The idea that "A Female character doesn't fight = She's useless".

Chagen

This idea has always bugged me. Why must everyone fight to be useful in a story? A team does not consist of merely the fighters--there's support too, you know. Take a Fantasy story. If there's a stafff chick/healer girl, she will be derided as "useless" by the fandom because she doesn't fight. Uh huh. Because we all know that keeping the team alive and well-healed for each battle is useless, amirite? And obviously making sure it's cohesive and everyone is working together means that you're useless, amirite again? It gets worse, though. In the same stoy, a healer boy will be regarded as interesting by the fandom because he takes an uncommon role for males. He will also be regarded as useful and important to the team, even if the only difference from said healer girl is that he has a dick. So: Male support characters are intersting and useful. Female support character, on the other hand, are useless and sexist for doing the exact same things. This is a ridiculous double standard. What makes it even more ridiculous is that it is perpetrated by the exact same people who normally oppose double standards. What the hell?

BecNoir

Is this in response to Dantes' thread

cause if so

yeah

nohaynicklibre

I hate this idea too
The only time a female character is useless is when she doesn't stay in the kitchen
 

Crimson

Because those support roles are almost always given to women. It's a stereotype that implies that women should be, or are better at, support roles away from danger than being at the front lines. THAT is the part that's sexist.

Beholderess

Because the idea that woman's only value is being a support, addition to man is  still alive and well. And people do not have  a means to say whether support character happens to be female, or was assigned to support role because she is female.

While with a male character it is always clear

TheConductor

"amirite?"

Where I stopped reading.

Chagen

Except, sometimes, the support character just happens to be female.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Sometimes, the author innocently wanted a support character to be female. That's it.

Beholderess

Sometimes, yes. But how do we tell?

ClockworkUniverse

Most authors don't flip coins for this stuff.

Chagen

They don't flip coins, but, at the very least, I randomly determine genders for my main characters. I don't try to pigeonhole any one gender into one role, and I try keep a near 50/50 balance.

BecNoir

I can actually see Chagen's point here. Saying that a woman should not placed in a certain role because that would be sexist is in itself sexist.

Beholderess

If there is 50/50 balance, it usually becomes much less suspect

Crimson

Personal anecdotes don't matter when it comes trends across fiction as a whole.

ClockworkUniverse

^^^I'm not saying they should never be placed in the role, but that they're placed in the role too much.

BecNoir

I never specified any role.

ClockworkUniverse

Well, yes, but there are roles that get too many characters of one gender of the other.

Beholderess

Again, not saying that it is always justified. But understandable

Chagen

Also, Neo: I'd like for you to explain how support is less useful than fighting.

Wars are won by tactics. Firepower is useful, but the side with better support, tactics, and logistics has a massive advantage.

Do I need to pull out the "Feminity-Masculinity-equality" quote again?

Saigyouji

And suddenly I realise that in MGS1-3 (not sure about 4), the main person helping to save the game is female. Mei Ling, Rose, Para-Medic. Although, one of the biggest badasses in the entire series is female, too.

Counterclock

If you're making a fantasy, Why not just have a female that's more than support?

captainbrass

The derision with which fans treat this sort of character is probably connected to the fact that the most vocal fans of things like fantasy novels or video games are young, male and like them epic battle scenes.

At the risk of being a bit obvious, this is also not a phenomenon in all media. If you wrote a "literary" novel about the First World War, for instance, no-one would say "Your leading female character is crap, she doesn't do any fighting", because in "serious" fiction war isn't supposed to be cool anyway.

Beholderess

(sigh) It is not useless by itself. And personally, this one very much enjoyed playing the healer and being treated as the most damn important member of the party back in her MMO days.

However, concepts of femininity, support, patronising stereotypes and complementary (inferior) role towards men are still closely linked, and it would be strange to pretend that they don't exist.

The same thing with equal value of active and supported roles. No disagreement with it, but when linked in any way with gender, advocating it might be seen as uncomfortably close with advocating fixed roles for women.

"But staying in the kitchen and rearing children is a valuable pursuit!" (it is) "So when we say that a  proper woman should stay in the kitchen, we are not discriminating against her!" (sorry, you are)

ClockworkUniverse

Wars are won by tactics. Firepower is useful, but the side with better support, tactics, and logistics has a massive advantage.

In reality, yes. In fiction, wars are largely won by the main character, who is just that badass and rarely needs support.

Counterclock

When it comes down to it, it's the mentality behind it, there's a certain reason people place females in roles of support...

You could say individual female support characters aren't the problem, but if in your story, females are nothing but support, then you're still playing to stereotypical mind-set

Chagen

Counter: Because I like each character in my team to have a specific role.

Just look at Hellfire Catharsis, which has:

Male MC and leader/fighter (Enselm)
Female MC and Second-in-Command and leader/fighter (who is the strongest character in the team) (Abcde)
Male supporting alchemist (Johnazhan)
Female healer (Ile)
Female fighter (Chrona)
Female supporting fortune-teller (Rötria)
Male fighter and support (Niko)
Male fighter (Kenshi)
Female long-range fighter (Yuyuko)
Female supporter (who actually is the strongest character in the entire series, she doesn't fight at full power because she would bowl over everyone in seconds) (Marina)

vandro

That's a serious problem with hierarchy. Tactics are combat, Strategy is positioning, Logistics is supply management. Putting logistics inside of tactics is like putting the biggest matryoska doll inside the smallest.

Beholderess

That does look like a fair mix. This one would not have trouble with that

captainbrass

You can just about argue in some contexts that this is justified by reality. In the US and British armed forces, for instance, women can join but do not serve in front-line combat roles (this is not true of all militaries now, of course). So if your setting is based on those, having women in support roles in war is justified.

If you're writing pure fantasy, though, why limit yourself by the rules of the real world?

Chagen

Beholderess, thank you.

I added their names for no particular reason.

FrodoGoofballCoTV

I've noticed when you have an action series with lots of characters, there will often be a Crowning Moment Of Awesome where the leading noncombatant female on the hero's side (who is often either a specialist healer of some kind, or introduced as a useless character), will be alone with a kid or an injured person and has to select a weapon and fight.

[Expletive deleted] TVTropes!

Chagen

The main healer, Ile, in that situation, will simply change her form to her combat-oriented adult form, so that's taken care of.