One Woman's Love Letter

Finding strong female characters in fiction isn't easy. Finding them in fantasy or science fiction can be even harder. And finding them in fantasy or sci-fi that comes out of Hollywood? Sometimes it's easier to find that proverbial needle in the haystack. Thank God for Joss Whedon. Joss Whedon, who has brought us the fabulous female characters of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Angel, Firefly, and Titan, A.E. (He also wrote Alien: Resurrection, but I assume that means someone else developed Ripley, and was in on Toy Story, but there were few female characters there.) Joss, a lot of us girls love you.

I haven't seen every last thing Joss has written. At the time of writing this article, I've only seen four seasons of Buffy, none of Angel, every last episode multiple times of Firefly (and Serenity), and yes, I loved Titan, A.E. But I've peeked at Wikipedia enough to know that I'm okay with a lot of what I'm going to say and my opinion isn't very likely to change, and yes, I totally know what happens at the end of Buffy and even what happens in quite a bit of Angel. So. Disclaimers done, let's move on to the love letter.

"Strong female characters," we beg, "give us strong female characters!" Well, very well. But what makes a strong female character? There's two ways you can interpret that phrase: 1.) a female character that is "strong" emotionally, physically, spiritually, or mentally, and someone who could serve as a role model to young girls, or 2.) a female character that is a strong presence — fleshed out and three-dimensional. They aren't always the same thing. For example, Lara Croft could easily be called a strong female character by the first definition, however I don't consider her particularly fleshed out. On the other hand, not every person is what we would call "strong", and the presence of a well-developed but "weak" character (such as Sibyll Trelawney in the Harry Potter series) does not automatically condemn the overall series. I'm looking for a combination of the two.

Whedon gives us those female characters in spades. Well, not spades. The casts of these enterprises are relatively small, when you think about it. But I'm glad of that, because it enables him to really focus on the characters he does develop, and give them detailed and interesting arcs. So, what makes these female characters so superior to so many female characters in the sci-fi/fantasy genre?

1.) Let's start with the obvious. Whedon women have all sorts of strengths.

This is a necessity, obviously. You need to have your girls have fun strengths, and preferably not simply the stereotypical "female" traits. Buffy has near super-powers, but she's also resourceful, creative, and quick-witted. Willow and Kaylee are intellectually brilliant, one being a computer geek and the other an engine genius. Zoe could take down Jayne (and maybe even Mal) without breaking much of a sweat. Akima is a little more generic, but is a pilot, creative, and a good fighter on her own. (One of my favorite scenes in Titan A.E. is the elaborate rescue that Cale stages for Akima, only to walk in and find her sitting on her prison, whacking one of the slavers over the head with a club.)

But the strengths don't have to be obvious. For example, Inara never picks up a gun in the entire Firefly series, but her strengths lie in diplomacy. Cordelia might be unpleasant and even shallow during much of the Buffy series, but she is very intelligent, is willing to (realistically and eventually) go against society's expectations, and does have a core of unexpected loyalty. However, I'd like to also point out that not every woman has to be a strong female character. Why? Because not all people in life are what you might characterize as "strong." If you want certain characters to stand out, the others must allow them to do so.

However, despite the fact that Whedon women have these amazing strengths, no one strength is held up as the absolute ideal or specifically feminine. Rather the opposite, in fact, as many of the strengths the women possess are often associated with men. (Strength, logic, etc.) Which brings us to point 2:

2.) Being a strong woman does not rob you of femininity.

Very often, when I see a woman with a lot of backbone in sci-fi or fantasy, she becomes… less feminine. Like you have to make a choice between being a role-model and being a girl. Whedon women don't do that.

There is not a single Whedon woman that does not remain just that — a woman. The Buffy girls still care about their clothes, they still gossip about their love lives, they still relate to others in a feminine sort of way, although that way is different for each character. They still baffle Xander and Giles with some of their ways of thinking and their approaches to problems. The Firefly girls are much the same. I think the episode that drives it home the most for me is 'Shindig', when Kaylee and Zoe start discussing the dresses they see in a window.

That scene sums up another point for me — that "femininity" also is not a single-option setting. Zoe and Kaylee are both undeniably feminine, but in very different ways. Aside from drastic differences in the fashion preferences, Kaylee is much more emotional where Zoe is much more restrained. (As a side note, I always thought the dynamics of the Zoe-Wash marriage were fascinating and really well done. Even though there was some serious role reversal, there was never any doubt that Wash was a man and Zoe was a woman.) Kaylee is more of the "little sister" type where Zoe is more of the "big sister". However, both are incredibly attractive, sexy, feminine women. And so, point 3:

3.) Women are interested in sex, and they all have different approaches to it.

Fantasy tends to shoehorn women into the Madonna-or-whore dilemma. You can be a sweet, innocent virgin who sleeps with her one true love, or you can boink anything that moves. If you're the first, you're probably very repressed and prudish. If you're the second, well, you're not, but the attitude sort of stays the same regardless of the character. Whedon women have sex, and they all have different reactions to it.

For example, you have Buffy, who seems to constantly make bad boyfriend decisions. Her forays tend towards the highly passionate and very ill-advised. Willow is more of the classic "good girl" to start, but she makes it clear that her physical impulses and her morals are not always in agreement. (Incidentally, I find her relationship with Tara quite nicely handled, too.) There's Faith, who uses sex as a release and a power trip and pure pleasure. Cordelia obviously puts some value on it, given how she never slept with Xander, but she acts as if it's no big deal because that's what her social set dictates. Zoe is intensely passionate, but confines that physical passion to her marriage. Kaylee is much freer, and never once insists she loves Simon, which I found refreshing. And Inara's sex life is just… complicated.

Sex is a part of life, and it is a complicated one, one that everyone addresses differently. However, sex isn't the only part of life, which brings us to:

4.) Women have other relationships besides romantic ones.

In a long-running TV series, you have to address the romance, sure. But at the same time, you have the opportunity to explore many other relationships, and Whedon does.

Whedon women are friends, daughters, mothers, sisters, and co-workers. They don't exist in a vacuum and they don't exist to be romantic interests. They exist in a network of people, in some sort of family.

I have to admit, the romantic relationships in Buffy kind of bore me. They just do. The relationship I've always enjoyed the most is the one between Giles and Buffy, and is sort of the epitome of what I mean. There is absolutely nothing sexual in that relationship, and it's one of the cornerstones of the series. I would then further extend that to Buffy's relationships with Xander and Willow. It's wonderful to see Buffy and Xander be friends and never have sex, emphasizing how men and women can be friends in a nonsexual context (his early crush on her nonwithstanding). And even better is Buffy's friendship with Willow. It's a true, deep sisterly friendship that, should I ever have a daughter, I would very much like her to have a friend like that. It's based in mutual respect and like and love, and I really appreciate that.

Firefly is a little more difficult because it is a shorter series, but the women-are-more-than-love-interests are still there. Zoe and Mal have the rare instance (in Hollywood) of a true male-female friendship with no sex, even though both parties are attractive and interested in the opposite gender. There are some nice moments when Jayne seems to almost consider Kaylee like a little sister (pretty much everyone does, for that matter), and I really liked the relationship based on faith between Book and Inara. But I think the relationship that stands out here is River and Simon, and the deep brother-sister bond that superceded pretty much anything else in their lives.

5.) In order to have strong, compelling female characters, you must have strong, compelling male characters, too.

Now, this rule doesn't hold hard and fast, depending on the setting. If you're writing something set in a girls' school or another environment that would be predominantly female, I'll give you a break. But seriously.

Women in the real world do not exist in a vacuum, and not all men are sexist, evil pigs. People are all different from each other, as after-school special as that sounds. Any time I see a series or work where the women are amazing and the men are whining louts, I have just as low opinion of it as I do when it's the other way around. Good writing involves remembering that each of your characters is a character in their own right, and has their own strengths and weaknesses. Doing anything else is lazy.

Additionally, what I want to see in my female characters is not a superior society, but an equal one. For an equal society, you must have men and women interacting in a logical and respectful manner. Same in fiction. Whedon male characters are often just as interesting and complex as the female ones, which only increases my personal pleasure in his work.

5a.) But with that said, don't ignore gender politics when they are relevant.

Female characters should not be antagonistic to males just for the sake of it. Likewise, they shouldn't be elevated for the sake of it. However, there are times when gender politics are crucial to the plot, and interesting to boot. The current example I can think of is when Riley undergoes the operation to return him to "normal", thus losing any special abilities he had from the Initiative. Buffy, however, is still the Slayer, and only increasing in her power. It's an interesting dilemma and (currently, we're about 5 episodes in) an interesting plotline that is very relevant to this particular story.

But again, gender politics aren't always relevant. I like that in Firefly, there's nothing odd about Zoe being Mal's first mate or having served under Mal in the war. There's nothing strange about Kaylee being the mechanic- no one thinks twice about either of these things. It's a very nice depiction of just how much gender politics have changed (outside of the border planets) in the 500 years before Firefly takes place.

6.) You've gotta take the good with the bad. In order to truly be a feminist writer, some of your villains must be female, too.

This is one area where I've been a little dubious on how often Joss does this. In Buffy, there's Drusilla, the bug-teacher Xander has a crush on, Darla, Harmony, Faith, Maggie Walsh, and a maybe a few more. (Okay, peaking at spoilers, definitely a few more.) The major guys I've seen have been Spike, Angel, Adam, the Master, the Chosen One, Ethan Rayne, the Mayor, and quite a few more. But it's really when you start adding up all the random demons and vampires that I think you come out with a lot more male villains than female ones.

Now, this is probably because I'm including the random, one-episode, fight-a-little-and-get-staked guys. I suspect the reason the male villains outnumber the female ones is because the number of male stunt actors looking for cheaper work in Hollywood is greater than the number of female ones. However, I'm not sure the male villains outnumber the female villains in Firefly, (I can think of Patience and YoSaffBridge for the female Firefly villains,) and the Drej in Titan A.E. did have a queen.

Anyway, there are some good female villains. Drusilla is seriously insane, but very powerful and quite intelligent when she's thinking clearly. Faith is wonderfully complex and developed and full of shades of gray, even if she would kick my butt for attributing that much subtlety to her. Maggie Walsh was another great one who truly thought she was doing some good, but willing to be utterly ruthless. I actually quite liked YoSaffBridge- intelligent, witty, and someone who you never knew the whole story. (Darn FOX for canceling the series!) I'd comment on how Harmony is a complete ditz and Glory sure meets a few stereotypes, but let's face it, not all the male villains are the epitome of evil genius, either.

And finally, what's really the most important point of all:

7.) Whedon women are characters — full, realized characters.

I realize this feels like circular logic. The question is what makes Joss Whedon's female characters so great, and the answer is that they're characters. But really, it's not. This is a situation where the fundamentals of writing answer the question of why Joss's women kick butt. His women kick butt because he remembers that they are full-fledged characters and treats them as such. They're given strengths, weaknesses, and motivations, heartaches, triumphs, relationships that are good, relationships that are bad, problems, and above all, personalities. They're treated with respect, and that's what ends up making them such great characters.

Joss isn't the only writer to make strong female characters, of course, even in fantasy and science fiction. Look at the Harry Potter series, A Song of Ice and Fire by George R.R. Martin, Anne McCaffery's Dragonriders of Pern, Battlestar Galactica (which I haven't actually seen yet but know enough to know that's a fair statement), Alien, and even Star Wars (the women might be think on the ground, but Leia can kick pretty much anyone's butt). But I do think Joss Whedon is a pioneer of sorts, not only in providing these sorts of female characters, but in proving that there is indeed a market for them.

So thanks, Joss. We appreciate it! Now, can we talk about the concept of happy couples for a change?