[ SECRET POST #2941 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2941 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Fire Emblem: Awakening]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Hannibal, Richard Armitage]


__________________________________________________



05.
[The Hobbit]


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.
[Dan and Mab's Furry Adventures]


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.
[Doctor Who]












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 015 secrets from Secret Submission Post #420.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[a_potato]

I've often encountered the vein of thinking that, since women's options were limited to "wife" and "mother" in the past (although this is only true of women in the middle and upper classes, which is often ignored); since the role of female characters was long mostly restricted to those spheres; and since there's still a very strong societal expectation for women to inhabit those spheres, portraying women as being focused on them has undertones that aren't present when portraying men in that way. And I think there is something to that, and I think it's valuable to look at wider trends and evaluate whether there's some sort of bias at play. I think it's also valuable to sometimes look at what we're drawn to and consider whether we've been influenced by social conditioning. But the solution to the problems that exist isn't to completely do away with female characters who are interested in romance and motherhood -- it's to make sure that those characters are well-drawn, and to add variety.

I feel like representation is treated as a zero-sum game, at times, and...that's really not how it should work, particularly since I agree with you. I'm married and I'm going to be a mother, and these are things that I want and that I feel add value to my life. No one should feel pressured into choosing these things, and it's wrong that people have been, but the choice itself shouldn't be treated with scorn.

You might be right about these spaces including a lot of young people; when I was young, I thought romance was frivolous, that marriage was a sham, and that kids would unnecessarily tie me down. And look at me now, ha! :) At the same time, there are people who never develop any interest in romance or in having kids, and that's perfectly fine, as well. And I can kind of understand how someone who has no interest in either of those things might find it tedious to constantly come across them in media. But, at the end of the day, something not being to your taste isn't a good reason to dismiss it entirely (except insofar as, you know, you personally stop reading/watching).

(I feel like I'm kinda babbling, so hopefully that all made sense)

[lunabee34]

It does make sense. I agree wholeheartedly with everything you've written here.

I think I just have a knee jerk reaction to the vehemence with which the "mere female love interest" is decried in a way that I rarely ever see happen with male characters. I also think I'm watching/reading things through entirely different lenses that many people because when these kinds of discussions start, my reaction to being told that a female character is a mere love interest usually goes something like, "What do you mean? She does this thing and this thing. And that things. She does more things than these seven other male characters. Bah!" LOL