Susan Barker: Why We Need Monstrous Women

komorebi
“I am not free while any woman is unfree, even when her shackles are very different from my own.” – Audre Lorde

240

Feb 4 2025, 9:07 PM

Thanks, Elsacat, this was a really interesting read!

As I was going through it, I was reminded of Victoria Smith's Hags—I've been working my way through that book. I'd recommend it if you haven't already picked it up!

Possum
angry lesbian 🌈

Feb 5 2025, 4:20 PM

Loved this! Especially the final paragraph.

Quote:A monstrous woman is not unproblematic. But in the horror genre, where most monsters are male and the female characters tormented victims or plucky, resourceful Final Girls, I’m glad that we have a few. As far as feminism’s concerned, it’s an odd thing to applaud. But perhaps it’s more about what a female monster represents: the explosive rejection of the societal pressures to be uncomplaining and compliant with all the emotional and domestic labour that women are expected to do. A fuck you to being well-liked and attractive, undemanding and self-sacrificing, and conforming to all the other limiting and inhibiting desirable traits. I don’t see a monstrous woman as aspirational in any way. Their toxic behavior and sociopathy aren’t to be emulated. But as much as I recoil when Baby Jane Hudson serves her sister that dead parakeet, or The Ring’s Sadako crawls out of the staticky TV screen towards her latest victim, I recognize that in their monstrousness they are very, very human, and admit a shiver of delight at their gleeful subversion of all we’re told women should be.

I love monstrous or villainous women in fiction and I feel like I get pushback from both men and even other women/feminists for it.

The men because they think I'm stupid enough to think the female villain is a "girlboss" who should be uncritically emulated. The entire internet melted down about women cheering the ending of Midsommar but it's fine for men to think slasher villains are cool/badass.

And then pushback from women because there seems to be a general distaste for violent or "bad" female characters. As if violence or selfishness or etc are "male-coded" or something so it's wrong to portray female characters with those traits. (and yeah obviously in real life violence is kind of "male-coded" since they're so disproportionately violent compared to women. but in fiction I don't care about real life I just want interesting female characters, including violent monsters.).

YesYourNigel

117

Feb 13 2025, 7:42 PM

My personal Bechdel Test for cartoons is whether female nonhuman characters can exist with 0 gender role signifiers - no eyelashes, no sexualised feminine proportions, no Elsa-face, no monstrous-body-with-sexy-face-on-top. If the author can't view a female creature as a creature first and a female second, like how male characters get treated, that's a problem. And good lord do female monster characters suffer from this. The only exceptions I can think of is giant spider monsters, and even they are often female just because they have eggs to spawn more monsters. Hell, more often they're just spider thorax with a stripperific torso of a sexualised woman on top. Men try to produce actual art and not wank-fodder for each other's dicks, challenge: impossible.

It seems to go all the way to ancient Greece, because I notice the majority of female Greek monsters are humanoid, either straight up human (maybe with accessories) or monsters with an obligatory human face. The only exception I can think of is the Gorgon. Many other cultures don't seem to have that standard.

It's astonishing that men (and sadly women, but the dynamics are different with women, it being self-hate and all) will feminise and straight up sexualise (if love interest) a fucking fish if it's female, and they'll do this even in entertainment meant for little kids! And we all accept it as normal! It's sick!

(Feb 5 2025, 4:20 PM)Possum The men because they think I'm stupid enough to think the female villain is a "girlboss" who should be uncritically emulated. The entire internet melted down about women cheering the ending of Midsommar but it's fine for men to think slasher villains are cool/badass.

Haven't watched Midsommar but god I hate that double standard. Men, who actually have real massive problems with violence and murder and sadism, like to the point of being the main source of terror and trauma irl, can idolise serial killers, sociopaths and murderers, but women killing men is supposed to be a touchy hurtful taboo and a slippery slope to some kind of matriarchal genocide? LMAO you have never in your life experienced any sort of limitation, supremacist degradation or fear at the hands of women. Excuse me if I don't see your delusional mythologised boogiewoman that doesn't exist outside of your misogynistic mind as any sort of legitimate trauma or threat. And neither do you, given that this supposedly totally real matriarchy produces absolutely no limitations, trauma or even a spared thought in your day to day life.

Quote:And then pushback from women because there seems to be a general distaste for violent or "bad" female characters. As if violence or selfishness or etc are "male-coded" or something so it's wrong to portray female characters with those traits.

I imagine that's the virtue-signalling you mentioned against "bad women", because women always need to prove to a patriarchal society first and foremost that they are "objective" and "unbiased" and "not misandrist" by reassuring men that they don't think women are perfect angels who can do no wrong.

A lot of women also think femininity needs to be maintained and portrayed in female characters at all times because they've become convinced that femininity is under attack. There are women on social media complaining that a character like Marvel's Black Widow is not feminine enough. That this is an affront on feminine women. And often this will intersect with libfems who are trying their damnest to make femininity seem cool and empowering and totally not just a bunch of patriarchal chains. You can wear a pink princess dress with heels and a tiara AND fight! 🙄

Quote:As if violence or selfishness or etc are "male-coded" or something so it's wrong to portray female characters with those traits

Monsters don't even need to represent real life horrible people. They can symbolise negative or extreme traits and explore different aspects of humanity that way, and emphasise more relatable (but normally controlled) negative feelings. Certainly men don't own extreme negative emotions. The article even touches upon this:

Quote:perhaps it’s more about what a female monster represents: the explosive rejection of the societal pressures to be uncomplaining and compliant with all the emotional and domestic labour that women are expected to do. A fuck you to being well-liked and attractive, undemanding and self-sacrificing, and conforming to all the other limiting and inhibiting desirable traits.

Many monsters aren't even unsympathetic - plenty of monstrous male characters get sympathetic stories about how ugly and unloved they are (and ofc end up with attractive women who have to learn to look past appearances, because we clearly need women to learn that lesson and not the sex that grades the opposite sex on hotness scales), about rejection from society and about prejudice targeted at them, which ofc any typical white guy can relate to 🙄. Meanwhile the closest women get to that is "if you're an ugly duckling in high school you can turn into a supermodel and maybe get the attention of an attractive man (though ofc a conventional one who doesn't do makeup or invest even 1% of work into his appearance that you'll be expected to). Or at least you might land a decent man if you stop wearing glasses, you uggo".

Also plenty of monstrous male characters are horrible, and yet get portrayed as having hearts of gold underneath or only needing love. This is far more likely to work on women, who have significantly less recidivism, sadism and status gain involved in their violent or criminal activities. Monstrous men on the other hand are more likely to beat, murder or at least manipulate, control and exploit vulnerable targets (such as the women trying to help them) because they think love (especially love coming from women, the designated free-of-charge caretakers of men) is just what social inferiors are supposed to do for their masters. A woman's love re-affirms the man's supremacism and his entitlement to women's labour and coddling, it doesn't actually make him feel empathy for the bangmaids.

I refuse to debate two obvious facts: 1. the patriarchy exists 2. and that's a bad thing

Clover
Kozlik's regular account 🍀🐐

663

Feb 13 2025, 9:48 PM

(Feb 13 2025, 7:42 PM)YesYourNigel My personal Bechdel Test for cartoons is whether female nonhuman characters can exist with 0 gender role signifiers - no eyelashes, no sexualised feminine proportions, no Elsa-face, no monstrous-body-with-sexy-face-on-top. If the author can't view a female creature as a creature first and a female second, like how male characters get treated, that's a problem. And good lord do female monster characters suffer from this. The only exceptions I can think of is giant spider monsters, and even they are often female just because they have eggs to spawn more monsters. Hell, more often they're just spider thorax with a stripperific torso of a sexualised woman on top. Men try to produce actual art and not wank-fodder for each other's dicks, challenge: impossible.

I kind of have the same "test" when I watch cartoons! Have you managed to find any cartoons that pass the test with humanoid cartoons? 🥲

What's funny is Rick and Morty might somewhat pass the test. Only due to Summer (Morty's sister)? She has no eyelashes, her face shape matches her father's, I don't think her body is overly sexualized. Her mother does have eyelashes, and I wonder if that's the show's signifier of "has makeup/mascara".

Kozlik's regular member account. 🍀🐐

YesYourNigel

117

Feb 19 2025, 12:18 PM

For human characters my rule is whether a female character can be ugly or offputting while still being portrayed as cool or fun or likeable or even just relatably human like the male characters are. So for Rick and Morty, I'd need a female Rick. Almost no shows come to mind that succeed at this. Even if the female characters are not sexualised, they need to have somewhat attractive personalities and looks for cartoon standards (be thin, reasonable, competent, manage everyone around them etc.). Marge isn't "sexy" in the same way Jessica Rabbit is, but she's not a stupid irresponsible couch potato either - she'd be an evil b*tch if she was.

I couldn't watch Bojack because I had to stop once they started pushing a love triangle between a fat drunken horse man heralding the show, a dog-man, and an attractive normal woman who has a good head on her shoulders. Fuuuck no. I'm remembering Tuca from Tuca and Bertie (made by the same producer), and even though she is kind of an irresponsible chroncially unemployed bum, she's not a toxic narcissistic insufferable exploitative drain on everyone around her the way Bojack is, and I can't imagine that being the case for a female character in the main role, nor people making long essays about how deep, human and tragic that is.

Edited Feb 21 2025, 9:31 AM by YesYourNigel.