Gender-bending? No, thank you!
Jul. 12th, 2012 12:28 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
katikatI don't like gender-bending. Period. I don't like the idea of a female Watson (Elementary) and I didn't like a female Starbuck (Galactica). IMHO, the gender-bending of existing, established male characters does not further the acceptance of women in strong roles, it's simply lazy writing. It's the writers' way of saying that a female character can be interesting only if her part started with a penis. No, just no.
Regarding Elementary, why didn't they make Irene Adler a main character? Can you imagine Sherlock Holmes being aided by the best con-woman in New York? Or Mrs. Hudson, making her an ex-CIA agent or something? THAT would have been interesting. Giving Watson a vagina is just the easy way out.
Regarding BSG, why didn't they explore the character of Athena, Apollo's sister? Or Serena, Apollo's wife? Serena went from a housewife to a fighter pilot in five seconds flat in the old BSG. An abundance of angst and issues, a richness of material to explore. But no, they gave Starbuck boobs. Why? Because just like with Watson and Holmes, Starbuck's relationship with Apollo was already a part of the package. So why strain your braincells, right?
That's why I admire Peter Jackson so much. Instead of gender-bending characters, he expanded the existing ones - Galadriel, Arwen, Éowyn - or inserted new ones - Tauriel. IMHO, that's the way to go. Either explore and expand existing female characters, adapt books with female characters, or come up with new, original ones. Move your lazy ass, writers! Don't take the easy way out! You're not doing women any justice right now!
Regarding Elementary, why didn't they make Irene Adler a main character? Can you imagine Sherlock Holmes being aided by the best con-woman in New York? Or Mrs. Hudson, making her an ex-CIA agent or something? THAT would have been interesting. Giving Watson a vagina is just the easy way out.
Regarding BSG, why didn't they explore the character of Athena, Apollo's sister? Or Serena, Apollo's wife? Serena went from a housewife to a fighter pilot in five seconds flat in the old BSG. An abundance of angst and issues, a richness of material to explore. But no, they gave Starbuck boobs. Why? Because just like with Watson and Holmes, Starbuck's relationship with Apollo was already a part of the package. So why strain your braincells, right?
That's why I admire Peter Jackson so much. Instead of gender-bending characters, he expanded the existing ones - Galadriel, Arwen, Éowyn - or inserted new ones - Tauriel. IMHO, that's the way to go. Either explore and expand existing female characters, adapt books with female characters, or come up with new, original ones. Move your lazy ass, writers! Don't take the easy way out! You're not doing women any justice right now!
no subject
Date: 2012-07-12 12:39 pm (UTC)I have always thought exactly the same way. Not that I am against m/f characters or any combination honestly. But if a character is already established male - then leave him that way.
The only type of gender bending I have been able to enjoy is those that are sort of canon and done well. For example, I prefer Arthur with Eames but have read some nice "Arthur in a dream and Eames is forging a woman". It's STILL Eames!! And still a male. Just forging a female which is an interesting turn in storyline if done well.
I never watched the new BSG and it was because of Starbuck's character. Shit - Dirk Benidect played Starbuck wonderfully - cigar and all!! Why change that?
no subject
Date: 2012-07-12 06:22 pm (UTC)I don't like this gender-bending trend, it's like writers cannot come up with an interesting female characters anymore. They just take a guy and slap boobs on him and that's it. Argh!