Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Aganzir
There are different versions, but I don't think B-berry's (I should probably stop using this acronym because I pronounce it 'Bieberry' in my head) interpretation was off. Of course women can talk about men, but since the male characters don't only talk about women either, it would be justified to show women speaking of something that adds something to them as characters instead of to the male characters.
|
But I think there is a difference between “talking about men” and “talking about a series of events in which men were
involved”.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mith
Finally I reject the suggestion that objecting to Tauriel makes me somehow anti feminist. I care about the story not the gender of the protagonists.
|
Well, I certainly didn’t mean to suggest that,
Mith. However, I do think there has been an overreaction to the mere fact of this character's being a girlie– which doesn’t, in itself, break the universe as far as I’m concerned. Neither does her bearing arms, in my opinion– of course it’s not the
only way for a woman to be “strong”, but it’s
a way, isn’t it? What I think matters anyway isn’t how closely a female character fits any given viewer’s or reader's ideal (feminist or otherwise) but how well-written and portrayed she is– and *that’s* where I fear it’s all going to come unstuck.
Hmmn. Seems I’ve got myself out on a limb here. Ah well.