The Double Standard in YA Fiction: We love bad boys and hate flawed female leads–what gives?
This is a guest post by Jill Cooper
As you know, Emlyn’s second novel Open Heart came out last week; well, I loved it (review here). So I took to the streets–um, actually the blogs–to see what other people were saying about the book. I was pretty surprised by how some people reacted to Simmi’s self-destructive nature. Some downright hate her (one even ranted) and I’m still trying to figure out why. I can understand frustration, but outright hatred really? Seems like a pretty strong reaction.
Here’s some food for thought: If you took the same qualities and gave them to a man, would your feelings change?
Here’s an example: Walt is the type of guy all girls want to date. He’s charming, a smooth talker and always has a smile plastered across his handsome face. Unbeknownst to others, he struggles with his own inner demons. He’s faced adversity and survived, but is scared by what he’s done in the past so naturally withdraws from those he loves. He develops a coping mechanism–one that is bad for him and could lead to a lot of new problems.
He’s been dating Alex(is) for forever. Even though she’s crazy about him, Walt thinks of her more as a really close friend; he’s still happy to be with her, because Walt really cares for and is happy with Alex. Then a new girl moves to town and happens to catch Walt’s eye. She gets him, understands him. Maybe she’s the answer he’s been looking for, maybe she can help quiet his demons forever.
So what do you think? Everyone wants to be the new girl, right? The one who can settle down this charmer, fix him, and make him hers forever.
Now, ask yourself this, how would you feel if Walt wasn’t a boy, but a girl? Do your feelings change for the character? And if so, why?
Be honest.
Gut check question for the day, why do so many readers hate Simmi, a character with real problems who is hurting on the inside, but the same readers aren’t bothered by male characters who have manipulated, lied to, and even verbally abused women in fiction? Sure, they’re hot and look great without their shirts on, but some YA dark male leads (all the way back to Buffy, and further) are downright emotionally abusive to their girlfriends… And we drool over them, we fawn, we want to be the objects of their attention.
Why? Why do we hold women to a different standard than to the men we want to fix, change, and call our own? Is it because we don’t like seeing our own flaws reflected in others? Does it make us so uncomfortable that our defensive reaction is to hate?
Are we so afraid to face the truth in us, we would rather fix our men than fix ourselves?
Simmi is real. Sure, she has problems, but guess what? We all do! Maybe we prefer all our female heroines be picture perfect where their only inner dialog relates to how beautiful they are or how their hair flows gracefully off their shoulders. Bah!
I’ll admit, Simmi is wrong a lot of the time–she shouldn’t try to fix herself or feel better by binging and purging, she shouldn’t compare herself to others, and she shouldn’t lead on one boy while falling for another… but such is life, such is being a teen.
Personally, I enjoyed reading about Simmi and found it to be almost therapeutic in a way. Not because she was like me, but because I can look upon her and say, “Don’t worry, it’s going to get better. You’re going to grow up. You’re going to learn to love yourself. And you will be an inspiration to others who feel just like you do. You’re not alone.”
Weigh in here. Have you read Open Heart? Did you find yourself hating Simmi, pitying her, relating to her? Is there a double-standard in YA fiction? Discuss!
About our guest poster:
Jill Cooper is the author of The Dream Slayer out in June 2012, focused on Natalie Johnson, a girl with her own weight issues and the ability to create a magical world just by daydreaming. Visit her at www.jillacooper.com
Emlyn's Newsletter | Enjoyed this post?Sign-up for my monthly newsletter for Advance Review Copies, giveaways, and special announcements.
|
I think you really hit the nail on the head here: “Is it because we don’t like seeing our own flaws reflected in others? Does it make us so uncomfortable that our defensive reaction is to hate?”
I’m not quite done with Open Heart, but I love the story and characters for how real it, and they, are. The book is about a real girl with BIG problems. If anything, the reader should feel sorry for Simmi and feel the need to help her . . . not hate her. Makes you wonder how the readers react to their real-life friends when the going gets tough.
Thanks for reading and I was wondering this morning if it happens because we like to picture ourselves as an ideal, which is all good. Reading is an escape and should be enjoyed, but that doesn’t have to be ALL it is.
If all young girls read about is bad boys and perfect girls, I think they are setting themselves up for heartache in the future. And as writers, I think we owe it to them to balance the playing field a bit.
I like writing and reading about flawed heroines because it feels real to me. And when it feels real, I am able to immerse myself deeper in the universe the author has created.
I don’t know what to say here because I think I possibly don’t possess this particular double standard. I LOVED the Unearthly series because I found Clara and Tucker absolutely wonderful. I loved their personalities because they were so strong and grounded. They were people to look up to. Bella? Couldn’t read the Twilight series because of her. Found Edward a bit annoying after a while too. The Hunger Games? WOW!!! I HATED KATNISS! Worse than Bella. Why? I think it’s because my brain kept going “rubbish – I don’t believe you!” I haven’t finished reading Open Heart yet but the thing is…you KNOW why Simmi is annoying. She’s annoying because you want to shake her and tell her to get a grip. And you want to do so because you KNOW better…because you are no longer 15. You may share those same insecurities, but at least you know they are silly and unimportant. The thing is…it’s not inspiring to watch someone self destruct… It is comforting yes – because the self destruction of others helps you to feel like you are not alone in your own destruction… But inspiring? No… And I think that is why the anger comes out sometimes. Because even though feeling “not alone” can help you feel better…it doesn’t help you to BE better. Sometimes you just want to look at someone and go, “You’re a size 14 and you’re beautiful…maybe that means I am beautiful too…” Do I hate Simmi? No I pity her. How sad for talent and beauty to be wasted on someone who is so busy focusing on her short comings that the rest of her falls by the wayside. But that’s the lesson though, isn’t it?
I can confess I sometimes adhere to the double-standard, which is why I find it so important to challenge said standard in my own writing. I loved Katniss, hated Bella. I like kick ass heroines as a reader, but they just seem so dime-a-dozen. Hunger Games was crazy entertaining but did it lead to introspection, did it change anyone’s life? I want to offer readers more… whether or not they want it
Oh I definitely agree with offering more. The thing is: if you love or hate a character then the writer is doing something right! It is only in indifference that some sort of failure has occurred. Hating something is simply recognizing that it should not be that way – whether you relate to it or not.
Excellent point. I’ve just been waiting for the 1-stars to come in because of how much some people seem to dislike Simmi. I got my first 2-star today. It said, “AWFUL character. I wanted to like it since I loved Farsighted so much, but I just couldn’t get beyond how awful the main character was.” Thanks to this conversation reminding me of why I wrote Simmi the way I did in the first place, I now feel like the 2-star is a testament that I am doing something right!
Haha! I really wouldn’t worry about that! I think the way you’re doing this series is great (like I said…my first book was a bunch of perspectives…I like perspectives!)and I absolutely love how this book has such a different voice from the last one. You will probably find as you go along that people will choose their favourite voice and then struggle with the rest. I think that’s ok though. It’s a kind of “something for everyone” kind of thing. /not everyone can judge something for what it is instead of according to their own taste (something that is so hard to keep in mind when it comes to the nasty things people can say about your work sometimes! Wow!)I’m looking forward to getting to the end. I think once all 5 books have been read and you can sort of hold it in your head as a whole people will be less bothered by Simmi. You know I have a friend who is just like her. Crazy stupid talented. But SOOOOOO self deprecating. IT drives me insane. I once told her that the most annoying thing about her is the fact that she goes on and on about how annoying she is. Because it’s true! characters with these flaws are so relevant though. And you can be proud that you remained true to Simmi – even if you are getting a bit of flak for it.
I think it’s the usual double standard; we as a society think that it’s “okay” for men to be primal and base, women “should” be delicate and reserved so we are less likely in our minds to allow women to be flawed. If a woman or girl in fiction is flawed, that automatically turns her into the “bad guy” while a similar man or boy is just nodded and smiled at, implying that his behavior is just a “guy being a guy.” Also, there’s the whole “bad boys are more manly” idea. It’s all very interesting sociologically.
What she said.
There has always been a double standard based on the fact that on a male dominated society we set ourselves to be awesome no matter what, and women to be lame or bad no matter what. It’s been going on long enough that it’s taken as gospel, even when we know better.
Thanks, Samtertainment. I love having guys weight in on these issues. See, women, even men can see what’s going on? This is on us!
Indeed, it is the lesson. As an adult, sure Simmi frustrated me, for sure. But I think her flaws are important because that’s how alot of girl’s feel and if that’s not displayed in literature, maybe they’ll feel alone, like everyone is perfect but them.
Is Simmi inspiring now? No, but I have a feeling she will be by the end of the series. Then when she grows, conquers her demons, she’ll be inspiring, and show everyone that if she can dig out of this hole, so can you. And that’s an important lesson too.
I haven’t read it yet, but I’d like to. However, for people’s reactions: how old are the people who dislike Simmi the most? It’s a book about teenagers, so adults should realize that teenagers are just learning/making mistakes with relationships, etc. How else do they learn compassion and understanding? My question for age is really: Do teenage girls dislike her the most or is it adults? I’ve found the age of reviewers makes a difference in their gut reactions to characters.
As a reader we want to be able to relate to the characters in some fashion but we also want escape. So, do readers see themselves in Simmi? Is she too real? I think that’s a nice compliment for Chand.
That’s a great point, Caron. I saw this happen with my first book Farsighted. A few readers complained that Alex was too wishy-washy and had a temper. I was like, “Hello, teenage boy! Do you think he has it all figured out yet?”
Alot of adults have tempers too. I personally like my characters flawed. ALL of them!
Good point, Natalie. I think to an extent we let society get away with this by not wanting to admit we have flaws to ourselves and our circle of friends, the easier it will be for society to admit we are striving toward an ideal we can’t meet.
Also while I think Simmi isn’t inspiring now, by the end of the series I bet she will be. I am guessing at some point she will reach rock bottom and have to climb out. When that happens, she will show everyone if she can do it, so can you.
It’s an important lesson and one girl’s need. If heroines are always perfect, they’ll feel only more alone, isolated, and that’s just dangerous.
Has anyone else noted that the double standard is perpetuated not by men, but by women? That’s only in part because women are the primary audience for books like Twilight and Open Heart. Women judge each other much more harshly than men judge them–it’s called self-policing. Why do we care so much? Why can’t we just accept each other and move on with our respective lives?
For sure, we are the problem. And it doesn’t end in high school. 2 years ago I became a Mom and was really looking forward to joining mother’s groups, but for me it lost it’s appeal fast because of the sniping and judgemental attitude against how other women mother.
Why women can’t support each other and constantly need to compare, I don’t know. (obviously not all woman are like this, but it seems more common in a group setting)
Maybe it’s because we are self conscious and are not confident in our methods so we strike out, rather than look inward. That at least makes me feel better about it.
This is why I dropped my pre-law major almost as soon as I entered college. I was so excited to learn, but the other students were more interested in making everyone else look stupid or incompetent–rather than busting their own humps to learn. I guess “pre-law major” is built into our gender.
Wow do I feel you on this! I was hazed out of a job by women. Laughed at for wanting a natural birth by women. When I was a legal secretary, the only attorney I refused to work for was a woman. She threw staplers at me. Women are terrible to each other. I don’t know why. I guess we’ve all been brain-washed.
First off, WONDERFUL post. That’s awesome. You really found something here. Back in the day I wrote a post about why Buffy beating up Spike all the time and him always going back to her was analogous to spousal abuse. I got slammed on the boards because “Buffy needs the outlet” and “Spike doesn’t have a soul”. Blah Blah, beating someone who loves you and then using them to make yourself feel better is abuse, no matter what gender you are.
Secondly, I haven’t read Open Heart – yet. Your post definitely makes it more attractive to me. I generally don’t like YA because it’s so… blah, predictable and sanitized. Sounds like Emlyn didn’t hold back and I’m excited to read it.
Thricly, I think a lot of the reason for this is that the targeted reader audience is female. As women we all have what my mother called “broken wing syndrome”. We want to take that hurt bird home, nurse it back to health and teach it how to love. We want to be the special one who can understand. It’s far too real and intimate to have to be the broken one. As a species we avoid that kind of introspection. Good literature takes that challenge and makes it evocative and something we relate too. I’d much rather read about someone with real issues than another fallen angel who’s dangerous with a dark past and blah blah blah.
Thanks for this!
Awww, thank you, Pavalicious! Your support means a lot to me–not just in writing and blog-posting, but in life outside of that, too. I’m glad Jillybug’s insights have lit an Open Heart fire in you. Love the allusion to broken wing syndrome. I used to bring home dead birds as a child–I was never able to nurse them back to life though. Now I have Ducky (What in you brings out string-of-consciousness in me?)
I don’t know but I totally love it
I agree about spike and Buffy. It wasn’t healthy no matter whose side you were on. To some extent if. Buffy and angel didn’t exist I don’t think Edward and Bella would either.
I definitely think sometimes girls want to be the only one who can fix the broken guy. It makes us special. What I’m trying to do in dream slayer is say that doesn’t make you special. YOU make you special. Guess I’ll see how it’s perceived!
You’ve hooked me, Jillybug! I can’t wait to read Dream Slayer
Crap – you people are trying to get me to read YA aren’t you!?! I won’t do it, you can’t make me!
I know your secret. You are a self-loathing YA author, madame!
I haven’t read the book, but I do get what you’re asking. It’s the same question I’ve asked over and over again about Twilight-though under a different pretext, I’m sure. I really think its because girls aren’t supposed to have problems of their own. Call it the “princess syndrome” or whatever fixates your fancy, I really believe that girls are held to the perfection or subordinate position. MEN are the ones with issues, because that’s what’s been portrayed for ages. Girls don’t have problems-they’re the ones that need to fix all of the problems that their guy has. It’s just what’s done. No one ever lets on that that situation brings about a whole other slew of problems and is fundamentally unhealthy no matter what your sex.
Personally, I want to read about the girl with issues because I have plenty of my own. I don’t like perfect girls and I sure as hell don’t appreciate an author that lets his or her guy character get away with being abusive because “girls love the bad boy”. No, no we don’t. Bad boys are bad news and can’t be fixed.
I’m definitely going to pick up this series. I want to see what Simmi does and who she becomes.
Excellent points, RJ. I intentionally created a manipulative dynamic between the characters of Simmi and Dax. Simmi has bulimia and a lot of negative self talk; she’s holding onto a boy she doesn’t love but who she cares for deeply (until she’s attracted to Dax). Dax is destructive, has killed someone in the past, and uses her eating disorder against her, BUT because he can be quite romantic, that’s okay. Simmi, on the other hand, cannot be redeemed. I mean, c’mon.
If you’ll excuse the nerdy Victorian literature rant, the dark, tormented, (and sometimes abusive) male lead goes back way further than Buffy. It’s one of the mainstays of Victorian/Gothic literature. Why? Because the Victorians were obsessed with sex, but couldn’t write about it and still get it through the censors. (Incidentally, this is where the vampire story gained traction: I don’t think I need to spell it out for you.)
In these Victorian stories, the virginal, perfect young woman falls in love with the dark and dangerous hero in order to illustrate the dangers of sexual attraction and the ruin that could come to the proper young lady should she indulge in those feelings. The redemption of the hero that almost always follows and the subsequent marriage is the triumph of societal mores in taming that dangerous side of the male/female relationship. (Tell me that “Twilight” doesn’t follow this theme!)
So, really, we’re all closet Victorians at heart. Even though societal expectations have changed, we repeat this story over and over, especially in YA, where the bad boy hero adds excitement without having treading into spicy adult romance novel territory.
The tradition doesn’t necessarily make the double standard right or healthy, but it does make it far more understandable.
Excellent insights, Carla, thank you for sharing! I’m reminded of Wuthering Heights–does it have a different message since Catherine and Heathcliff were never to be?
Oh yes, it goes back much further than Buffy, that was just a post I remember writing about this that got slammed. It’s even further back that the Victorians. Look at Oedipus. Who dies? Not Oedipus, who is the one who did the killing and fucking, but Jocosta, the mother who had to take her own life in order to restore order to the city and end the plague. It’s always on the women to be the pure or clean characters. When we challenge that people get uncomfortable.
Thanks for the info, Carla. I have never read victorian era fiction so that’s really interesting to know!
I did realize Buffy didn’t create this arch type, but it was the most relevant example I could think of without research. I try to do as little of that as possible
The Buffy illustration is a good one though! I’d argue that the Buffy/Angel relationship is more traditional, but as she becomes more powerful (both personally and as the Slayer) Whedon flips the archtype. Buffy takes the dominant role over Spike; she essentially becomes the dark flawed hero in this one. Hmmm, wonder what he was trying to say about that one. Or if maybe he just thought we’d like to see Spike get slapped around a bit. I always felt those episodes were supposed to be a little uncomfortable.
It’s kind of the same thing with the old western dime novels. They made Jesse James a hero rather than a criminal, “romanticized” the gunslinger…which was the late 1800′s too for Victorian times. We still want some man to ride in and save us (Edward drives up and saves Bella from certain rape). So Meyer played on both the damsel in distress and the forbidden sex bit.
And I know that it’s really pathetic, but sometimes I still wish that some man would come along and save me from all my problems! Then I listen to Helen Reddy’s I Am Woman song and flip off all the men!
Haha, don’t we all?
Very timely article, as this is something I have been thinking about for a future novel. I’m afraid I think society likes to subscribe to the “Girls are made of spice and everything nice” notion. For this reason, many have equated “strong women” with “flawless women”. Male writers tend to deal with this in two ways: If they are what I call the “silence of the men type” who are afraid to disagree with women (guy I known cannot disagree with his partner about EastEnders – a popular UK soap – this is for real) then they will exclude women from their novels altogether, or have them as such minor characters that they won’t matter, because they just don’t know how to deal with a female who is going to have flaws in their novels. If they are men of the “agree with your women for a better time in the bedroom type” (advice given to men on an Oprah show as to how they should treat women), then they will include women, but those women will all be as tough as nails and flawless, because they believe they make women feel good by making them only strong. A particular British writer does this with all his female leads, and although he is a best seller, you probably wouldn’t be able to differentiate between his female characters, and I doubt if you will remember any of them once you finish the book. Unless a character has flaws, then they have nowhere to grow. I bet everyone remembers Scarlett O’Hara. Why? Because she was so flawed.
Wow, such excellent points, George. I never thought of it like that, but it definitely makes sense. I would welcome/embrace/adore a guest post from you about writing female characters (advice for the guys and struggles that crop up). I could run it on this site or on http://www.novelpublicity.com. Sounds like you have some fierce introspection on the topic!
Hi Emlyn,
Thanks for the invitation. I would love to write a guest post for you. Please let me know where to send it.
That would be rocking! Just email me at author@emlynchand.com when you’re ready
Perhaps we’re harder on female characters because we still hold all women to ridiculously high standards – standards we are guaranteed to fail?
I can’t help but think of Elena from the Vampire Diaries book series. She was shallow, bossy, a bit rude – and still likable. Maybe it’s just what faults we can tolerate?
Women are cruel to one another, maybe because we’re fighting to be the best in the eyes of men, maybe we’re hard-wired that way since the dawn of time. Either way, I much prefer female leads to have flaws. I want to know they’re like me, like every woman out there. I have gotten grief over this though, for writing about real women with real problems. Oh well. Can’t please ‘em all.
Join the club, Jen! We *should* start a club!
I’m going to compare Simmi with the MC of Wintergirls (I can’t even remember her name). While Wintergirls was very stylistic, and focused entirely on anorexia and getting better, Simmi’s journey includes her spiral downwards. A lot of people (may) like it better when a character starts out flawed and becomes better. Simmi starts out as Simmi, we see her unravel, and then we see the uphill battle. Though, this is mostly due to how Alex held her in such high regard in Farsighted.
Even though some of her decisions frustrated me (because really, some of them were high school decisions, as they should be), it was real and believable. And honestly, I don’t see how you could have made such a frustrating and flawed character better. A part of me fell in love with her. A part of me still wants to smack her. But that’s how I felt about most of my high school friends, so nothing is new there
Haha, awesome analysis, Rachel. I’m glad you found her partially redeemable. It was important for me to broach the body image issues with her, and I don’t think there was any other way to do it unless I wanted to come across as very Hallmark channel-like–i.e. problem, solution, love all around! I just don’t do feel-good writing, I guess
Oh, I found her super redeemable! Don’t get me wrong, I really love Simmi now, but I also really hate her too.
Which means, as a character, she’s incredible. And I definitely think that she ends much more redeemable than she starts!
Her poor sister’s Halloween candy though! That was the one thing that made me so angry (and nauseous).
Fantastic post, and some great comments! (On a side note, I always thought Buffy treated Spike like crap and it bugged me to no end!)
My thoughts… (or at least a few of them)
1. When women are the target audience and, especially, when there is a romantic theme of some kind, having a ‘blank slate’ for the MC helps the reader insert their own personality and self into the role, thereby allowing them to engage in the fantasy more completely. A character with too much of any personality (flawed or not, and it’s usually the flaws that set us apart), takes us out of that experience a bit. I think this is partly why Twilight and 50 Shades are so super successful, the MC’s are easy to superimpose over.
2. I’ve read Open Heart, and I really didn’t like Simmi, but I loved the book. However, my disdain for her had more to do with the types of flaws, rather than the fact that she is flawed. I found her to be too passive, indecisive and passive aggressive (different than passive, this is evident with the lying to make other happy then doing something else entirely).
I couldn’t respect her and even in the areas where I could relate to her, I couldn’t relate to the choices she made based on how she felt. When I look at the ‘bad boy’ characters, they usually have more active vices. They may be bad, but they’re getting stuff done and often they have some traits I respect. And two, they aren’t usually the POV character, and I think this makes a difference as well.
It’s easy to enjoy a seriously flawed character from another character’s perspective. I didn’t like SImmi in the first book, but I only saw her through Alex so it wasn’t a major issue and in the first book I also saw some things I could like about her. If I were reading a book from the POV of a male who acted like Simmi, I wouldn’t like him either (if he had the same flaws as her.)
For me, it really comes down to the kind of flaws and the kind of character they are and who’s POV I’m reading them from. Also, most bad boy characters have some redeemable quality as well (besides being hot) that made them more likable. I personally didn’t find any such quality in Simmi.
However, Emlyn did an amazing job with this book, and despite (or maybe even in part because of) my feelings for Simmi, I couldn’t put the book down. I love that each book in the series will be from a different POV. I’m sure there will be some I love and some I love to hate and it will all make a great cocktail of entertainment. I can’t wait for the rest of the series!
Great argument against Simmi, Kimberly! My follow-up question is, should a character with such insecurity to the extent of bulimia *be* an active character?
I’m glad you stuck to your guns and wrote the character the way you wanted to and I’m excited to check out Open Heart. I had worked with a couple of editors on my book and they kept telling me my main character doesn’t do what “a good woman would do.” If all female leads fit into this cookie cutter mold, I would find reading dreadfully boring.
Oh my gosh, Heather! If my editors told me that, I’d say, “Refund please!”
WOW! How horrible. Maybe they should have said, your female lead isn’t how we write 1 dimensional character in popular fiction
Ironically, I always have the exact opposite reactions and problems. I’m so sick of the ‘bad boy” thing. It’s so cliche to me. And I’m annoyed by the flood of too wonderful, too gorgeous, too perfect female lead characters in so much YA fiction (and romance). I prefer all characters to a little flawed in some way or another (though, I do think that some writers can over-do the flawed thing, without making it fit the tone and plot of the story). I do still sometimes get frustrated with flawed characters – like Katniss in Hunger Games. She frustrated the HELL out of me sometimes. BUt I still liked her as a character. I thought she was a well-written, rounded believable character. I just wouldn’t have liked her much if I knew her in real life. And I think that’s a sign of good writing – that I can imagine her well enough to know that.
So yes, bring on the flawed characters! And quit with the overly cliche bad boys, please.
Charlize Theron’s thoughts on the same issue:
It’s bizarre to me when people say, ‘You play unlikable characters, you’re so brave.’ That’s what’s real, humanity – that’s what’s out there. I don’t know why but society lives in this dream world where women are only two things: amazing mothers who never do anything wrong or prostitutes. That’s it. It’s the Madonna/whore complex – or it’s assumed that women can’t be as complicated or as conflicted as men. It’s not true. There are millions of women like Meredith [in Prometheus]. We just don’t acknowledge them. I don’t think anyone sits down with Robert De Niro and says, ‘You play strong guys.’ But in many ways, we do it to ourselves, we don’t want to acknowledge the truth of who we are.
Her full interview covers other issues: here
I’ve heard a lot about that interview, Robert, and it’s definitely pertinent to this convo. Thank you for sharing! Theron became one of my favorite actresses after I saw her performance in Monster–wow!