Satirical Strong Female Characters Kick Sexism's Ass

on September 7, 2011

Intern Grace's Team Pick:

"Strong Female Characters" is a short series of webcomics that include Georgia O'Queefe, Susan B. Assthony and Queen Elizatits shooting guns that look like Tetris blocks because they are classy ladies who scoff at your social construct of what a normal gun looks like! Haha!

It's very snarky.

Artist Kate Beaton of "Hark, a Vagrant":

“This comic was conceived by Carly Monardo, Meredith Gran and myself one night. We are professionals in the entertainment industry and we think we know what we are talking about when we say that there needs to be more strong female characters out there and we know just what to do about it. Finally, some women to look up to!”

You can see the (slightly NSFW) comics on the "Hark, a Vagrant" site.

28 responses to “Satirical Strong Female Characters Kick Sexism's Ass”

radiogirl (member)
September 7, 2011 at 3:52 pm Permalink Reply Report user

Kate Beaton is #1 on my list of “Favorite Humans I Have Never Met”

0
1. radiogirl (member)
  September 7, 2011 at 3:57 pm Permalink Reply Report user
  
  JK obviously I meant “#2 after the entire Autostraddle Team”
  
  >>
  
  0
kitty
September 7, 2011 at 4:08 pm Permalink Reply

I’m not sure how I feel about Strong Female Characters, actually. I love Kate Beaton, but when she first posted these I was taken aback and a little offended. Re-reading the comics now, my reaction is the same. Am I being over-sensitive? Am I just missing something?

0
1. chrissie riot (member)
  September 7, 2011 at 4:18 pm Permalink Reply Report user
  
  No, I feel the same way.
  
  0
2. Intern Grace (member)
  September 7, 2011 at 4:19 pm Permalink Reply
  
  I have a lot of feelings that I can’t quite identify about this. I kind of wanted to see how other people felt about it.
  
  0
  1. chrissie riot (member)
    September 7, 2011 at 4:23 pm Permalink Reply Report user
    
    I feel like it’s almost a satire of things that I am not comfortable being made fun of? So the whole thing makes me somewhat uncomfortable. And I don’t know if it’s because I need to examine my thoughts or if I’m uncomfortable with the way they’re being presented.
    
    Confusing feelings.
    
    0
3. Tui
  September 7, 2011 at 4:25 pm Permalink Reply
  
  I go back and forth. On the one hand, it is borderline slut-shamey which I’m not comfortable with. On the other hand, it does articulate something about the portrayal of women in the action and SF genres that I enjoy, viz., double standards with clothing and the willingness of male writers to put the most facile, empty spin on the “strong” woman character possible and then say, look! We’re not sexist! Yeah, we’ve only got two women in the film and one of them’s our protagonist’s wife or girlfriend who has no impact on anything at all and probably dies horribly, but look at this other one! She’s just like the men, but naked! But it’s OK because she LIKES to be naked! We’re not sexist AT. ALL. Also, they hate each other, because obviously women who choose less traditional roles HATE women who are homemakers. And that attitude makes me go RARRRR.
  
  0
  1. southpaw (member)
    September 7, 2011 at 6:14 pm Permalink Reply Report user
    
    Agreed, Tui. To Kitty and the rest, I will say that it took me three readings to actually get what Beaton, Gran and company were getting at. It seems to be a satirical comic on many different tropes surrounding women in comic books, video games and other “boys-only” genres. I feel that because the comic represents such a conglomerate of tropes that it’s message doesn’t really come across clearly.
    
    For example, I see the skimpy costumes and butt-and-boobs in every shot as an take on commentaries like these. I read the characters’ hypersexuality and “don’t need no man” attitude as a commentary on the tendency to imbue “strong female characters” with “masculine” traits (or at least masculinity as it is viewed through the mainstream/marketing lens. this also says something about the value placed on “feminine” traits but I digress…). I’d argue that most of the strong female characters these days are at the core male leads with breasts and “sex appeal.” Alot of the the comic seems to focus on this, which is where I think the slut-shamey element comes from.
    
    I mean, obvs there are tons of women who are masculine of center or femmey or independent or into sex or into being naked, and I don’t think the comic is coming down on those types of people. I think it’s judging media producers who can only seem to craft female characters from the dude-with-boobs/skimpy outfit playbook and claiming that these are unproblematic.
    
    0
    1. southpaw (member)
      September 7, 2011 at 6:16 pm Permalink Reply Report user
      
      shoooooot…typo on the last word >_>
      
      should read *problematic.
      
      0
4. Lora (member)
  September 7, 2011 at 5:31 pm Permalink Reply Report user
  
  I think it’s a GREAT send-up of the way that Hollywood creates “strong female characters” and expects that to be some shorthand for feminism. I think, considering the timing of the comic, it was probably a direct statement on films like “Sucker Punch.” She’s basically making fun of the way that women are supposed to be empowered by these characters who kick-ass, but who have to do it in a skimpy costume, who HAVE to have a love story or who end up with some gross dude just because that’s the way it goes, and how they distort the tenets of feminism. Women as filmgoers are supposed to enjoy these characters and be thankful for them, but it would be seemingly impossible for a blockbuster, major studio film to have a female character who was strong and empowering and not also made for the male gaze.
  
  Like, the one that kills me every time is the one where the character is explaining why all the pieces of her (yes, skimpy) costume are canonically important. Because there’s always a lot of mansplaining about stuff like that in the world of film – like, someone makes the valid criticism that the women didn’t have to wear that super sexy, totally impractical costume, and it’s not like [insert male action hero here] has to wear something like that, and countless fanboys will reply with various inane reasons why the costuming was in-line with the plot, when really we all know that the “strong female character” was dressed like that for that very fanboy’s benefit.
  
  I used to spend a lot of time on movie forums. I have a lot of feelings about this.
  
  1
  1. Tui (member)
    September 7, 2011 at 7:34 pm Permalink Reply Report user
    
    Because there’s always a lot of mansplaining about stuff like that in the world of film – like, someone makes the valid criticism that the women didn’t have to wear that super sexy, totally impractical costume, and it’s not like [insert male action hero here] has to wear something like that, and countless fanboys will reply with various inane reasons why the costuming was in-line with the plot, when really we all know that the “strong female character” was dressed like that for that very fanboy’s benefit.
    
    Yes, I completely agree. I think probably whether this comes across fully depends on how much time the reader spends reading comics/watching SF/hanging out with fanboys. I’m a comics fan and while I really dig, say, Zatanna’s and Kory’s costumes as coming from a place completely related to their characters, PG’s infamous boob window, Supergirl’s super-mini, Huntress’ belly window et al make me roll my eyes sooo hard. And the comic does a pretty fantastic job of sending up that fanboy perspective.
    
    I think where the problem with the comic lies is that it puts these sentiments, generally expressed by fanboys to justify creator decisions, in the mouths of women. Obviously they’re characters, not real people, but when real women say things like “the way I dress is an important part of my culture and identity”, we really should take them at their word. (c.f. the Marvel comics character Dust, who observes hijab.)
    
    0
5. Raef
  September 7, 2011 at 5:57 pm Permalink Reply
  
  Yeah, you’re being too sensitive. Nothing in it is even remotely offensive.
  
  It’s just a damn funny comic that makes an excellent point about ‘strong female characters’. Lora said it perfectly.
  
  0
  1. Jane (member)
    December 11, 2012 at 7:00 pm Permalink Reply Report user
    
    Having different thoughts than someone else (or than a majority, dominant, or more-informed viewpoint) about what something means, or being unsure, or having aspects of something trigger uncomfortable feelings, is not being “too sensitive.” Anyway, no one jumped on the comics, they just expressed maybe not quite understanding where it was coming from, and expressed pretty understandable uncomfortable feelings. People have explained the background and the comics make more sense, at least to me, now. It’s a lot of specific commentary on a specific world that not everyone is immersed in.
    
    Just had to say this because the “too sensitive” thing is used so much to shut down people expressing feelings, thoughts, awareness about sexism, racism, etc. I don’t think this was… entirely… your intent. “Nothing in it is even remotely offensive”? I think it’s pretty easy to see how at least some stuff in it is “remotely” offensive, given the world we live in, if you don’t have enough knowledge about where it’s coming from to know the meaning.
    
    0
6. Kira
  September 7, 2011 at 11:20 pm Permalink Reply
  
  I, too, am not sure how I feel about this comic, especially as I have enjoyed a great deal of Beaton’s work. I totally agree with what I think the points Beaton and the other artists are trying to make but I am uncomfortable with some of the ways they went about doing it….
  
  I am having trouble articulating exactly what is ever so slightly off-putting to me about a few of these strips – I’m getting slut-shame-y vibe from them, somehow, though I don’t think that was intentional on the part of the artists.
  
  Feeeeelings.
  
  0
7. Elise
  September 8, 2011 at 11:54 am Permalink Reply
  
  I feel exactly the same. I adore Kate, and i’ve loved her previous comics on sexism, so I’m confused by my reaction to these. I wish I could explain my discomfort better.
  
  I think part of the problem is that the first two strips just feel like generic ‘crazy feminist’ punchlines. ‘Strong female characters’ brutalizing men who open doors and women who bake cookies, with a ‘but that nice man was just holding a door open for her!’ vibe just makes it feel too much like a ‘wah! feminists are mean!’ joke for my comfort. The baggage of these kinds of jokes is that they’re parodies of feminism, not parodies of sci fi and comics misunderstandings of feminism, which I think is what Beaton was going for.
  
  And, I wish I could explain this better, but the ‘strong female character’ zeitgeist she’s working with feels like the nineties crop of Charlies Angels/Barb Wire/Lara Croft faux-feminist action heroines, and i feel like their moment has already passed. I feel like the trend for female characters now is to be overtly feminine and weak and neurotic and supportive/needy with the male heroes. Which is why a parody of these characters now and their strident independence confuses me. ‘I don’t need a man, but there’s something about this weak male hero’ rang true, and them twisting their backs so their boobs and asses are always in the same shot is fucking hilarious, but… yeah, not sure about the other stuff.
  
  I can’t stress enough that Kate is still amazing, though.
  
  1
Emily (member)
September 7, 2011 at 4:23 pm Permalink Reply Report user

My take, for what little it’s worth, is that Beaton is poking fun at a lot of the usual tropes used in movies/TV to represent the “strong female character.” Like, it’s good that they have these characters at all, but not so good that they seem to fall into the same stereotypes far more than often.

That is: To TV/movie people, strong female character all-too often seems to equal straight, sexually predatory, femme, and scantily clad.

Which, hey, that would be all well and good if it was just one of many types of ladies portrayed. It’s not so much good when that’s pretty much all you ever see, though, and that’s just when media even deigns to portray a non-doormat lady character.

I also adore Beaton’s work so I could be slightly biased.

0
1. Tui
  September 7, 2011 at 4:43 pm Permalink Reply
  
  iawtc
  
  0
  1. Intern Grace (member)
    September 7, 2011 at 4:44 pm Permalink Reply
    
    I have to look up that abbreviation every single time without fail.
    
    0
    1. prolittering (member)
      September 7, 2011 at 4:54 pm Permalink Reply Report user
      
      I thought it was a noise.
      
      1
    2. Alyssa Jane (member)
      September 8, 2011 at 2:00 am Permalink Reply Report user
      
      I have to look up most abbreviations every time. I remember encountering “imho” before google, and I had know idea what it meant or how to find out. It was probably a good two years before I got it. Seems like every time I catch up, there’s a new one and I am so terrible at scrabble as it is.
      
      0
2. leafdarking (member)
  September 7, 2011 at 4:45 pm Permalink Reply Report user
  
  I was going to say something, but you just said it better.
  
  0
3. lyels (member)
  September 7, 2011 at 4:59 pm Permalink Reply Report user
  
  I also agree! I’m a big fan of Kate Beaton’s work, and it’s really not slut shame-y. This always strikes me as a parody of a very specific and unrealistic character stereotype, rather than at any real people.
  
  0
4. lyels (member)
  September 7, 2011 at 5:01 pm Permalink Reply Report user
  
  I agree! This always strikes me as a parody of a very specific and unrealistic character stereotype, rather than at any real people. Although I am also biased towards Kate Beaton because I love her.
  
  0
Claire (member)
September 7, 2011 at 5:13 pm Permalink Reply Report user

I think it’s an interesting commentary on how the stereotypical strong female characters are drawn. Also, I like snark.

0
Paper0Flowers (member)
September 7, 2011 at 5:17 pm Permalink Reply Report user

<3 Kate Beaton. This comic made me chuckle when I first saw it a few months back.

0
Jacob McConnell (member)
September 7, 2011 at 9:04 pm Permalink Reply Report user

Haha sweet comic. A change from the usual videogame-y ones that i read, but still awesome. Thanks for pointing it out!

0
Tarzan (member)
September 8, 2011 at 6:03 am Permalink Reply Report user

Maybe it’s because I’m French, but I don’t understand half of these comics. I mean, I understand, I just don’t get the jokes I feel dumb.

0
Damascus
September 8, 2011 at 2:24 pm Permalink Reply

Why are people saying this comic is slut-shaming? Because it makes fun of how skimpily the characters dress? That’s just satire about how so-called “strong female characters” usually dress in movies and the like.

Also, I loved this comic the first time I read it; glad to be reminded of it!

0