An ever-growing trend in media is to portray the strong-willed, independent woman. Feministic ideals surround us from every side and pull us in with promises of equality—and we readily hop on the wagon, because after all, isn’t all this a good thing? Women are in fact equal to men and can do everything that they do, and ideally feminism expresses this opinion. But does the media do it right?
Personally, I think that there are very few instances that the feminist woman is shown in an appropriate light. Granted it is hard to do, balancing charming stubbornness with general femininity, but every so often, someone manages to get it right. Such is the case with the most recent portrayal of Mary Watson (née Morstan) in BBC’s Sherlock, played by Amanda Abbington.
Mrs. Watson has been something of a strong character in her own right since being introduced in Sir Doyle’s stories, even in a time when women were still very much oppressed. It would have been something of a radical choice to create such a complex and important female character, but Doyle did it all the same, even as she retained something of a demure and soft personality reflective of the day. In today’s media, it would have been so easy for someone to write her into a script while modernizing her in such a way that she matched every other strong female character on television, but this did not happen. She has only been in a few episodes of the series, and she already displays wonderfully how a woman can be intelligent and independent as well as likable and feminine. One episode, The Sign of Three, is a wonderful example of her charms.
It is evident rather early that Mary is an intelligent individual, and not long after that do we realize that she also has a very large influence over the people around her. John, Sherlock, and various other characters are keen to do as she asks not because she is a woman, like someone might assume at first, but because she quietly, effectively proved herself to be dependable and smart enough to make important decisions. In The Sign of Three, she is shown to have a firm grasp of her relationships and those of the people close to her when she convinces, separately, john and Sherlock to take the other out for a case. This was done in a way that was subtle and that no one else would ever see—no one would ever know that she managed it. Another female character might’ve made something of a stand and loudly told the boys exactly what they should do, and that they were being childish, and they would’ve listened because she was Woman and she had final say.
This is unnecessary. And unrealistic.
One may also notice that, aside from special circumstances, Mary does not fight with her husband. They disagree, sure, what couple doesn’t? But she never raises her voice, she never attacks him, she simply explains herself firmly and clearly. She gets her husband on board with her plan, she does not kick him down and drag him along.
This is what the essence of feminism is. The characters I see portrayed regularly in various media are, at best, caricatures of what a feminist is, and to be honest I strongly dislike most of them. There is nothing strong about a woman who has to belittle everyone around her, fighting to be on top. Nowhere in the rules does it say that an independent woman must also be cold and unfeeling, and often rather “butch”. And there is hardly anything more insulting than a woman overly sexualizing herself because she kicks butt, like proving yourself once gives someone the right to dangle themselves in front of the masses and completely erase all the work they think they’ve done.
Feminism is not supposed to be women demanding or begging for special treatment, which indeed is what the above examples are. The goal here is to overcome the patriarchy in favor of equality, not of a matriarchy. If women are equal to men, and we want men to listen, then the best way to do that is by being equal, not self-righteous.
No comments:
Post a Comment