Screenwriting : Portayal of Women by Harold Vandyke

Here's one article about Joss Whedon's negative tweet regarding the sexism in the film: http://variety.com/2015/film/news/joss-whedon-jurassic-world-sexist-twee...

I just watched the Jurassic clip that incited Joss Whedon to comment so tersely about it... And, yeah, he's right. It's awful. :/

As a female screenwriter of strong women's roles, I'll jump in. How should women be portrayed? As the protagonist. As intelligent, and complex. Over the age of 30 & up to 80+ as often as in their teens & 20s. Involved in action, drama, sci fi in addition to just romantic comedy and not only as the victim in horror. In scenes with other women in which they never talk about men (aka passing the Bechdel Test). Clothed. Appropriately. Or naked without violence or male focused titillation in the scene. In a range of races and ethnicities. As heading up a business or country, leading an alien attack force, as ambitious, successful, aggressive, vulnerable, open, weird, funny, scary, angry, kick-ass, silly, sensual, stunning, average, unsure, loving (aka as human beings).

Thanks for posting that, Beth.

So, we're not talking that she was spurning his advances, but rather the way in which her character was portrayed, by the male character's comments? The male character appeared fairly stereotypical as well. I guess my first impression was that Joss felt she should be easier, but that's not necessarily what was implied. The thing about the Bechdel test is that the comic strip it refers to appears to have been written from a lesbian point of view.

Yes, the whole thing was rather gender stereotypical and ridiculous -- she's the cold control freak; he's the cool, easy-going fun guy. His constant power-play and belittling of her with his sexual innuendos was rather stupid. Basically, he equated her worth or what she was saying to how she rejected him sexually.

She was trying to be serious about the topic at hand and he just wanted to mess with her on a more personal level. He was a little sexually frustrated, wouldn't you say? The writer's way of introducing conflict into their discussion. I think it's amusing that woman tend to be introduced in screenplays as some form of attractive. You just don't see them described as; ugly as sin. Pretty much the same for male characters.

I do love Joss on many levels. His work and his attitude is great and, to be honest, rare.

Joss Whedon's forte: He really listens and he speaks up.

Always nice to have clout to back that up.

Personally, I've grown to despise the phrase "strong female character." The phrase in itself implies that women or all other female characters are what, weak? I understand its use is well-intended but I feel it is rather patronizing. I mean, how many male characters are considered to be "strong?" Of course, we shouldn’t understand “strong” as meaning, well, “strong”, but rather something more like “well-written." Sorry, but I don’t think the majority of writers or readers or audience members consider the term quite that way. They consider it more in terms of physical strength or fighting capability or anything that makes them equal to male characters on screen. Female characters instead should be defined in their own right and not in constant comparison to male characters. Looking forward, I would love the conversation to change simply to that of creating "great characters" -- male or female. How do I think female characters should be portrayed? I think they should be portrayed as three-dimensional, authentic human beings who are imperfect, obnoxious, pretentious, audacious, courageous, broken, brilliant, eccentric, brave, neurotic, fastidious, rude, crude, manipulative, loving, vain, ugly, artistic, cruel, sad, self-conscious, hilarious, old, young, athletic, strange, creative, caring, happy, dorky, exhausted, self-destructive, complex, selfless and powerful. Strong? No thanks. :)

I think the goal is to someday not have that phrase, but right now there are so many wives and girlfriends and other unimportant peripheral female characters in films that we need to do something about it.

Beth, see my earlier comment. I guess I'm one of the weird ones who sees "strong" as meaning well written! A gave a very similar list of characteristics too, so we're on the same wavelength! I think women perceive strong in a different way. Also, a lot of us understand that the strongest women are often vulnerable, imperfect, subtle, gentle, and yes, sometimes physically strong. I refuse to let male characters own the word or idea Strong. Women characters simply redefine it.

Yeah, I wish someone would have smacked the person who coined the phrase and re-labeled it "well-written female character." lol! Avoid confusion and different interpretations. :) I would go so far as to kindly ask people to stop using the phrase. So, yes, let's do something about it. We know better. We should do better. :)

I also don't care for the Bechdel test. Sure, it brings "playful" attention to the lack of female to female character interaction/communication regarding all other subject matter, other than men, but it truly does not fit the bill. It's not enough. Why use such a ridiculous, simplified measuring tool to understand and determine the complexity of gender representation and roles in film? Disparaging portrayals of naked, objectified female characters who barely speak just happen to say something to each other like, "Hey, nice spray tan. Pass the body glitter gel, will ya?" passes the Bechdel test. An inherently misogynistic film can easily pass this test with just some minor arbitrary comment between women. And yet, we have incredible films with empowered, authentic, well-written female characters that do not. I find this whole thing disheartening. It's distracting people from the real issues. Does this "test" truly expose the lack of depth to female stories or female concerns? It doesn't. Furthermore, we should not need some arbitrary and incredibly flawed criteria to tell us how to label, or falsely label, a film as "sexist." I feel this "test" is more damaging than helpful. Can we not use our own critical reasoning to determine if a film demeans women or not? Can we not discern whether a film creates a positive or negative representation of women? Of course we can! So, let's keep moving forward! :)

Write good characters. That's all. ;-)

How should women be portrayed in film? The ideal situation is that all characters are portrayed true and authentic to the characters' motives, actions and reactions in the story. I write scripts that feature female characters as the lead, and I love strong females who overcome the odds of succeeding in a male-dominated world, and especially when they don't have to resort to employing stereotypical "female charms" to achieve their success. In the bigger picture of the lack of female lead roles in Hollywood, let's remember that Hollywood not only is run mostly by men, but that art reflects life. Traditionally, men have been "the tough guys" who "fought battles", "overcame obstacles", and even "got the girl" at the end. I'm not saying "that's right", I'm just saying "that is." Historically in real life, gangsters, thugs, cops, American presidents, cowboys, land owners, titans of industry, good scientists, mad scientists, gunslingers, soldiers, politicians, rulers, religous leaders, assassins, war lords, drug kingpins, inventors, music idols, idol leaders, military leaders, athletes, serial killers, war heroes, clumsy fools and buffoons have mostly been men. Historically in fiction, the leads in novels and comic books have mostly been men. And in many countries around the world, women still have nowhere near the equal rights that men have, and are still considered to be subservient to the men in those countries in general. And a studio head trying to market films internationally and maximize profits has those heavy past historical and current political weights on their shoulders to consider. Those are some of the realities that people face when questioning why there aren't more female leads, unfortunately. There are thousands of years of history that stand behind us, where men were and still are the majority of all of the iconic figures that I listed above. It makes one appreciate even more, then, when Angeline Jolie can be the lead in "Salt"; when Uma Thurman can be the lead in "Kill Bill"; when Jodie Foster can be the lead in "Panic Room" and "Flight Plan", and when Meryl Streep can be the lead in just about anything.

I applied the Bechdel Test to an early draft of my thriller; surprised myself when It failed, even though I had four notable female characters. So, I wrote a scene and let them talk to each other. And my screenplay improved, a lot. I'll be thinking about it in all early drafts henceforth.

I have a real life story. I worked as the director of project management and estimating. We hired a new saleswoman. She was late 20s, blonde and in all honesty very pretty. One our first interactions (beyond the usual introductions), she came to my office with the clear intent of getting preferential treatment and pushing her project in front of others. She started with mild flirting which was a tad bit ridiculous since I’m overweight and going bald. Experience told me no woman of her caliber would look twice at me in a bar. Seeing that fail, she switched to the “poor little o’ me” routine; a woman struggling in an all-male sales team. I swear she even pouted at me. I waffled between being mad at the crude attempt to manipulate me and sad that she felt like these tactics were her go-to strategy and finally the temptation to laugh because this was just like a bad movie scene where she played the “Sexy Co-worker” role. She was obviously a smart, talented woman, so why the act? Did these tactics really work for her? I guess they must have at least on some guys. I ended up talking to her boss and objected to her behavior. We got beyond this and we enjoyed working together for years once we got beyond the acting and were just being ourselves. I guess this is a case of life imitating art, (assuming badly written women in bad movies count as “Art”) I strongly agree that there are not enough well written female characters out there. I myself try to always have 3 dimensional realistic women in my scripts. I also tend to like women leads.

Thx for asking, Harold. The best answer for me is, portray women as 'human'. Surpass and align with the higher being, higher self, and you can't go wrong. Take away race, religion, physicality, all the things that stifle who we are, and relate female characters on-screen with dialogue true to their character - not another cliche, stereotype or undercut. To change the way women are portrayed, you have to change the culture in filmmaking. The same way you have to change all sub-cultures that are unfair or unbalanced. The point is, don't expect to do it all at once. Do it brick by brick, or rather, film by film...and watch the shift occur. I for one, am devoted to writing strong female characters and can't wait to get some of these ideas out there.

My 2 cents on Bechdel: I NEVER write to it, but sometimes use it as a tool after the fact or to check other films against. Beth is right that we can't put too much stock in just having women talking to each other. What are they saying and why and who Is saying it? The issue is that we need more women writers, producers, directors and editors and DPs to tell our complex stories fully.

Thanks so much everyone for the comments/points of view. Laurie; but aren't race, religion, physicality etc. all of the things that actually make us who we are and give us interesting characters to write about? I guess the other aspect we're dealing with here is that the film industry is a big, billion dollar business -- yes there is art involved but the focus has evolved over time -- and movies are made to cater to certain demographics more than others. From a money making standpoint, and since the males of our kind are visual creatures (not much we can do about it, short of poking our eyes out) what most of us prefer to look at, as far as the females go, will probably never change. Women are visual to a lesser extent, but still appreciate a well maintained man-bod. I am of course referring to mainstream/summer/entertainment movies. That said; from a business standpoint, I think we're okay with the hot babes and studly guys, but as has been stated, give them more human depth. Characteristics that evoke the gamut of human emotions etc. We've got the visuals down, it's the heart that we're sometimes lacking. I totally agree that, although women and men are different, we should treat each other as equals in a dignified and respectful manner. Feminism, at it's core is an honorable endeavor, unfortunately as in just about ever other movement, it's the radicals who give it a bad name. My desire is not to offend anyone and my comments are based on personal observations. I wish everyone happiness and success. Keep writing and dreaming. Hey, and if anyone wants to relay how they might have rewritten that scene, feel free...

Haha! That's great, Lyse! Sorry, but I don't care how many muscles Chris Pratt has or how charming he is -- he couldn't save that horrible scene! And, Bryce Dallas Howard... She's an INCREDIBLE talent and now seems to be type cast as the cold-hearted woman (50/50, The Help, Eclipse, now Jurassic World). For me, I'd rather there be NO sexual anything. Why can't they just be rivaling professionals?!?!! Equals in their field! The idea that these two characters would even go on one date is absolutely preposterous. Talk about lack of on-screen chemistry. Of course, we know he "changes" her by the end. She will finally submit to those muscles and charms. Dirty up that ridiculous pristine dress -- with or without dinosaurs. Man, I wasn't interested in this film before but now I most certainly am not. I'll be sure to skip this one.

Passivity and complacency certainly will not effect change in the industry for women nor for female characters -- and that's a loss for everyone. "Entertainment" and "business" aspects aside, it is extremely important and relevant to better portray the female experience. We are half of humanity -- some may argue we're "the better half." lol! ;) Life inspires art, does it not?

Lyse, that was great! Looks like she's written to represent the corporate antagonist -- not too bright, quirky, cold hearted... Like I said earlier, It looks like he's the frustrated one because she has moved on. So now he's resorting to the demeaning comments. As humans we hate to be jilted. With guys it's an ego thing. Nothing like a little sexual tension in a story. I'd still go see it, just to see the dinosaur action. You know people are going to get eaten. ;) Melody ... And then we hear comments from a female CEO who recommends women not run a country.

Harold, yeah and that CEO is a nut from Texas who says her reasoning is based on women having “different hormones” and on “biblical sound reasoning” and that she'll move to Canada if Hillary Clinton becomes president. Bye-bye! Don't let the moose antlers hit your butt, lady on the way north. Great character to add to an absurd political comedy BTW. ;)

@Harold - I'm glad you started this thread for a few reasons, but specifically because I'm outlining my next script and it has a female protagonist. I think I can write pretty good characters, but I've never done a female lead. The comments here will definitely make her even better than she would have been in the first draft :-) Cheers everyone!

Haha, very true, Lyse! Brilliant scene, CJ! ;) Sexual tension is MUCH better when it's intelligent. Of course in this film it's, well, not. Okay, I'll stick my neck out -- as if I haven't enough already, lol! -- and say the problem is really with the film creators. They defaulted to not just stereotypes but the "sexual tension" here is a complete cop out -- as if they thought, well, I don't know, we have a woman here, so I guess the two leads have to have sexual tension, right? Therefore, it wasn't done well. It seems very contrived. Forced. Insulting. ...If only they had hired you two, Lyse and CJ! When I watched the scene I could just feel that the actors didn't care for this ridiculous scene either. As if they were rolling their eyes between takes. Sorry, but now I'm going to sound cold-hearted -- I assure you, I am not. Nothing but love here. This stuff keeps me up at night -- but I tire so much from this... Why must these gender biases keep being perpetuated? Why always sexual innuendo, which really is disguised sexual harassment/belittlement when a female character just happens to be present? I tire so much from female characters who are instantly on the defensive about just being a woman because of what that means to a man. Sexual tension is a great game but it's at its best when the players are equally matched. :) Anyway, I'm glad Joss Whedon called the film out -- it incited a great discussion! :) The filmmakers know they have a giant blockbuster on their hands; a big fan base from the other Jurassic movies; fantastic special effects... Even if it gets poor reviews it'll be a big hit. :)

Very true, CJ. That's the reality. I know I'm a bit idealistic, maybe to a fault, but that is the very reason I personally don't care for blockbusters. I know they are great entertainment. I know they are visually exciting. Stunning. So, WHY NOT do better with the characters, with the writing, with the story? Why be so lazy? Why be cliche? Why not go for not just the big bucks -- which is pretty much guaranteed anyway -- but also go for great reviews! Great storytelling! They have the budget so why not hold these films to a higher standard? Don't just wow us, take our breath away!

Ain't that the truth! ;)

I bought and watched The Disappearance of Eleanor Rigby a few months ago (Him and Her, not Them I through out that DVD. Don't care for Weinstein's version). Him worked, Her not so much. My problem with it, I realized while watching, was that although this was the story from her POV, and thus line readings, color palette, camera angles etc were all different, it wasn't authentic. The film was written and directed by a male, and because of that, the film is a male's interpretation of a female perspective and thus not accurate. An admirable failure. That film should have been written and directed by a woman instead. The point is, there needs to be more women filmmakers because I think there is this other, enormous perception of reality out there that hasn't really been taped into, shown, or explored. Doing that, I believe, will open up new, original avenues of storytelling and artistic expression that everybody can learn and grow from, and advance storytelling to newer, greater heights.

Generally speaking, we don't talk about men THAT much -- that's a male misconception. :) Sure, of course, different social groups, different ages, different cultures, different individual personalities give different variances. But, really, overall, we don't. That's a myth created and feed to by media, which, generally speaking, is dominated by men. Just saying... :)

@ Jim Jackson: and now a growing number of audiences are outside of the U.S.!

Jim, people talking (gossiping) about other people is totally different. The myth, or false notion, that when women (of any age) are alone socializing together without any men around that ALL we talk about is men is simply not true and ridiculous -- despite what you see on "reality" TV, or rom-coms, or sitcoms, or whatever. Trust me. I mean, which one of us is actually a woman!? LOL! When the decision makers who are steering the media ship are mostly male there's going to be a dominate industry world view, yes? The media is both the messenger and the message on how women are portrayed and perceived, which is rather one-sided, limited and unfair. That's the point. :) And, BTW, women of all ages buy tons of movie tickets! Who's talking about segregating movies? Not me! No way! :)

Jim, I'm certainly not talking about "dogma" nor "rules" imposed upon storytelling. Not at all. The Bechdel test doesn't impose anything either, it's just a simple test that often points out that male-dominate view. If anything, what I'm talking about and truly hope for is a better balanced industry with a broader world view which would be beneficial for everyone. :) If you would take a look at my earlier comments within this thread you would see that I don't care for the Bechdel test either, however for completely different reasons. :)

This is probably a fringe point of view but... The fact that a big budget action film exhibits sexism in a few scenes (let alone throughout) at this point and time gets a pass. Were talking about an industry that pays Michael Bay 65 million a year to keep doing what he's doing - as if to say, "Go, man, go!" But what should be more talked about - and definitely on another thread! - is that the JW scene reinforces a disgusting racial hierarchy inherent in all the big streaming blockbuster franchises to date - and Joss Whedon TOTALLY fails on that front; (JJ Abrams, incidently, arguably the best). This is relevant because the "70s" comment hints at a era that made progress on two fronts, not just one.

Beth is just passionate about the subject. All in accordance, raise your hands and say yea. You go, girl!

Oh, do not bring up Michael Bay! "Gets a pass?!" What?! His films are top offenders. The only nice thing I can say about Michael Bay is that he has nice hair. LOL! And, there's no cherry picking. I don't even like cherries. Haha! Best to you guys!

Just keeping it real and bringing the love, Harold! Great thread! I do love a great discussion. :)

Another reason to despise him.

It's not that Michael Bay gets a pass. It's that sexism, specifically heterosexual forms of male hierarchies in general and misogyny in particular, are basically intrinsic to the big budget action genre, so the idea of a Jurrasic Whatever or a X-Men 35 (it's called X-Men for crying out loud!) NOT showing sexism at least in some scenes would be a straight-up miracle. Michael Bay doesn't get a pass from me, but my point is that it doesn't matter because he makes bank and, unfortunately, so will JW even after flaunting schlock dialogue like that scene. So, for me this is kind of like going into a porn shop and asking for a loaf of bread. You can't really criticize their baguettes because THOSE AREN'T BAGUETTES!!!

Michael Bay has received harsh criticism, not just from the public but from the industry as well. Money as an excuse, or reason, for misogyny and sexually objectifying girls and women as being "okay" is extremely offensive, even more so when is it marketed to children.

Yes, great points about racial offenses too. I boycott anything and everything Michael Bay.

Jeffrey, sorry, but you're missing the bigger picture here with such a myopic view of the issues. Most of us have said we do individually choose not to watch or buy something if we do not support it artistically or otherwise -- that's not censorship, that's personal choice. Perhaps you should read the thread in its entirety, there was much more discussed than this little side conversation about Michael Bay.

Looks like Jeffrey has left us.

I think there is an over-reaction here, I saw the scene in question and can't fathom this level of discussion - WHAT I SAW is average writing with equally average acting juxtaposed with average production - like it or not, there are people that would react like these two characters, it's poor and lazy writing, while that scene did nothing for me, I'm not going to rubbish the work, it's some filmmaker's vision and I respect that, I don't necessarily share that vision, so what? - re Michael Bay, again, so much criticism - I'm not a fan, but I respect the fact that he creates something that has a STRONG market and appeals to a particular audience - I've heard terrible things said about Furious 7 and it has grossed over a billion - FACT, there is a market that is willing to pay to see films of this "QUALITY" - I don't like fast food, but it is an industry that capers to a large market, as these films cater to a large audience.

Christopher Nolan is one who uses women as plot devices and never really explores the character with depth. I'm not a big fan of Nolan (aside from Batman) and this is one of the reasons why. It is apparent in all of his films.

Liam, glad you mentioned Nolan, I'm not a fan, don't enjoy his films, but they have been successful, so what do I know.

Hmm... not convinced that's always the case Liam, I thought Scarlet Johansson's character in The Prestige had more depth than is initially apparent and for a comic adaptation I thought Cotillard and Hathway were both well drawn in Dark Knight Rises... then again I love Nolan so may be biased ;-)

I'd hate to be a woman in one of Nolan's films.

I think if Nolan didn't feature THE ABSOLUTE BEST MALE ACTORS at basically their career peaks you might think that his male characters were also a touch cookiecutter. His films are brilliant because he turns the blockbuster action genre into a puzzle, less rollercoaster more labyrinth and maze. His characters are all just Victorian stock: tortured men and tragic women, stocks also favored by Burton, only much, much more naturalistically with Nolan.

Lets go back to simple psychology differences the Female Venus and the Male Mars.It's not stereotypic difference but real way of life and thinking of the 2 genders.Let' s describe the male caracter as a straight one difficult to change and the female all adaptation and empathy.The first doesn't have menses and babies the second whatever strong she has not his voice not his muscles and not his penis without missing all that as much as Freud would have like to think Writing about a male is starting by these basics as well as for female caracters and making them want and fight until the end.A male caracter will be as strong as a female as we writers decide them to be and to become. Or as feable as we wish. I WISH SOME PRODUCER WILL DECIDE TO DO MY" TWO WOMEN"(finalist at the 2015Creative World Award competition)and ...I am a female strong caracter ,says my male husband.

ugh you did not just bring up Mars and Venus. If anything did damage to our cause it's the pile of shite.

Every single word was accurate I'm sorry to annouce you.The difference between you and me is that at my age it is not a defect and an accusation against men or women but a starting point to go on as best as possible essentially in our script.I was a professor in Pathology with 4 kids at home and always was looking at myself as a valuable human being with many differences but also advantages compared to my fellow working men and fathers.I hope that my grown children understood that without lengthy monologue but just by acting authentically in my life and in my scripts nowdays."Women are the future of men "wrote a famous french poete. We are stuck together.

Wow. How did I miss this topic? CJ and Beth pretty much said everything I feel about the topic, so I have nothing to add. Michael Bay has a ton of foul themes to his films, but he's like a McDonald's meal. It's terrible for me, but even if it's just once a year, I HAVE to have it. I enjoy his nonsense. It's thoroughly entertaining in my opinion. There are people who actually dislike Christopher Nolan's work? I understand a film or two, but the majority? Oh, what fame can do to brilliant people...

CJ's "characters in a realistic vein" comment resonates with Blake Snyder's "shard of glass" advice in his STC books. Kinda like Indiana Jones being afraid of snakes... "I hate snakes Jake!" Jakes reply, "Ah, c'mon, show a little backbone eh?" (in Raiders of the Lost Ark)

I think there is a lot of confusion about the Bechdel Test. It is not a test it is a bar, a very low bar about a basic human thing that happens a trillion times a day yet almost never makes it into mainstream movies. "Women talking to other women not about the topic of men." How can such a basic human occurrence be so greatly avoided in film. It's like declaring that all women in movies must only have one eye. The Bechdel test is a statement of how poor the development of females characters are in a movie if it cannot meet the bare minimum of human female behavior. This means a vast number of scenes featuring women are false and defy human logic. Don't try to pass the test. Try to raise the bar. Also someone on this thread very smartly mentioned that it does not work if a man tries to write a woman from a man's perspective. It just turns out awkward like a turtle with a giraffe head. I once read that the reason women are written so much better in the movies from the 40s and 50s is because male writers would go and ask the women around the studio their thoughts on female characters. Go rent His Girl Friday and watch the back and forth between Cary Grant and Rosiland Russell. She gives as good as she gets. Russell had a lot of input of her character. There is nothing these days I would compare it to. As for the Jurrasic World clip some things I noticed: women are from the same planet as men; when Chris Pratt makes a crack about going into his cabin chiding her about sex the answer is yes we can go into your cabin for sex. You're smokin' hot. Women have sex drives and occasional impure thoughts yet there is no sign that Bryce Dallas Howard has ever heard of sex or sexual innuendo until Pratt brings it up. I see that a million times in movies. Even when a scene calls for strippers it's like they're dancing half naked all over a man's lap yet simultaneously somehow they've not ever heard of sex or have a thought or opinion about it like a blow up doll. Another pet peeve when only men write women is it is never apparent in movies these days that women sometimes find men tiresome and annoying. In the Jurassic World clip Howard stands around way longer than necessary in order for Pratt to reel of his snappy one-liners. She even at certain points stands right into his eye line in order for him to smart off. Who does that? Nobody. There is a really great scene (among many) in All About Eve where Bette Davis is woken in the middle of the night with a call from her husband. After he relays his message she tells him she is sleeping and hangs up the phone. I don't think I've ever seen a scene so bluntly state from a woman to a man that yes I have other things going on other than you. In this case a basic human need such as sleep. I think there was a question about improving the Jurassic World clip. I would start by making her a human from planet earth (unless of course she is not actually human and has been regenerated like the rest of the dinosaurs). I've gone on too long, glad to get a chance to vent. Great topic of conversation, thanks.

Again, really great thread! I've always appreciated the Mars/Venus comparison as it taps into psychological differences between the sexes, but I also find it to be damaging, too polarizing. These days, it's perhaps too limiting. Again, the mistake of taking a simplified concept to explain something that is much more complex. The truth is WE, society, have a perception problem. Culture over centuries, over decades, over years, generation after generation, has been built by "heteropatriarchy" and its "phallocentric" institutions -- including the film industry. WE tend to view the world through "male" heterosexual perception, which has long been the norm, the default, the usual, the easily accepted. The idea, or persona, of "women" has been forged through this historic lens and constrained by long-standing societal perceptions. Unfortunately, this has done women, and the world, a huge disservice. Likewise, female characters have been confined in these small perceptual cultural "boxes" too. Yes, absolutely, we are more alike than we are different!!!! Now, that similarity is finally being better explored in film, even more so in TV. :) Male characters are becoming more emotional human beings. But, the truth is our world perceptions are different. They just are. I'm walking around looking out as a Caucasian American woman and viscerally experiencing how the world reacts to me. Perceives me. Interacts with me. That experience shapes my world view, which, of course, would be different than a man's perception and experience with the world. Filtering that notion through one's writing can add much needed authenticity. So, the more WE alter OUR perception and think about each other and our characters as complex, INDIVIDUAL personalities the better and the more exciting our characters and stories become. Male or female, each character should have their own reason for being and be pushed beyond these societal constraints! Break these damn molds and create truly great characters! :) Speaking of which, I've been watching "Daredevil" on Netflix and while I'm disappointed with the lack of female characters and lack of depth (the few seem a little underdeveloped), I'm really enjoying the friendship between best friends, Foggy and Matt. Fun banter aside, these two friends truly care and love each other. They've been friends for a long time and are a huge part of each other's lives, part of their own sense of self. Usually, when heterosexual men's friendships are tested in film/TV it's over a woman. Or, maybe, they're being emotional and teary because they lost a friend/soldier in battle. Or, for some other extreme "outside" reason. But these guys show deep hurt over each other, nothing else. It's refreshing. Touching. I loved it. :)

Tresa, yeah, so true... Women often DO find men tiresome and annoying. Haha!!

http://www.pajiba.com/celebrities_are_better_than_you/joss-whedon-apolog...

Oh, we passed the Bechdel Test, CJ. Lyse and I had some conversation about the Jurassic World scene and about posting a web site url. WHEW! ...Yeah, you know I'm in complete agreement with you about the failings of that ridiculous "test." Anyway, great point about female writers being on shaky ground criticizing male writers about their creation of authentic female roles as, yes, the door certainly does open both ways. It is extremely challenging for women to write men; men to write women. For me, it doesn't matter. I find ALL characters difficult and challenging to write. ;)

Thanks, man. I really appreciate it. Means a lot coming from you, CJ. I have nothing but high praise for your work. ;)

I briefly discussed this topic with my wife, whose own personality leans toward the Alpha female type, and/but likes to be feminine (nice clothes, hair, makeup), regarding this topic. Asked her if she thought it unrealistic the way women are portrayed, regarding those who have random sex and flaunt their bodies. She said; generally no, because there are women out there who act this way in real life. As far as the portrayal of tough chicks, she prefers those like Ripley and Vasquez in Aliens. Rather than the vulgar, over-masculinized types. She also doesn't like the stupid, screamers as many are portrayed in horror movies. Looks like the comments are winding down. Thanks to all who participated in this thread. I'm sure it will continue to be a debatable topic.

There can be top class heroine centeric scripts. I have one for the world wide audience to leave a civilized world to our own children, to Eradicate Malnutrition & the Cuase producing it in a democratic way. If men have strong arms muscles to hit others to be heroes then heroine have brilliant thoughts to trap and the evils. Thank you, I am K.S.Nagarajan. Have a well researched facts based script for world wide audience looking for a producer/actor producer please.

So Joss Whedon got chased off Twitter because folks thought his action film was sexist: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-32591260 I'm going to reiterate my very first point and suggest folks not looking for gender stereotypes and misogyny try entertaining other forms of cinema than the Special Effects-Riddled Action Summer Blockbuster Based on a Comic Book. Cries and Whispers is one of my favs. Vivra Sa Vie is also pretty amazing.

A case of the pot calling the kettle black?

Umm, Joss Whedon was not chased off Twitter, but rather, as quoted from the article; "Comedian and actor Patton Oswalt ACCUSED them [Whedon's critics] of having 'chased Joss Whedon off Twitter.'" Joss Whedon just closed his Twitter account. That's it. There are influences on the new Avengers film that were outside of Joss Whedon's direction and control -- that would be the franchise and world of MARVEL.

Joss got a taste of what it was like to be a film critic.

Mother hood is the VIRTUE of every feminine. So if a film has young girls and boys attracted scenes then it should equally project the Mother hood VIRTUE, the Love of mother is essential tool to leave a civilized society too to be a socially responsible cinema. Thank you, Yours sincerely, K.S.Nagarajan. Chennai, India.

stereotypes exist because they are true. all we want is for the broader range of types pf women to be portrayed as well. i think things are improving.