Women representation in sci-fi films... Any opinions please!

[Steve Jordan]

Originally Posted by Connavar of Rigante

Khara isnt one dimensional as you might think either.

Not Kara... I "suggested" Dee was "one-dimensional," although you're right... even the simple characters on BSG tend to be more fleshed out than many major female roles on other series.

Originally Posted by Connavar of Rigante

Also Boomer isnt asian They are from alien planets far far away from earth.

All the more reason not to typecast her as one, simply because of a convenient resemblance.

[Connavar]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Not Kara... I "suggested" Dee was "one-dimensional," although you're right... even the simple characters on BSG tend to be more fleshed out than many major female roles on other series.



All the more reason not to typecast her as one, simply because of a convenient resemblance.

I agree Dee has been one dimensional. Unlike other female characters in BSG. She has been shown only as the lover and not on her own. First Billy and then Apollo.


Who typecast Boomer as Asian ? You mean the writers?

[n25an]

women and scifi...

to be honest with you the only character that I have seen thats been truly fleshed out convincingly since I have been watching scifi is xena... as far as the books go... its that princess in star wars leia... and to be honest I see nothing wrong with that... the stories just cann't handle too much more... in other words... a half baked story idea does not lend room to female character development... and most scifi films are rather half baked... good entertainment but half baked... this is why for a long time... people were questioning if science fiction is literature... its just so cliched...

[Lith]

Women characters have been "fleshed out" (convincingly or otherwise) very well over the years.


(Sorry, I shall remove my punny self for a while.)

[Steve Jordan]

Originally Posted by Connavar of Rigante

Who typecast Boomer as Asian ? You mean the writers?

Nobody did... I was suggesting that typecasting women roles based on female stereotypes makes as much sense as typecasting Boomer as Asian.

@n25an: True, most SF that makes its way to movies and TV tend to be rather lame examples of the genre. If you want to find really well-developed female characters in SF, you should be digging into the literature, not the movies.

However, movies was the subject here... in fact, we've digressed by discussing so many TV SF shows. If we limit our discussion to well-developed female characters in SF movies, I'm back to Ripley in Alien, Major Motoko in Ghost in the Shell, (thought of another) Dr. Aki Ross from Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within, and then I'm kinda tapped out.

Edit: In thinking about it further, I have another good one: Dr. Ellie Arroway from Contact. (I started to add Ivy Walker of MNS's The Village, but calling that SF is a stretch.)

[Lith]

Lara Croft from Tomb Raider.

I haven't seen most of the shows or movies mentioned here, so have no basis for comparison for a lot of this stuff. But upon thinking it over, I disagree about Ivanova not being a central or fully realized character. Compare her for a moment with Janeway from Voyager, who is undisputedly the central character of the show- Ivanova beats her all hollow by any comparison.

Maybe it's not fair to come in here and vent my frustrations with all things Star Trek.

I'll also nominate Cloud Strife from Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children...

[Thadlerian]

Here's another point: What SF/F movies/series have you seen, in which a female character's gender does not matter? It seems to me that when people make movies (or write books for that matter) nowadays, they always think they have to prove something with their female characters. For instance, there's always the scene where the boy underestimates the girl's strength/martial prowess, and gets his ass kicked. You can always see that scene when it's coming.

I think one of the main tenets of sexism remains in force: Only women have gender. A human being is, by default, male. Thus, when a character is female, that needs to be justified by making a point out of her gender. Or something like that (am I even making sense now?).

In which movies could you change the female character into a male, without affecting the content or plot?

My point is that a male character can be anyone, while a female character needs to conform to one or more stereotypes. Like the damsel in distress, the tomboy insisting on independence, the warrior-princess, the super-skilled mechanic/hacker, and so on. These may be strong characters within their respective stories, but they remain stereotypes. And they're fairly static. A man, on the other hand, can fill any role, and go through any character development.

Troo adressed the point of "female men", which I think is valid, even though it's a matter of diverging feminist theories to determine whether it's good or bad. One of the classic questions is: What is important, the right for a woman to be a man, or for a woman to be a woman? SF movies seem stuck on the former. For how often do we see a female main character who is, in the traditional (bear with me here) sense, feminine, but not necessarily weak? What movies are capable of not equalling traditional femininity with weakness? I mean, women have endured child-birth and all manner of punishment and oppression though millennia - there must be some trick to it.

I think female role models are important for today's women to abandon self-oppressive mind-sets. But I also think many women find their femininity central to their identity, and would like to see strong role models they can truly identify with. Not everyone can be Cara or Lara, nor do they necessarily want to.

I would also disagree that Major Kusanagi in Ghost in the Shell is a good/strong female character. Sure she's tough, but she always has to undress to use her cloaking device. In some scene in the middle of the movie, there's a man using a cloaking device, and he's allowed to remain dressed, if I recall correctly. There are no doubt some technical points about different cloaking devices, but in the end, it just looks like a good old-fashioned example of exploitation to me. There are numerous similar cases in SF. And I think they send a strong signal to women that, sure, they may be allowed to speak rough and act tough, but, in the end, they're there because of their bodies. Because, if these women were really that strong, why didn't they get a word in deciding their own clothing?

[Steve Jordan]

Thadlerian,
I believe my character selection meets your criteria, including the Major. Regarding the issue with the cloak: I thought the Major stripped down to a bodysuit, and was not naked... but maybe I'm not remembering it clearly. Anyway, at least she did not go through any issues with having to run around "exposing" herself, but just got the job done... that's the sign of a strong character.

My other selections... Ripley, Aki, Ellie... are all strong roles, but roles that could have been given to a man and played out exactly the same. And in each case, there is nothing about the characters and their actions that is stereotypically "female." I'll give the same props to Lara Croft.

[Dave]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

My other selections... Ripley, Aki, Ellie... are all strong roles, but roles that could have been given to a man and played out exactly the same. And in each case, there is nothing about the characters and their actions that is stereotypically "female."

Ripley - I can't see a man building such a strong relationship with his cat.

[Steve Jordan]

Originally Posted by Dave

Ripley - I can't see a man building such a strong relationship with his cat.

Now who's being sexist? You don't honestly think it's beyond a man's ability to love a cat? As a cat-lover myself, I officially Take Umbrage to that remark!

[Connavar]

Originally Posted by Thadlerian

Here's another point: What SF/F movies/series have you seen, in which a female character's gender does not matter? It seems to me that when people make movies (or write books for that matter) nowadays, they always think they have to prove something with their female characters. For instance, there's always the scene where the boy underestimates the girl's strength/martial prowess, and gets his ass kicked. You can always see that scene when it's coming.

I think one of the main tenets of sexism remains in force: Only women have gender. A human being is, by default, male. Thus, when a character is female, that needs to be justified by making a point out of her gender. Or something like that (am I even making sense now?).

In which movies could you change the female character into a male, without affecting the content or plot?

My point is that a male character can be anyone, while a female character needs to conform to one or more stereotypes. Like the damsel in distress, the tomboy insisting on independence, the warrior-princess, the super-skilled mechanic/hacker, and so on. These may be strong characters within their respective stories, but they remain stereotypes. And they're fairly static. A man, on the other hand, can fill any role, and go through any character development.

Troo adressed the point of "female men", which I think is valid, even though it's a matter of diverging feminist theories to determine whether it's good or bad. One of the classic questions is: What is important, the right for a woman to be a man, or for a woman to be a woman? SF movies seem stuck on the former. For how often do we see a female main character who is, in the traditional (bear with me here) sense, feminine, but not necessarily weak? What movies are capable of not equalling traditional femininity with weakness? I mean, women have endured child-birth and all manner of punishment and oppression though millennia - there must be some trick to it.

I think female role models are important for today's women to abandon self-oppressive mind-sets. But I also think many women find their femininity central to their identity, and would like to see strong role models they can truly identify with. Not everyone can be Cara or Lara, nor do they necessarily want to.

I would also disagree that Major Kusanagi in Ghost in the Shell is a good/strong female character. Sure she's tough, but she always has to undress to use her cloaking device. In some scene in the middle of the movie, there's a man using a cloaking device, and he's allowed to remain dressed, if I recall correctly. There are no doubt some technical points about different cloaking devices, but in the end, it just looks like a good old-fashioned example of exploitation to me. There are numerous similar cases in SF. And I think they send a strong signal to women that, sure, they may be allowed to speak rough and act tough, but, in the end, they're there because of their bodies. Because, if these women were really that strong, why didn't they get a word in deciding their own clothing?

Boomer,Starbuck,Roslin can all be man and not effect the plot.

Boomer was even a man in the old BSG. Starbuck is messed up firefighter.
She does have a thing going on with Apollo but its not as important atleast in the first few seasons.

Boomer is a pilot, she doesnt do much in the story that would change if she was a man. The old BSG show that.

Roslin the only important to others about her backround is that she was so far from the position as president before everyone else before her on the list died. Its not a big deal she is a female since they have female soldiers,pilots etc every in the fleet.


This all cause BSG is not generic SF tv show alà Star Trek where they make big deal of gender. " Oh a hot alien" and so on....


Samantha Carter in SGI too, i almost think they have made her too much like a man. She doesnt show much that she is even a female. Maybe in a mission or two when they are in alien planets who are shocked seeing a female captain.

[Lith]

For how often do we see a female main character who is, in the traditional (bear with me here) sense, feminine, but not necessarily weak?

The best example I can think of is Yuna from Final Fantasy 10 (yes, broadening the category to video games as well). She's undeniably feminine, and even passive, yet the central character of the game that saves the world through persistence and kindess (doesn't that sound gooey!).

And GitS- She runs around Tokyo in her underwear! I don't know how she can be taken at all seriously! Tokyo's not THAT warm! (Presumably though, she has some choice in her outfit, as only a complete idiot wouldn't see sexism in it if she was forced to wear that outfit while the men were in suits. And because she's a high-level cop, we must presume she's not a total idiot- just enough of one to run around in her lingerie for all the world to see.)

The problem becomes the definition of feminism itself. In order for a woman to avoid accusations of being there solely for her body, she has to not show it. But then she's accused of being a man in woman's clothing. There's no winning for losing anymore.

There's the additional problem of stereotyping, and that's regardless of gender. Male characters are also heavily stereotyped, into captains, military, politicians, heavies, nerds, cowboys, etc... I can't think of any that are both nerds and heavies, for example.

[ironvelvet]

Sometimes I think that female characters (and children and teenagers) are used in SF films to create a frame of reference for the audience. As in, we would all love to think that our first reaction to aliens and danger etc. would be proactive and intelligent and steadfast but secretly we know that there would be embarassing amounts of paralysis, brain shutting down, screaming panic. So seeing someone on the screen reacting in what we fear would be the 'real' way actually draws us deeper into the fantasy and creates an illusion of reality and believeability.

Pity it's nearly always the woman who gets to be human and pathetic but men - on screen and elsewhere - are very restricted by the stereotypes they've wished on themselves.

[Star Scream]

id just like to butt in and say thanks for all your current responses! and sorry i havent been commenting back but i have been reading them all

I was comparing Aliens with Terminator 2 and did you notice Ripley and Sarah Connor are wearing basically the same clothes? Obviously Camerons doing but that must be a connotation between the two movies. I think Ripley's ability to control the loader at the end of aliens is a symbolic representation of women - and defeats all stereotypes in this one scene. She is heroic, strong, and masculine in some ways.

I also think the conversation between Newt and Ripley in the med lab before the fire alarms go off is important, as they are talking about the alien and how it reproduces.

And in the end Terminator 1 & 2 and Aliens is all about reproducing.
Sarah connor --------> Matriarchy and mother of the saviour of earth (or whats left of it)
Ripley --------> Matriarchy and "mother" of newt and jonesy the cat

Dont you think Hicks Ripley & Newt make an artificial family at the end of aliens? well before Newt and Hicks dies in Alien3 that is

Oh i scrapped Transformers out of my case study. Even though its a good movie, i decided to change it with Terminator 1, and now my hypothosis is:
How are women represented in the films of James Cameron?

But keep up the replies! thanks guys

[Star Scream]

Urgh, another thing that annoyed me

Terminator - The Sarah Connor Chronicles is coming out soon.
I really dont like the look of it though. Firstly, the terminator is female again, so the emphasis will be on her trying to look sexy.

It seems i cant post a link to the poster because i dont have enough posts! But theres a poster on Imdb if you want to have a look, shes hovering in mid-air with half her body destryed in a white background.

Shes mean't to be the Terminator, and yeah she may have half a body but look! Her hair is blowing in the wind, shes got makeup on and above all else she does not look threatening.

I think thats one thing james Cameron did well, he made the female characters strong and hardy - he didnt make them look sexy so the films would expand to a wider audience - because he didn't have to.

The poster is Hollywood'ised', and in my eyes if they cant make a good poster then the programme is going to be pants