning over the car. My sisters and I rolled our eyes at that scene, since pretty much it really was only to give young guys a chance to ogle her stomach. After a minute of that I was like, ALL RIGHT ALREADY, SHE HAS A LONG TORSO. ENOUGH! XP ;D

    Thanks for sharing the article!

  3. semantics

    I totaly disagree with the premiss “Strong Female Characters Are Bad for Women”. I think strong Female characters are good for women! But I generally agree with what the article is saying, I just disagree with the semantics of what a “strong female character” is.

    The article references this quote “Both of the female characters in the movie were very strong characters” (Megan Fox). When an actress uses the phrase “strong characters” it usually means the personality of the character is well defined by the script, it does not imply that anything specific about the character. Fox goes on to say “Rachel [Taylor]’s character is very intelligent. I thought that they were representing women very well.” I would assume she is referring to how women are reflected in typically non-feminine roles (aka mechanic, scientist). Overall I think poor wording on Fox’s part has lead the author to misunderstand her intent. (I would also recommend not-caring too much about what celebrities say)

    Other than that point I generally agree with the authors critisism of females characters in pop culture.

    In my opinion “Strong Female Characters” are better defined by,

    Juno – Juno
    Catherine – Proof
    Amélie – Le Fabuleux destin d’Amélie Poulain
    Jane – American Beauty
    Jo – Rounders

    Hillary Clinton (maybe…)

    I would be interested to see an argument as to why the characters listed above are “bad for women”

Comments are closed.