Female characters really suck

[dustinzgirl]

Faery, I know so many women who were all "OMG FEMINIST RULES!" then when they got home and married they are cooking, cleaning, and raising babies (and still working full time, go figure).

Myself included.

Women will do a lot for the love of a man (or woman), its in our nature to want to be loved. Otherwise, why would so many women stay with a husband who beats them, verbally abuses them, or rapes them? Because they want those in between moments of utter beautiful amazing love, and will take abuse (and in some cases, even commit illegal acts, like in that old kidnapping case, I'll have to look it up) because they love their man.

[Rosemary]

I always looked at WOT as being set in a similar time line as ASOIAF... medieval. So, in those days it was quite normal for that sort of behaviour.

[Diana Levin]

[quote=the_faery_queen;920349]but it's not a woman's world. without going into a big feministy rant here, the women THINK they're in charge, the men think they're in charge, until they get in a relationship. then the men become instantly dominant over them, the women seem happy tro submit and in my mind, that doesn't make it a woman's world. it makes it a 1950s type situation, with a bossy hosuewife who loosk after the kids, cooks the meals and bosses her husband around. but he's really in charge and puts her in his place whenever it suits him. not a woman's world at all. jsut the illision of it.
quote]

I suppose if there wasn't some kind of power struggle between men and women, than it wouldn't feel like real life. And isn't that what a good story is supposed to do...allow us to feel pain and suffering of the characters in it, so that we can relate to them better?
I think that is what Jordan...and many other authors are trying to portray. If the world was equal, and everyone was treated fairly, and all was good, than there wouldn't be any story at all. There would be no point in writing a story if everyone just got along.
Drama is built on inequality, injustice, intrigue and the power struggles between one group and another. That is what makes it so interesting. Because that’s real life.
I certainly don’t agree with you that Jordan's female characters always submit to the men. I am not sure what lines you are reading...but I really don't get that from the books at all. Maybe some had submitted....but so what? That’s realistic, isn't it? Some women will still submit to their men…it happens in real life all the time. You are angry at the injustice, and that’s what makes for a good dramatic story.

[Eidurson]

Bashere and his wife contradict this though...

[Thadlerian]

I think it can be stated quite fairly that the primary gender problem with WoT is that men are allowed to fill a wide range of character types, whereas all the women (I'm making this judgement having read books 1-5) seem to be the same character, with the same abilities and faults. Further, these are faults that somehow prevent the females from becoming sympathetic characters. They may be likeable, as they're beautiful (somehow, a woman's first defined characteristic is her looks, whereas a man's is his actions), physically powerful, brave, and generally create intrigue and action whenever they appear, but none of them appear mild and sympathetic like the males. Can you see a Jordan female in the shoes of Rand, Tam, Mat, Perrin, Lan, Tallanvor (or what was that guard's name) or that prince dude in book 2 who apologizes for being a darkfriend?

However, it should also be noted that Jordan does nothing new, he just emphasizes a trend that has become common in SF/F (and mainstream media as well?), most likely as a half-hearted attempt to satisfy feminism, in which the formula has become the following: Female strenght = Power. Male strenght = Propensity to do objective good. Use of this formula can be found with writers as diverse as David Eddings and Kim Stanley Robinson.

The "damsel in distress" is no longer accepted; she has now been replaced by the "incompetent tomboy".

[Diana Levin]

Originally Posted by Thadlerian

However, it should also be noted that Jordan does nothing new, he just emphasizes a trend that has become common in SF/F (and mainstream media as well?), most likely as a half-hearted attempt to satisfy feminism, in which the formula has become the following: Female strenght = Power. Male strenght = Propensity to do objective good. Use of this formula can be found with writers as diverse as David Eddings and Kim Stanley Robinson.

The "damsel in distress" is no longer accepted; she has now been replaced by the "incompetent tomboy".

I think you make a good point, Thadlerian. I see that as well...and thats what made me so irritated with Jordan's characterization of women. Its as if when he sat down to write his book, he said to himself, "now how can I characterize ALL THE FEMALES?" seeing them all as one singular force, as opposed to treating of each of them as separate complex beings (like he does with his male characters). Its as if he considers women to have a sort "ant hive" mentality. Perhaps, as he say so often in his book, he just "doesn't understand women."

[Talysia]

Ok, I've been thinking about this for a while, but are there any of RJ's female characters that don't (by general consensus) annoy the readers? I can only think of a couple...

[C Of K]

Great new avatar Talysia! I almost didn't recognize you
But about your question...for some reason I like Verin a lot. Although I think there are instances in this story where I like most of Jordan's characters, the unflattering qualities shine through in most of them. It's just a part of his world, I think.

[Diana Levin]

Originally Posted by Talysia

Ok, I've been thinking about this for a while, but are there any of RJ's female characters that don't (by general consensus) annoy the readers? I can only think of a couple...

There are only a couple characters that truly anoy me, and I'm okay with that. There will always be characters I like and characters I don't like--its supposed to be like that. What bothers me is the way Jordan portrays female characters in general.

[Talysia]

Originally Posted by C Of K

Great new avatar Talysia! I almost didn't recognize you
But about your question...for some reason I like Verin a lot.

Aww, thanks! Sorry to confuse you, C Of K.

Verin is one of my favourite characters in the series. And Diana, I know what you mean about the way women are portrayed in general. I can't decide whether Jordan is writing for the era of fantasy that he's created or something else.

[woodsman]

Yep I'd go for Verin and Min, Faile a little as well.

I felt a lot of sympathy towards some of the characters early on: Egwene, Elayne etc, but as the books go on instead of maturing they just become worse and worse. i think this is more tied up with the role/portrayal of the Aes Sedai. Basically a bunch of objectional people who believe they have the greatest power and are best at absolutley everything.

I don't think that Jordan has made realistic female characters though and hating somone is not an indication that they are a well written/thought out character, But I do believe the whole portrayal of women in WoT would work well if it was in less detail and the series was shorter. This is because the role of women and the way they act does seem to have been key to several threads of the story.

My tuppence worth.

[NyneaveSedai]

Just a thought but have you considered the setting, in terms of age, of Jordan's work? I found the political power balance is suprisingly even considering.
From the way Jordan always talked about his wife Harriet I doubt VERY much that Jordan wished for his female characters to come over as opppressed or petty.
I do think that you are a little harsh on his characters, I find them interesting and sometimes dislikable but isn't that the point? you can't go through life liking everyone.
But Faery Queen, are you seriously just talking about a book or does this run a little deeper than that? are you referring to our society?

[BSOM180]

Yes, a good number of his characters are similar. I can almost lump Egwene, Elayne and Nynaeve (the Trio) into one personality. But if you truly think all women act the same, Moiraine was nothing like any of the other Aes Sedai I knew. Siuan Sanche had an attitude of her own as well as a compelling personality. Morgase is a more intricate Elayne. Aviendha is like a mix of the Trio and Lan. Faile reminds me of a mixture of Rand and Mat with a touch of Jordan's Trio.

Now I know there can be arguments, but I truly think that not ALL of these women are the SAME. Moiraine never bickered or gossiped like the other Aes Sedai, she played in schemes yes, but she never acted like an old woman. Siuan also didn't seem to have the gossip issue, she seemed more like a mix of Morgase and Moiraine to me.

As to whether his world was masculine or feminine, I think he wanted to get across that it was feminine, but Rand's coming seemed to shake down the women's rule, for better or worse. But before Rand, kings and lords didn't war with each other outright, kept under watch by the Aes Sedai. The Whitecloaks were a total joke. And any man who could channel got his arse handed to him fast.


Oh, and edit, I do admit that when I read his books for the second time, I found myself skipping over Egwene and Elayne when they went adventuring. The Trio seemed a bit too childish for me. So I do agree that at times, the women can be really annoying.

[the_faery_queen]

refering to our society in what way?
and women, in this real world, submit to their men and stay with rapists and those who beat them because they believe they can't do any better. those sorts of men groom those women, the way a pedophile does, into beliving that this is all their good for, that this man who hrut them really does love them and that he's sorry for hurting them and that they won't find anyone else who lovs them more
it's not that they tay with him for the good times. they stay with him because they CAN'T leave. they're broken down and afraid of being alone, that no one will want them. opr phyusically afraid the husband will get them. no one stays with abuse for the good times, they stay because they feel bad about themselves and have to.

and i have to say that i think ALl his women will submit to a man, if they haven't already. the way that the siuan woman crumbled almost instantly, is kinda proof to me that these women will cave and put up with ridiculous sorts of crap for thuis guy, no matter how strong they are. and staying home and doing the dishes and keeping house isn't what i was talking about. (i just used it because it reminds me of that sort of society where that was seen as a woman's role) it;s how they let the men make the decisions, ALL the important ones, let the men punish them when they disobey. for heaven's sake you CANNOT spank your damn wife (unless it's in a sexual way) for doing something you don't want her to (perrin and faile her) it's perverse. a woman is your equal, not your submissive, not someone you can punish for doing her own thing. and yet all the women seem to accept thsi sort of situation. ok not all the men have spanked their women yet, but they all seem to be of the, ok dear, you know best, you tell me what to do and iw ill do it
even queens. even women who probably know better than the men do, still do whatever their told.
none of them are strong or indepedant, they all cave

and i have to say i dont' agree for one second that you need the battle of the sexest to make a book interesting. there are other battles. there is no reason for jordan to be so sexist with what he's done, it just says a lot abotu him. none of the women are strong, they all put up with ridiculous domination from teh men and teh spanking, and nakedness and everything else just goes to support my belief that jordan has women isseus (in another sort of way from goodkind but issues all the same) women just don't behave like that. we're not girls from a 1950s enid bylton boarding school hitting each other with hairbrushes and having midnight feasts, while looking down on boys, yet still doing what they say
and that's how the women come cross to me

[C Of K]

the faery queen makes good points. But this mostly just illustrates differing points of view. I can see how she would perceive things the way she does, that all of Jordan's women are weak. That's not necessarily my point of view on the matter, but she isn't wrong.

Perrin did spank Faile. As I recall she'd been pummeling him at the time, even after he'd displayed distaste for her treatment of him. But I don't necessarily disagree with the faey queen as much as I see things differently.

That Perrin spanked Faile does not show strength on Perrin's part. If anything it shows that they may both be weak individuals. That men can make all the important decisions, just because they are men, does not show strength, either.

The maidens of the spear, none of which are regularly featured characters by the eleventh book, will die for Rand, but when he dishonors him, they've been known to take it out on him violently. Many of them are strong characters, but no single maiden is featured as one of the more important characters, now.

Strength can be portrayed in the making of decisions in books, or in real life, but really that's only a small aspect of what strength is. Lan, for instance, is usually portrayed as a very strong man, but he's taken orders from women for decades. Is he any less strong for being able to do so?

I don't believe so. Lan knows his role, has excepted his role, and carries it out to the best of his ability. That sounds a lot like strength to me. The world would get nowhere if everyone was pulling clout on everyone.