- This topic has 87 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 1 month, 1 week ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I’d say as long as the guy draws something that reflects his personality it will be fine. Think about why he draws what he draws. If you need help there maybe think about why you draw what you draw and extrapolate that onto him (and see if you can find a deeper reason than the things you draw being girly.)
Personally I could see him drawling any number of things for various reasons. Maybe he draws flowers because he is the son of a prolific gardener and has always been fascinated with flower structures. Maybe he draws swords because his main job is in the armory. He could draw planets because he has a fascination with astronomy. Any of those options would work.
Through darkness,
light shines brightestI’m moving a discussion I started into this thread. It’s kind of related.
Basically, how far are you willing to disregard gender norms in stories, specifically tropes? For an extreme example, switching a “damsel in distress” for a “man in distress.”
“Everything is a mountain”
That’s an extremely blatant example. I’m more interested in the possible nuances. But it gets the point across.
“Everything is a mountain”
switching a “damsel in distress” for a “man in distress.”
ABSOLUTELY NOT!
I don’t care how interesting that plot may be, I believe it’s plain wrong. It’s completely unbiblical and it’s against God’s design. A man who leaves a woman to fight for him/rescue him is no man. Just read the Bible and you will see God very clearly designed and called the men to fight for and protect the women and children.
We see the perfect picture of this in Christ’s sacrifice for his bride, and men are called to love their wives as Christ loved the church. To lay down their lives for them. He calls men, married or not, to fight, defend, and protect.
Now, I can hear people about to say Deborah. Well, God called a man to fight, and that man was weak and dragged a woman into battle with him. It was shameful, and God gave Israel the victory, but He wasn’t please with Barak’s actions. “I will surely go with you. Nevertheless, the road on which you are going will not lead to your glory, for the Lord will sell Sisera into the hand of a woman.”
This word that God spoke through Deborah was practically a curse, and it was a good sharp reprimand to Barak. In other words, “Alright you coward, drag a woman into the fight and I’ll give the victory to My people, but you will have none of it.”
Also, Scripturally, any time in prophesy a woman is mentioned leading or fighting, it is a curse. The nation is cursed and is led by women. The nation will fall because the hand of a woman wields the sword. Etc. All that to say, a woman in a man’s position, (the position of leader and warrior) was used to show that a nation was cursed.
However, I am not saying that a woman has to be a wilting violet.
She can be smart, strong, courageous, ready to defend the weak, ready to defend herself, but she should not be the leader and she should not be in battle, and she should not be the hero doing the saving and rescuing of the men.
There are so many things God designed woman to do, Special, glorious, and important things. Don’t make her take the man’s roll too.
Think of the Narnia (BOOKS!!!)
Susan was given a bow. Lucy was given a dagger. Susan was given a horn to summon help. Lucy was give a cordial to heal. This scene deserves to be read again.
“Peter, Adam’s Son,” said Father Christmas.
“Here, sir,” said Peter.
“These are your presents,” was the answer, “and they are tools not toys.
The time to use them is perhaps near at hand. Bear them well.” With these
words he handed to Peter a shield and a sword. The shield was the color of
silver and across it there ramped a red lion, as bright as a ripe strawberry at
the moment when you pick it. The hilt of the sword was of gold and it had a
sheath and a sword belt and everything it needed, and it was just the right
size and weight for Peter to use. Peter was silent and solemn as he received
these gifts, for he felt they were a very serious kind of present.Peter has been called upon to be a man. He is to fight, lead, and protect.
“Susan, Eve’s Daughter,” said Father Christmas. “These are for you,”
and he handed her a bow and a quiver full of arrows and a little ivory horn.
“You must use the bow only in great need,” he said, “for I do not mean you
to fight in the battle. It does not easily miss. And when you put this horn to
your lips and blow it, then, wherever you are, I think help of some kind will
come to you.”Susan is given a means to protect herself, and a way to call for help. However, she is not to fight, save, or lead like Peter.
Last of all he said, “Lucy, Eve’s Daughter,” and Lucy came forward. He
gave her a little bottle of what looked like glass (but people said afterward
that it was made of diamond) and a small dagger. “In this bottle,” he said,
“there is a cordial made of the juice of one of the fire-flowers that grow in
the mountains of the sun. If you or any of your friends is hurt, a few drops
of this will restore them. And the dagger is to defend yourself at great need.
For you also are not to be in the battle.”
“Why, sir?” said Lucy. “I think—I don’t know—but I think I could be
brave enough.”
“That is not the point,” he said. “But battles are ugly when women fight.”Lucy’s bravery, courage, and strength are not in question. But she is a woman and she is not meant to fight. She is given a means of defense for herself, (and presumably others who are defenseless and are with her. Maybe wounded or children) But she is not called to be a warrior.
I mean, if we were questioning strength or fitness around here, why didn’t anyone bring up the fact that we’re about to throw a teenage boy into a fight with horrors from a nightmare and a powerful witch?
It’s not about that. It’s about what God has designed them to be.
Who can say Lucy and Susan were wilting violets, or only there to be in distress? Lucy FOUND Narnia, Susan held her siblings together and tried to make peace among them. They were there when Aslan rose. They were the first people he came to. They went and gathered reinforcements. (In both The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe, and Prince Caspian)
They had a TONE of purpose and the story couldn’t survive without them. It wouldn’t have even started without them.
Then take Aravis. Her brother trained her to use a sword, and when she fled from evil she dressed as a male soldier because if she had not she would have been killed or much worse by men who would have seen her and overpowered her.
However, guess who does not fight in the battle at the end of The Horse and His Boy? and Aravis was one strong, skilled, brave girl. Without her, Shasta would have died long before he ever reached Narnia.
I could go on, but I’ll leave it here for now.
Man is born for the fight, to be forged and molded into a sharper, finer, stronger image of God
Wow, that was an excellent response. It really has me evaluating some female characters I have. The points you make with C.S Lewis were great!!
"No! Monkeys should have pets, all monkeys should have pets!"
thank you!! I’m very glad it was helpful!!
Man is born for the fight, to be forged and molded into a sharper, finer, stronger image of God
I agree with a lot of what you said, Ellette. Good points. Here’s the thing though.
That’s an extremely blatant example. I’m more interested in the possible nuances.
N u a n c e
A man who leaves a woman to fight for him/rescue him is no man.
Agreed, but what if he has no choice? What if the villain has him trapped?
Yes, God has put a simple model into the world which stories mimic: kill the dragon, get the girl. But that doesn’t mean that a guy is never in a position where he needs rescuing.
Sometimes the dragon isn’t what you think it is. World’s complicated.
It just seems pretty unrealistic to me to say that a man can never be in a vulnerable position. If a dragon kidnaps the main female protagonist’s friend and locks him in a tower, is she supposed to just ignore it? I think most people would agree that the right thing to do would be to try to rescue him instead of leaving him to be eaten (assuming she has no other options). There are times in real life when God does put men in positions where they need help. You can write a male character whose dragon he needs to kill is actually his own pride.
I have more things to say but I need to think more. But here’s some examples:
Rahab saves the spies’ lives in the Bible by hiding them and helping them escape the city.
The prince from The Silver Chair is rescued from the serpent by the main characters.
“Nothing says autumn like slurpin’ apples.” -my uncle
Lol completely messed up your tags
“Nothing says autumn like slurpin’ apples.” -my uncle
@ellette-giselle @theshadow @loopylin
Thanks for the thoughts!
N u a n c e, lol.
I truly wish there was some way to objectively judge every action. It seems like everything depends on the spiritual aspect rather than the physical, but I’ve learned to find it comforting.
God often uses physical laws to speak his spiritual truths, right? And it’s meant to be a ladder between the two worlds. In the New Testament, when the church leaders insisted on following every law, Jesus goes, “well, kinda nooo…” He isn’t denying the good behind the laws, but he attacks the leaders for using the right actions for the wrong reasons.
Because of that, I don’t think we should always judge by ‘men protect’ and ‘women don’t fight.’ I’m just brainstorming here, but maybe those rules are really about men and women’s psychological needs. From what I’ve seen in my life, men want to always be capable, and women need love directed towards them. It’s about understanding who you are in the world, and what your needs are.
But there’s an even bigger reason to stop judging people by those physical laws. In the real world, both sins and traumas/significant events can change how a person has to function in order to emotionally survive. Usually women need to feel loved for their self-image to flourish. But sometimes women learn to not depend on affection because of something in their past. I have always been a reserved girl who doesn’t feel comfortable with affection, even though I am supposed to be. It’s not necessarily a sin, because it isn’t my fault – and to treat it like one would emotionally worsen the situation. I think God understands that in this world, some girls need to be tough. And some guys aren’t in a position to be tough.
So
Applying this to writing…
Sometimes you can go against these traditional norms in writing, and it doesn’t make your protagonist “bad.” I wouldn’t pretend it’s black and white at all. For a tough female warrior to cope by “fighting in battles” is better than not coping at all.
Does that make sense? I don’t know, I still agree with how Lewis summarized those concepts, I just think he was simplifying it because Narnia is an allegory.
“Everything is a mountain”
I have a female protagonist, Barnes, and she is a huge leader and fighter. There is a huuuuuge maternal dominance in the story, and the main protagonist would not exist otherwise. Because Barnes is not misusing her power and she has good reason to be a more physically dominant being, I don’t think she is a bad person. She’s largely a victim of circumstance.
I don’t know if that made sense either. XD
“Everything is a mountain”
@whalekeeper @loopylin @ellette-giselle
*Peeks through cracked door*
Totally following y’all over here from the Castle…
So, ai didn’t read through everything above spoken (because my phone is rapidly loosing it’s life, and I’d have to go get my charger to revive it…) but here’s a few thoughts:
Why can’t a woman fight for a man? Not out of *superiority* (snotbagishness), but out of love for a fellow bearer of the image of God (aka human)?
Now let me go get that charger before I disappear…
First Grand Historian of Arreth and the Lesser Realms (aka Kitty)
Fork the Gork@koshka @whalekeeper @loopylin
I believe there are circumstances when a woman could fight for a man, when he is incapable of fighting. (ie, wounded, sick, etc.)
But it shouldn’t be the norm. She should be down to defending him, and should not be rushing off to battle or leading armies.
Man is born for the fight, to be forged and molded into a sharper, finer, stronger image of God
Why can’t a woman fight for a man? Not out of *superiority* (snotbagishness), but out of love for a fellow bearer of the image of God (aka human)?
*Nods in agreement* But to take it further, are there other reasons for a man or woman to act outside of those norms?
Now let me go get that charger before I disappear…
*Taps the screen* You alive, Koshka?? 😂
I’m getting vibes that you think, by extension, our protagonists shouldn’t step outside those norms because it makes the story objectively bad. It’s bad, we shouldn’t write it. Is that what you think?
“Everything is a mountain”
I may have had more lenience toward stepping out of the norm several years back. However, with the way the world is going right now, not just trying to blur lines but erase them, I think we, as followers of Christ, should be careful we have no part in that. What does it hurt you to take a few steps in the opposite direction of the world?
Maybe you lose a good story line.
So what?
Christ commanded us to take up our cross and follow Him, and He never promised it would be easy. If we can’t give up a plot line to stay above reproach and away from sin, then how do we expect to do what’s right when it comes down to losing much more?
I’m not saying your an evil person for writing a girl warrior. However, with the lines between male and female almost gone, an d the way people tread on eggshells when it comes to God’s design of the male and female, I think we should go above and beyond to point back to what the creator originally designed.
It’s bad, we shouldn’t write it. Is that what you think?
Why write something bad?
What is the good of that? Just for pleasure?
If you know that what you are writing is bad then absolutely stay away from it. I was not arguing weather or not we should do something bad and be okay with it, I was arguing the difference between a Guy with long hair and female anatomy and a wilting violet. How does one find the middle line.
Esther was a STRONG young woman. I mean, she faced death for her people and did what was right, even though she was afraid. Yet, she was very feminine. The most beautiful to the king of all the women in the kingdom.
Ruth was a hard worker, loyal, honorable, and yet beautiful and feminine.
Mary was practically given a death sentence when she was told she would have a virgin birth. If anyone found out she would have been stoned to death. Yet, her response is not, “How are you going to keep me safe, God?” But rather, “Let it be unto me according to Your will.”
The midwives in Egypt lied to pharaoh and hid baby boys. If they had been caught, they and their families would die.
Rehab hid enemy spies because she knew they were chosen by God, and she faced down the soldiers of her own land and lied to them, (something they don’t take too kindly to)
The Bible is FULL of strong women, yet they are women. Not women being men.
I don’t think it takes too much imagination to create a beautiful, strong, brave, courageous, loyal WOMAN and have an awesome character.
She can also be quite a lovely contrast to the men in your book, and contrasts are interesting and refreshing to a reader. Why make them read about the same person except it’s a she in one scene and a he in the other. Let’s bring men AND women back into the story, and let’s write them well.
Man is born for the fight, to be forged and molded into a sharper, finer, stronger image of God
I think you misunderstood what I asked, but this works too 🙂
What does it hurt you to take a few steps in the opposite direction of the world?
What if we step too far into the other extreme? I believe another extreme exists. I agree, men and women are literally different, but there are so many nuances in every person. That’s kinda the point of a story, to explore the nuances.
Here’s a nuanced hypothetical story. Let’s say a woman, Bonnie, lives in a structured society that belittles individual passions, and tells everyone to keep their personality within their societal expectations. Bonnie is okay with that, she hides behind her timid feminine identity because it’s easier than risking her vulnerable side. Her vulnerable side wants to push out, and to support her brother who is going to war. But she is a very cowardly person. She lets her fear control her, and she hides behind the classic feminine exterior.
Her brother, who sees her retreating into that persona, feels like he isn’t worth her risk. The battle is no longer worth it, and he dies in war.
Do you see how complicated that is?
I’m not denying Bonnie is a woman. But it would have been better if Bonnie stepped outside the feminine trope to say, “something else is more important.” What do you think?
I’m not saying there is no difference between men and women, there are objective good differences. I’m saying people are complicated. Why should we say any person who doesn’t fit perfectly in the mould is a bad character? It’s unrealistic, right? See the extremes here?
1. There is no difference between men and women, write whatever
.
1.5. (My stance) Male and female differences are real, but it is okay to write complicated characters. Real people are incredibly nuanced.
.
2. If a character is written a little unlike their gender, that’s automatically bad
“Everything is a mountain”
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.