Writefag problem thread
How the fuck do I write a strong independent female character?Like I have no idea if I'm suppose to take the independent part literally and just have her be like she hulk and have her get some dick and leave
>>81253645
Write every character as a person with their own goals and motivations. This applies to men, women, children, dogs, cats and albatrosses.
Done, problem solved.
>>81253749
>albatrosses
>Not Dickbags and generally burdens on everything
It's like you don't even metaphor.
If you only have one female character then she has to be perfect and flawless and represent all aspects of womanhood equally, otherwise you'll offend someone.
If you include more female characters then you can give them flaws and weaknesses and they don't all have to be "strong" or "independent" or whatever.
So... write more women.
>>81253871
Leave the albatross alone and you'll be fine.And actually read the Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner before trying to get clever about it
>>81253645
Take a look at Judy Hopps. Seriously, she's a really good example of one.
>driven and motivated
>determined to earn her dream rather than settling for others handing to her
>competent and capable in her chosen field
>is still actually flawed
>but she acknowledges those flaws and consciously strives to fix them instead of handwaving the away
>>81253645
>How the fuck do I write a strong independent female character?
Only acknowledge their gender when absolutely necessary. Other than that, write them similarly to how you'd write a strong male character.
>>81253645
"Independant" shouldn't be understood as something to do with sexual/amorous relationships, but more with social status and behavior in general.
Like you know, having a job, having things she cares about and does beyond sidekicking whatever her boyfriend is doing. She can have a boyfriend or a husband or not, that's somewhat irrelevant to the matter. Although making her a stay-at-home mom who doesn't do anything outside of the house would be a challenge.
But yeah writing weak and dependant women can be interesting too, so what this guy >>81253884 says.
Write all characters as male and flip some coins to determine whos the other sex. Protip: your first history will suck anyway.
If you don't already have an idea of who this character is in your mind, why are you trying to write her? Conceive of characters naturally and stop thinking in terms of trope phrases.
>>81253977
Judy Hopps is ok, but like that chick from Parks and Rec she falls underneath that insufferable quality of being too good for everything.
As to your plight OP just try to write a good character. If she's a macho dyke make her a macho dyke, don't worry about what feminists have to say because they're just looking to make trouble anyways
>>81253645
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBz0BTb83H8
>>81253645
Write for a man.
>>81253645
Look how Harper Row is written. Do everything opposite.
>>81253645
give her goals and desires other than having sex or getting the approval of a man. Have her work towards those goals.
read some more books
there are very few sources that will be helpful to you in comics but theres plenty in conventional literature
toni morrison
barbara kingsolver
ursula k le guin
i dont actually care for morrison and i grew out of kingsolver but le guin writes pretty great sci fi with strong females if you arent into mundane novels
>>81254490
>ursula k le guin
FUCKING KEK, the Earthsea chick? Yeah, read her books if you want to bore your audience to death. Why don't you suggest Bechdel as well you fucking pretentious hack?
OP look, just learn how to write interesting people. Don't worry about her being a woman. She can be cliche as cliche can be and still be likable.
If American writers stopped obsessing over the "strong female character" meme they might actually write some good female characters for once.
>>81254527
sorry you cant appreciate the same books i can. i stand by my opinion about le guin's depictions of women
you raise a good point about trying to write interesting people in opposition to interesting women though
>>81253645
Concern yourself only with writing good fiction. The fact that you're concerned with writing independent strong women to begin with is a problem that will hold you back. Write characters first and foremost, strong men and weak men, strong women and weak women. If you write with an ulterior goal other than just writing good stuff, you're doomed to failure.
think of a stronmg independent guy
got one? good.
now she's a female
pretty simple shit bruh
>>81254792
Female characters can be "strong" and feminine at the same time.
>>81253645
I am saging this thread just so you know.
Just write a man and then when you're finished give him tits.
I apologize that your thread is gonna get trolled to oblivion with /v/ faggots.
I do hope by "strong independent woman" you mean the archetype and not just "this is how you make a good female character, right?"
People saying "make a good character and then make them female" are only partially right. Being female intrinsically changes how people treat you throughout your life and therefore changes how your personality develops. So determine what your character's base natural tendencies are like, then determine how pretty she is and adjust her accordingly, then adjust how she reacts to how people treat her. Truly good female characters require a lot of thought. Though to be fair a truly good male character does too, just through a slightly different line.
>>81254269
>Judy Hopps is ok, but like that chick from Parks and Rec she falls underneath that insufferable quality of being too good for everything
I disagree, mostly because it's clear that she isn't. Her body type limits what she can do drastically, but she makes up for it by playing up her strengths. And besides, Fox McCloud was the perfect foil for her, since he always seemed to be the smarter one while Judy was generally more capable. The "book vs street smarts" dynamic balances them out well.
>>81255079
so can male characters. strong feminine males are insanely popular in eastern folklore
>>81254087
>But yeah writing weak and dependant women can be interesting too
I think it is far more interesting because then they make the big strong muscly hero look better and they aren't a cunt whore i hate thats just designed to pander to people.
>>81253645
Write Xena.
>>81253645
The Strong and Independent is a counter-reaction to the old-school prevalent way of portraying women as extremely weak and dependent (on men). You know, the character who's always being kidnapped, panics, is scared and overwhelmed by every single thing, needs someone to tell her what to do and has very little personality of "save me! help! Oh, my hero, I was so scared!"
The opposite to that isn't writing some infallible she-rambo superkiller who has no emotions - it's going too far in the other direction. It just means to write a real character, who may have flaws and weak moments since that's human, but who will try to cope with her flaws and become a better and stronger person instead of crumbling onto a heap and crying until a man will come and sort it all out for her
>>81257056
*very little personality APART FROM "save me…
sorry
>>81253645
>independent female character
Don't
>>81257056
>You know, the character who's always being kidnapped, panics, is scared and overwhelmed by every single thing, needs someone to tell her what to do and has very little personality
So they no longer want it to reflect real life?
>>81253645
Just write a fucking male character in a womans body, seriously. How do people keep getting this wrong its so easy.
>>81253645
>strong independent female character?
No such thing.
>>81253645
Make her a real character.
In fact, throw out independent all together. How many people do you know that are independent? Weird loners with no social skills.
If you're not going for that, have your characters, female or not, rely on others in some ways. "Independent" is a cliche overused character trope seen only in anime for "badass" rival characters.
>>81253896
>*Rime of the Ancient Mariner
you can't force the idea that's she's a strong, independent woman. you have to sell it, convince people. women who are desperate will lap it up no matter how terribly written she is but i'm sorry but you will offend male readers unless you prove it well
>tfw writing a lesbian with BPD because I have BPD and find it cathartic
>its hard as shit to do
>>81257218
Honestly, this.
I've found that female characters who actually have to rely on others are more fun to write, and offer some interesting possibilities for development.
Image related sums it up perfectly.
Do not even attempt a "strong independent woman", write a real fucking character with flaws and strengths. If "Strong and independent" are the only two qualities you can name about the character you've made a boring, cliche, pandering non-character.
In other words, you've failed. Start over.
>>81257056
This.
Look at the wives in Fury Road for a good example. They're victims of sex slavery, they're small, they're weak, they're new to the harshness of the outside world. But they're still human beings, and they behave in a way that shows they simply give a fuck about their own survival. That makes them believable. They're not arbitrary objects that the hero and villain are racing to obtain, they're people in their own right and even though their capabilities are scaled relative to their sex and experiences, they still try, because no one has a bigger stake in their lives than themselves.
And the exact same goes for the War Boys, who are objectified within their world for their male bodies and used as killing machines, every bit as much as the wives are objectified for their female bodies and used as incubators. But on screen both wives and war boys are also all humanised as individuals.
Treat every character as a person, not just a pawn or plot device in your story.
The damsel in distress was created because writers got in the head of their hero and needed something sympathetic for them to save, making a female character's entire existence based on being helpless.
Instead, go the extra step and think of what you'd do if you were in that damsel's shoes, genuinely fearing for your life. Would you just sit there and scream, when there's no guarantee anyone will save you? Fuck no. You might not be capable of doing much, but you'd sure as hell do something.
Opposite goes for male or any typically 'badass' violent character - what would all that violence actually do to you? Why do you really need to save this person, get this thing, beat this villain? What's stopping you from just walking away, other than the writer's need to continue the story?
Then figure out how these characters can all complement each other for a greater goal in the story.
