Where Are All of the True Female Heroes in Fiction?
Today, there is no shortage of the, "strong woman who don't need no man," caliber of action hero. Examples like Imperator Furiosa and Black Widow permeate our everyday media. The current Zeitgeist would have us believe these are realistic examples of women and how women should act. But, there's one major problem with this: these characters aren't women; rather, they're men in women's bodies.
Already, I can hear the cries of "sexist!" and, "misogynist!" But, hear me out. Those of you who are objective and capable of utilizing logic will hopefully see the truth behind my reasoning.
These characters all lack one thing key to being a woman: femininity. Now, I know there's currently a debate raging between post-modernists and Traditionalists about whether or not there is anything objective about manliness and womanliness. That debate stems from a deeper root issue concerning the existence of objective Truth and I'll address that at another time in another post. For now, I am going to argue from the position that there are things which make a man a man, and make a woman a woman. The first is biological sex; that is the prerequisite to the genders. All men must be males, but not all males achieve manhood. All women similarly must be females, but not all females reach womanliness. The second is the adherence to both natural (including spiritual) and socio-cultural expressions of the masculine and the feminine.
Here is where the problem lies. This new breed of one-dimensional, "Mary Sue"* characters embodies nothing of the feminine on either the natural or the socio-cultural levels. They are men in women's bodies. They are the masculine possessing the female frame. And that's a serious tragedy. Not only is it tragic, it's actually sexist (unlike the false sexism the neo-feminists apply to, well, everything).
Let's examine Imperator Furiosa from Mad Max: Fury Road, for example. She is a tough as nails, kick-butt, merciless woman who (ultimately) "don't need no man," (as is reiterated ad nauseam throughout the film; so much so that disgruntled fans have begun to call it Mad Maxine: Furiosa's Road). Furthermore, she's protecting a troupe of fertile women. She is their provider and protector. What is the message being sent here? That now, women can be in the Traditional role of men and not only that they can be, but that they should be. The ending scene shows Max literally and metaphorically stepping out of the way of this new breed of woman as they ascend above the crowd to the new place of authority, to be the "better" providers and protectors of the remnants of civilization.
*A Mary Sue is an idealized and seemingly perfect fictional character. Often, this character is recognized as wish fulfillment. They can usually perform better at tasks than should be possible given the amount of training or experience, and usually are able through some means to upstage the main protagonist of the story, such as by saving the hero.
As sickening as that symbolism is, here's the philosophical and creative problem: Furiosa is basically just Max in a woman's body. Ultimately, there's no difference between her and Max. And that's the story of all of the new wave of feminist action heroes. They embody the masculine; the very same "toxic" masculinity they claim they're against. They shoot first and ask questions later. They embody misandry and put down every man they can. They try to force masculinity into only one box: strong and broody that protects and provides. What difference is there between these female action heroes and male action heroes? Other than biology, there is none! That is what you call creative bankruptcy. Imperator Furiosa had the potential to be such a rich and diverse character, tackling the wastes in a new and profound way by embodying the feminine and still being kickbutt (Ripley from the Alien series comes to mind as a good example of the Feminine Hero). But instead, we got Mad Maxine: a gender-bent version of the main protagonist that was basically no different than what we'd seen of every other wasteland action hero.
There's another, worse issue as well. This is having a negative effect on our girls. As a culture, we are teaching our young girls that they should be like men, that they should be masculine, that they should abandon the virtues and beauties of femininity and instead embrace masculinity and act like men just to prove "they can." It's something one would think feminism would be very much against: the blurring of the lines of gender to the point of denying they exist, which in turn nullifies the differences between the two. The genders should be appreciated, and their differences celebrated. It's sexist to tell little girls they need to feel ashamed of their natural femininity, that they shouldn't celebrate being a woman, and instead should inspire to be the Man-in-a-Female-Body that is Furiosa and the rest of the strong, independent, female action heroes. Tell me, what is more sexist? The new wave of feminism that is actually trying to eliminate real differences between the sexes that should be celebrated, or the Traditionalist view that loves masculinity and femininity, that encourages both, that celebrates both? I think the answer is obvious. The reason for neo-feminism's sexism is that it isn't actually about equality or the sexes or anything like that. It's Marxism veiled as social justice; it's a power struggle to dominate the systems of authority. Furthermore, this is dangerous for women. In these movies, it shows women fighting men like men. This doesn't work in the real world. If a woman is being mugged and she tries to fight the man the way that men fight she will escalate the situation and the anatomically stronger man will destroy her. Women in fight scenes aren't bad as long as they're fighting like women. Believe it or not, there are fighting styles that teach women how to leverage their size, frame, and flexibility against male opponents. But, this is rarely, if ever, seen in film.
What, then, is the alternative? Allow me to tell you a tale. There once was a great hero. This hero grew up in a small village and was known for their genius-level intellect. One day, however, the hero's father goes missing. They launch a grand mission to go out and save him; however it is not out of a masculine sense of duty that they do so. They set out because of a rather feminine quality: compassion. During their quest, they're confronted with foul beasts that assail our hero. The hero fights bravely, because what will happen to their father if they perish now? After wounding one of the beasts and vanquishing another, the enemies gain the upper-hand against our hero. All seems lost; death seems certain for both the hero and their father whom they love dearly. Suddenly, a bone-chilling howl rips across the sky and a more fearsome beast bounds down a hillside and defeats the enemies but is greatly wounded in the process. Rather than recoiling in horror, our hero takes compassion towards the new fiend and in their feminine gentleness tries to help the monster. The monster, however, is revealed to be the kidnapper of the hero's father. Rather than resorting to violence, the hero chooses to self-sacrificially take their father's place out of Love for him. The monster accepts this and keeps our hero hostage. Although many opportunities to escape the monster's dwelling arise, the honorable hero abides by their word and stays. During this time, though, the hero begins to slowly conquer and vanquish the monster. However, it is not through violence and deceit but through friendship. The hero defeats their enemy by making the beast their friend. By the end of the story, the hero has domesticated the beast and become his friend, saving an entire village, their life, and the life of their father.
Sound familiar? It should because that's the plot of Beauty and the Beast. Belle is the perfect feminine hero: she's brave and goes on a daring quest to find her father and in the process fights off wolves, she doesn't need a man as she ignores the advances of Gaston yet chooses to be with a man (Beast/The Prince) because she wants to be, she's nerdy and unapologetically herself, and best of all she uses her feminine qualities to win the day! Her patience, compassion, and gentleness were what saved the village, granted her her freedom, saved her father, and ultimately redeemed Beast and everyone in The Castle. She and The Prince then ruled fairly and kindly and everyone benefited.
Now, imagine if the neo-feminists had written this story:
Belle's father goes missing. She notices that the obnoxious Gaston owns many weapons for hunting and thinks these may be useful on her quest. She does some completely unrealistic combat moves and somehow subdues the anatomically superior Gaston before raiding his home of his weapons. Belle then saddles up her war horse because why not give the Mary Sue a war horse out of nowhere? She rides off and finds her father's cart surrounded by wolves. Swiftly and skillfully she slaughters them all (even though she's had zero training with these weapons before and has no experience fighting off wilderness beasts). Then, Beast comes to see what has happened. When he does so, Belle shoots first and asks questions later. They fight all evening, each dealing harsh blows to the other. Suddenly, Belle does some other impossible combat move and vanquishes the beast. She follows his footprints back to The Castle, escapes with her father, and then burns The Castle (and its now dead residents who permanently became furniture the moment Beast died) as some thinly veiled attack on the aristocracy and nonexistent patriarchy. Belle returns to the village a "hero," and all of the men are gawking over her; she makes some snide, arrogant remark that of course the men all want her, she's the woman. Roll credits.
How is Belle in that version any different from how Gaston was in the original version? She isn't. She embodies the very same toxic masculinity that Gaston was created to caricature and that the neo-feminists claim to be against. And, no one benefits in this version except Belle's father. The new wave of feminist heroes are perpetrating the myth that only the masculine is needed in an action-hero story. It's not true in real life and it's not true in fiction. Listen to what the Traditionalists have been saying all along: we NEED masculinity AND femininity. But, femininity is disappearing from our media and subsequently from our culture as more and more little girls are brainwashed into thinking they ought to be like Atomic Blonde or Imperator Furiosa or Black Widow instead of like Belle or Wonder Woman who are the heroes in the minority of femininity.
So, if you care about girls and women at all, please stop putting forth and supporting this false narrative that women should be masculine and that this is a normal and good thing. Instead, recognize and celebrate the differences between the sexes as Traditionalists have done since, well, the dawn of man.
#Feminism #NeoFeminism #BeautyAndTheBeast #BlackWidow #Disney #MadMax #MadMaxine #WonderWoman #ImperatorFuriosa #Christian #Christianity #Film #Fiction #Films #Popculture #Hipster #Marvel #DC #FemaleActionHeroes #Masculinity #Femininity #Traditionalism #Postmodernism #Modernism #ElizabethCellier #Religion #Gender #GenderDifferences
Comentários