Hi Everybodeeeeeee *Kermit Flail*

[charliesmum]

I'm sitting here at the fiance's house, playing on my laptop while he's out getting coffee with his BFF, as he does on Sunday.

I keep thinking I want to write an essay on Stephen Moffatt and his female characters, to address how I feel about the accusations of him being a bit of a mysoginsit, but it would be something that would take more thought and care than I currently feel like giving it at the present time.

What I will say, though, is we have to be careful about creating what we think a woman 'ought' to be. Is there a resaon someone can't make women who are smart, clever, adventurous and yet would still like to get married and have babies?

I always felt that feminism was about a woman having a choice in what her role would be. In a perfect world, everyone would have a choice, even. If a man wanted to be the stay at home dad, he could do that without people thinking he's a loser or a layabout, and if a woman decided she wants to stay at home and tend to the house, she won't be considered setting the movementn back 50 years.

I was never built to have a 'career' I think; but I made choices in my life that made it impossible for me to do the housewife thing. I think I'd have been happier if I could have done that; I really do.

I have friends who have amazing careers and couldn't imagine them giving that up when they had children, so they beccame working mother's, and did a good job of it.

And I have a few friends who were stay-at-home mothers, because that's what they choose to do.

Are the working women better than the ones who didn't follow a career? No. The only idiot in that bunch was me, because I didn't know what the heck I wanted to be when I grew up when it was time to grow up. But I don't regret it. I am what I am, and all.

Sorry I got rambly anyway. I'd love to know everyone else's thoughts on this, and female characters in Doctor Who and other fandoms, and whatever else you may feel like sharing.

Ready...go.

Comments

[lietya.livejournal.com]

I am not talking about Moffatt specifically here, because I also don't have the energy or the enthusiasm do enough research to make a plausible case. But I think the issue when it comes to fictional representation is not so much about the choices each individual female character makes, as the overall pattern. If every single female character someone ever writes is smart and interesting and adventurous... and suddenly has an overwhelming urge to stay home and make babies and do housework, eventually I think it becomes plausible to ask whether there is some overarching theme here. In fact, I would say exactly the same thing if every single character they wrote were smart and interesting and adventurous and also absolutely despised babies and didn't want to get married. Not all women make the same choices, and if a particular fictional universe represents life as if they do, there is a problem no matter what the specific choice was.

Essentially I think I'm saying exactly the same thing you are; the problem lies in the representation of women as they ought to be - as a single main template with only minor deviations.