elapses

this reminds me of an article i read a while ago where the author said that what the media keeps writing is female character: strong instead of strong character: female, and i think that's really accurate. so many "strong female characters" are considered strong because of all these stereotypically masculine traits: they drink and smoke and fix cars and shoot guns, and that automatically gives them ~depth. BECAUSE STEREOTYPICALLY FEMININE CHARACTERS ARE ALWAYS FLAT AND TWO-DIMENSIONAL, OBVS. idk part of why i loved bridesmaids was because it was so unapologetically feminine at the same time that it was realistic and something that dudes could watch too. (not that i particularly gaf about whether or not it ~appeals to men~ but you know what i mean.) and ia so hard on the whole pseudo-intellectual tearing down of female characters. it's like no matter how a character is written, she's not good enough. if she's cute and feminine, the author is playing into a stereotype; if she's "strong" and masculine, the author is revealing their sexism by avoiding femininity. which isn't to say that that can't be a legitimate criticism because ofc it can, but it's rare to see a female character be praised for being flawed and having a multifaceted personality.

also alanna for life