Back in January (of 2024!), I saw
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
sqbr's fantastic post on gender, female characters, genderswap, and original female characters. It's
here and it's great. A nuanced, complicated take on this kind of genderbending is basically a bat signal for me personally, and at first I was going to comment directly to them, but my response grew as I thought about it, so I figured I'd put my response here instead of spamming their blog. I've basically been thinking about it off and on for the last two months. If you're reading this, I'd advise you to check out their post.
So, backing up a bit: I've often found the genderswap/genderbending and original female character (OFC) discourses to be—well, in all honesty, incoherent, unfair, and deeply stupid most of the time. I feel like a lot of "the discourse" around these things is contingent on 1) a “why are we not about me” approach to gender and 2) a sort of internalized fandom hierarchy, especially with regard to original female characters vs canon female characters. As I see it, all characters are
someone’s OCs. As a consequence, the framework in which female characters produced by a generally male or male-dominated creator/creative group should be considered more authentically female than female characters produced by fans who are very often actual women can seem profoundly unjust and also simply very strange.
For instance, I love a lot of the female characters in Robert Jordan’s
The Wheel of Time and would not argue that they aren't actually women. Moiraine Damodred is one of my favorite female characters in fantasy, partly because she's a woman in a role that goes to men most of the time. But the "fictional women created by a male author" vibe is intense and inescapable in these books. The idea that fans' OFCs reflect a less authentic femaleness than Jordan's powerful women getting sexily spanked over and over feels pretty bizarre.
And this extends to genderswap/genderbending, given that when influential people in Hollywood or the broader entertainment industry change a male character's gender to female (either the character was previously conceptualized as male in the creative process, or the work is an adaptation of a source in which the character was male), the same wing of fandom that condemns fannish genderbending tends to be completely supportive and to see the new version as a legitimate female character. We can see this with Ripley, Azula, Joan Watson, etc. And even going the other way, nobody seems to think Luke Skywalker is somehow not a real male character even though George Lucas kept changing his gender, or that there was anything wrong with Lucas doing that. The condemnations of genderbending cis male characters to female ones are pretty specifically about
fans doing this, especially female fans.
That's a longer rant than I meant it to be, but the reason I bring it up is because this has always struck me as a baffling argument as well as an unfair one. But I think
sqbr's post highlights an important distinction between arguments about characters' femaleness and arguments about characters' female characterness, if that makes sense. The ways in which female characters tend to be framed by the narratives they appear in shape our sense of what female characters are and what is desirable for them to be.
For me, M->F genderbending is partly about my own wobbly, weak sense of gender, but also partly an expression of affection. It's satisfying to give the kind of centrality and/or Very Special Boy treatment that my male faves typically get to a girl or woman, and to explore the ways in which the kind of frameworks typically given to male characters collide with generally patriarchal settings, all without sacrificing my fave. So, say, my female Luke Skywalker has to deal with The Space Patriarchy
and with being Special and Important and centered in a way typically reserved for male characters.
And that's often a major part of the appeal of M->F genderbending for me—a female character getting the structural narrative benefits typically reserved for various kinds of male characters, but without fundamentally disrupting the structure of the cast as given in canon. So turning Luke into Lucy feels fundamentally different to me, and much more satisfying, than inventing, say, a female triplet to take his narrative place.
And this is basically the exact opposite motivation as the one described in
sqbr's post, of relating to female characters
because of the narrative framework typically given them. I don't think either of us are wrong, factually or morally, we just sometimes have different tastes in terms of how we do fandom and gender.
I do think they're very correct about how a lot of female characters who are kind of presented as badass or whatever by way of receiving traits often assigned to male characters don't hit the same note as female characters who are given the kind of narrative framing often assigned to male characters. And I also think
sqbr is right that what we all get out of female characters, what we find appealing in them, or gratifying, or admirable (or cringey, reminiscent of painful RL experiences, an annoying trope given female form Yet Again, etc), is hugely variable between people in ways that can actually be entirely legitimate for those different people. I've known female SW fans, for instance, who couldn't latch onto Leia the way I did because of the ways she's sidelined by the narrative structure of the OT (particularly ROTJ). I think that's perfectly fine, actually, even though I don't feel the same.
In addition, I had some amorphous thoughts about how when canon female characters click for me, they tend to
really click, which
sqbr also discusses in their post. An easy example for me is Attolia Irene in
The Queen of Attolia, whose experiences and choices are profoundly shaped by patriarchy
and who is given the kind of messy sympathy and resourceful triumph that is often reserved for characters like Gen
and who is beautiful in a way I personally find hot as a lesbian. I briefly thought about what f!Eugenides/Irene would be like—cool to be sure, but tbh I'm not that interested because I'm so invested in Irene specifically.
Sort of relatedly, I do find it annoying when there's a discussion going on about favorite female characters in a canon, especially a male-dominated canon, and people respond with canonically male characters "because he's a lesbian to me" or whatever. I’ll defend a lot when it comes to genderbending, but that’s not cool.
