The Radical Notion That Women Are People Too: Sexism Among SPN Fans

[chasingtides]

Sexism in Supernatural, and its ensuing debate, is old news. I wrote my own meta, drawing on my experiences as a hardened horror fan, about it in September, Why Supernatural Is Like The Evil Dead. However, today, in light of what has happened with Misha Collins and his character, Castiel, I might revise that original opinion, I regret to say. More on that later.

Despite the talk about the show itself being sexist, I've never seen anyone look specifically at the sexism and misogyny present among the primarily female fans. Taking a number of things into consideration, from what has happened with Misha Collins and Castiel to the recent wank about an actor's girlfriend daring to exist, I think it's high time that someone did.

If you watched the embedded video above, you watched three actors from the show (Misha Collins, Jensen Ackles, and Jared Padalecki) and their interviewer discuss the blatant sexism in the fandom. I, for one, am embarrassed that I fall, broadly, into the same category as these misogynists.

A quick perusal of Fandom Wank (a source, which, while wanky, is a great place to find an overview of the worst of any fandom) shows us people in this fandom getting upset over (and at) women for years. We get gems like (2007-2-19) fans going after women (ex girlfriends) associated with the actors, (2007-7-12) fans getting angry that two women (Bela and Ruby) would appear in season three, (2007-11-16) people getting angry that an underage actress dares to drink and put the show into disrepute, (2008-1-21) someone is called out for bashing (literally) women in her fanfiction, and (2009-3-31) people getting angry that an actor's girlfriend exists.

Television Without Pity and its associated forums also carry their own anti-female baggage. Ruby is known as Gluby (a name smush, I have been told, of Glinda - of good witch fame - and Ruby). Of Ruby, people write things like, "I'm not going to cheer just because the character wore an expression, for once," "She tries to tell us that she is into the method acting. I wish she wasn't. You really need a talent to transfer it from your mind to outside, in her case she only stuffs her head with wild ideas," "That scene gave off way too many Ruby is too speshul to kill vibes for me," and, "What I saw was that they know about her and are waiting for her to have enough rope to hang herself." It continues with the other women. Anna gets, "It's the casting and the acting that makes Anna into such a wasted opportunity," and Jo gets, "I think if she'd been played by someone who actually looked like an adult, the character would have been far less irritating." although one fan adds, "if she were to come back as a hunter, an ally and possibly kill Gluby once and for all, I'd throw her a parade."

I debated naming names, but why should I hesitate? If you think I have interpreted your posts/language/fanfiction/meta wrongly, feel free to let me know. I am only human. If we have a discussion and you show me that I am wrong, I will change this.

The fans on LiveJournal aren't any better than the TWoP fans.

huntress69 bashes, sometimes literally, the female characters in her fiction. I remember, quite vividly, being new to fandom and reading the fic in which Sam drugs Cassie and buries her alive to keep her away from Dean. Cassie appeared in one episode in season one and was never mentioned again. I don't mean to suggest that huntress69 is unique by naming her. She is not, by any means. She is merely someone I remember clearly. Consider her an example of a genre, rather than a unique outlier.

dean_sam gets more than its share of misogyny, one of the reasons I took it off my flist. spnstoryfinders periodically gets requests for fics bashing female characters. There's the impression, in many communities, and even in personal journals, that one must clarify why or how one likes a female character. "I like Jo, but not as a love interest." "I like Ruby, but not when she was snarky."

In addition, Misha Collins threw a monkey wrench into our sexist habits. He, in my mind, takes away our excuses, negates our ability to turn a blind eye to our own internalised hatred. Before, we were able to say, "Oh, they hate anyone who takes away from Sam and Dean." If Misha is to be believed in his interviews, the Powers that Be said the same thing. They warned him that, as a guest star, he would be reviled. Instead, he has become beloved. I know. I co-mod mishaland, a rapidly growing caplock community devoted to him. And yet, we continue to revile the female characters and actresses. TPTB listened to our hatred and to our outcries. Misha Collins will be returning next season as Castiel, something that no female guest star has done. Yes, this is sexism on the part of TPTB who shouldn't do this. But the blame falls to us - we are the ones who raised the hue and cry. We are the ones who demanded to be heard.

Do I blame Misha Collins for this? No. No more than I blame Alona Tal for the fact that Jo, my personal hero, has not returned to the show. No more than I blame Kate Cassidy for being replaced by Genevieve Cortese. This blame falls to us.

This also creates a problematic binary in the fandom. Either you are for the women or you are against the women. It becomes difficult to dislike a character or an actress and not be painted with the same brush as those who have Cassie buried alive. I, for one, am not a fan of Genevieve Cortese and her Ruby. However, I greatly hesitate to say that, though I love many other female characters who have graced the screen, for saying that I find Cortese's acting to be flat is tantamount to misogyny.

This false binary is just as unfair as the great misogyny. We are, contrary to popular belief, allowed to dislike characters based on what their characters do and don't do. (I, for one, find the whole demon blood drinking bit to be more stomach turning than anything else in the show, probably for cultural signifiers.)

It also grows difficult to separate the characters from the fandom. Is Castiel, and his actor by extension, a part of the clamor of fans who love him and slam the women, presumably on the value of what's between their legs? Is Ruby, and her actress by extension, a part of the crowd that labels you sexist if you suggest that you don't like her acting? Or can we accept the characters as separate from that? Are we able to separate the actors from their characters? Does it all blend into a giant ball of hatred, anger, and wank?

I don't know the answer to this. I know that I am becoming more and more selective in the communities I read and erring ever closer to going exclusively capslock, though it seems almost irrational to go to capslock communities to avoid hatred and irrationality to an outsider. I become hesitant in friending people. I also hesitated to write this meta. I know that it will cause problems. I've been planning this for months, but it was seeing the YouTube video that spurred me on.

Whatever the answers are, whatever reasons we have or don't have, this has got to have an ending point. We are women tearing down women. We are calling women whores and sluts and worse, for what? Daring to grace our television screens? Most of these women kick ass and take names. For the most part, they're awesome (Bela's backstory and Ruby's current apparent subservience aside). Why can't we, as presumably awesome women ourselves, appreciate that?

Comments

[crimsonkitty88.livejournal.com]

I barely go on any of the comms for the reasons you've stated. I just... don't want to deal with it. All the stupidity and just blatant sexism and hate and ridiculousness.

*sigh*

(I loved Jo too btw. high five!)

[moonvoice.livejournal.com]

This is interestingly written and raises a lot of salient points. As an outsider looking into the SPN fandom, it really does seem like a lot of anti-feminism going on, especially when contrasted with something like the Buffy fandom which by contrast attracted (and attracts) a lot of hardcore feminists and gender egalitarians.

It's kind of a shame, and I wonder if it's possible for TPTB to undo the damage that they've done. They've set themselves up for a fandom that is not open to long-term, female characters. And really, the scriptwriters have themselves to blame for so much of it. They get the audience - in the very first few episodes of the series - used to strong, lonely men who are used to seeing their women brutally killed (the mother, the girlfriend). Women were set up in the first hours of the show to be malicious or non-lasting characters. The very first villain in the show, is a woman who uses her sexuality to brutally kill men, and who is a poor mother figure. The other mother figure who is seemingly a positive influence is absent and dead.

I imagine media analysts are having a field day with this kind of stuff - not least, the popularity of SPN among female fans despite fairly blatant misogyny entrenched within the actual show itself.

[crimsonkitty88.livejournal.com]

Another quick thought

There's the impression, in many communities, and even in personal journals, that one must clarify why or how one likes a female character. "I like Jo, but not as a love interest."

That's kind of funny because I find myself having to do the same thing with Castiel. If you don't ship Castiel with Dean, you obviously don't understand their relationship.

Yeah. Whatever.

I love Cas but not with Dean. Same as I loved Jo and the first Ruby just not invloved romantically with either of the boys. I'm too much of a Sam/Dean girl to see anything else.

(And now it sounds like I'm trying to say something in my own defense. THat's really not what this is about. Not at all. I really don't know how to respond to anything without adding my own experiences into the mix and sometimes that comes out a bit... narcisstic? yeah...)

[ibroketuesday.livejournal.com]

We are calling women whores and sluts and worse, for what?

This is what gets me. Dislike Ruby? Dislike Anna, Jo, whoever? Fine, I don't care. But I see, so often, insults like whore, skank, slut, manipulative bitch, etc etc - all of this based on truly ridiculous stuff. For example, Anna's sex scene with Dean. I will never understand why reaching out to Dean in a time when both were in danger of being killed and were in need of comfort makes her a manipulative skank. These fans go beyond disliking a character. They vilify them to ridiculous degrees.

It's utterly unsurprising, really, that male characters would be more successful in a female-majority fandom, because a part of character affinity is based on sexual attraction. Characters you're attracted to are automatically more interesting, you're willing to give them more of a chance, etc etc etc. You might even be biased in their favor from the get-go. I've actually had favorite characters who I didn't see as hot initially, but I always wound up feeling attraction as they advanced in my affections. In that vein, it's nothing remarkable that fans, by and large, welcomed Castiel with open arms. What is remarkable is the rampant, outright hate for the female characters. They aren't appreciated even on a non-rabid fanworship level, they aren't tolerated, they aren't even ignored. They are loathed on a freakishly large scale. I cannot go anywhere in fandom without encountering bashing.

There are a lot of factors that contribute to this, I think; fans are possessive of their ships (Sam/Dean, Castiel/Dean) and feel that the women - who could canonically become love interests - threaten them; fans are used to the show being only SamnDean and hate anyone else butting in (I have also seen Castiel bashing because of this); the women don't get the get out of jail free card that being sexually attractive to the fans gives the hot males; and, yes, there is an element of sexism, and it's exacerbated by all of the above. It becomes especially apparent, as previously mentioned, when hurling insults and getting those hated characters down any way possible. I guess that must be the sociological product of a sexist society, manifesting in the gender it hurts. *sigh*

I've been thinking a little about what would have happened if Cas had been played by a (talented) female actress, and she'd probably be dead by now. But Dean/Castiel would've become canon first. That's a fannish problem and a writerly problem. Fans react with instinctive vitriol against any female presence on the show, unless there's no way she'll be around much or will sleep with any of the boys (no one has any problems with Ellen, Missouri, Pamela - yeah, dude, 'cause they're obviously never gonna be love interests! And also they're awesome, but fuck, so is Ruby, and mostly, so is Anna). Looking at what happened when Anna was introduced, Dean met her one episode and they had sex the next. Why? Why couldn't it have been platonic, writers? And built up organically? Don't you know that's how you draw people into relationships? That's probably another reason that Castiel wouldn't be so popular if he'd been a woman; people would just be like "Oh la, when will Dean sleep with the pretty angel?" and they'd be right, and it would be boring. And even if it were an exact mirror of their current canon relationship, it would have shippers - hell, I'd probably be one - but not to the extent it does now. But I don't think that's sexism so much as a simple slash preference in fandom exerting itself. The widespread bashing of lady!Cas certainly would be sexist, though. And now I think I'm digressing. I should go to bed.

[fannishliss.livejournal.com]

I for one am very uncomfortable when I see the women characters slammed with derogatory epithets. I remember at wincon how the critique against Dean as a misogynist was at least partly based on his calling Ruby a skank -- and yet I've seen fans use the term too too often.

To be fair, I think that women fans can be angered by stereotypical women characters, and I think that's fair for them to air their anger. On the one hand you have angry real live women, and on the other hand, mere fictional characters who are products of writers, a storyline, and a TV production system.... anger is displaced onto actors, who, as women, conform to the culturally constructed beauty myth, and who are cast and directed to conform to certain expectations....

I guess what I've seen firsthand is smart women applying a strong feminist critique against the show and finding the female characters coming up wanting time after time. (I personally have argued the other way, and I think gender politics on the show is fairly sophisticated -- I'm willing to argue!)

Because as fans, we LOVE samndean, so that even if we are troubled by sexist behaviors on their part, we still keep watching the show.... then Misha comes one and is very pretty and we love him too! but when Bela or Ruby or Anna come on, we immediately begin to argue about how their characters are predictable and flat and how the women's acting sucks. (Of course, a lot of fans HAVE actually not enjoyed the bringing on Angels... Misha hasn't caught wind of that yet I suppose.)

Maybe Castiel IS predictable and flat... but it doesn't bother us because it's not just one more depiction of someone sharing our gender, with the same stereotypical traits and flaws we've seen so often.....

So, I do think we should be concerned that Jared and Jensen and Misha look at fandom and see us as ''sexist against ourselves" -- I hope it makes people at least consider WHY they hate the women they hate..... but as a feminist, I just can't write off the ALL anger as internalized misogyny either.

When a show like Dollhouse actually tries to openly talk about how women are sexualized, it tries to talk about identity as a construct, it tries to talk about the resilience and ingenuity of a woman stripped almost completely bare -- Fen still don't like it. oh well.

[chasingtides.livejournal.com]

The name calling really bothers me, especially when it extends to the actors playing the part. (I, for one, actually call Dean an ethical slut - and I do actually mean it in a good way - but I wouldn't think to call Jensen a slut.)

Honestly, my biggest issues with the female characters is when they're given their backstories. I loved Ruby and Bela until I learned that they had these sob stories - they're supposed to be the little sisters we need to care for. But... that's me wanting to have kick-ass women who are kick-ass for kick-ass sake. It hurts me a bit when I see fans slamming the women who don't have the sob story background (Anna, Jo, Ellen, Missouri).

I think part of the problem - the reason I am not saying, "Oh, we're discussing problems with the show," - is that the fans write off the women BEFORE they appear or just as they appear. In the fandom wank section of my meta, I showed women bashed Ruby and Bela before they ever showed up on screen. Characters like Jo and Anna gained strength as characters after an episode or two - which makes sense (Castiel, John, and Bobby were not strong in their first appearances).

When we write off women without ever giving them a chance, we are being irrationally misogynist. When we aren't giving forum to discuss the potential problems and strengths of the female characters, we are being irrationally misogynist. I really don't know how else to view it. Perhaps there are places where women are being discussed - other than the capslock forums - but I have not seen them, outside of their relationship to men.

I have many, many issues with the Dollhouse, especially in the idea that they say that they are trying to show us that this is badwrongbad, but all I see when I watch the show is them trying to show me how hot it is. I don't see it as a discussion of the sexualisation of women, but as an example of it. (Given, I stopped watching after... episode seven? because it was being highly problematic to me and not worth it.)

[gembat.livejournal.com]

Thank you for writing this. Just... thank you. <3

And just because you mentioned it, I've never been a member of the main comms, which is probably why it took so long for me to get into fandom at large, as it were. I'm basically exclusively capslock, and it's awesome. I've never interacted with any of the misogynistic fans on a personal level, so you know. It's not the worst thing in the world to consider.

[chasingtides.livejournal.com]

Yeah. I've started modding over at impalabackseat, which is attempting to be a sane place. Beyond that, at the moment, I'm pretty much either capslock or in fic comms. Or spnstoryfinders, even though they scar my brain.

[isaacsapphire.livejournal.com]

This covers pretty well one of the reasons that I'm a bit shy of this fandom. My RL experience suggests that women are in fact more misogynistic on average than men and fandom seems to confirm it. (eg. woman at work needs something heavy off of a high shelf. She asks me to get a man. I go get a ladder. She is shocked. The guys don't do this usually and tend to be more susceptible to logic when they do "There's no one else to do it." Guy says, "Can I help?" I say, "Thanks but no thanks, lawyers. It's not as bad as it looks." Woman repeats, "You shouldn't do this, go get a man." while I get the item and hand it to her/put it in her cart.)

I do wonder if the mitigating powers of sexual attraction has something to do with it. I like most of the female characters (Jo, Ellen, and Bella in particular), but I'll admit that I'm bi and a lot of them are cute, which doesn't explain everything. However, I really didn't like Anna OR Castiel and I'm kind of baffled by how much people like Castiel. Maybe it's just all the (more ethical) slash fans wanted a non-RPS, non-incest pair so bad they'd jump at anything?

One thing, I'm newer, but how the heck was Pamala not viewed as a "threat"? She openly hit on both of the boys, Dean was looking, and she wasn't hideous or old.

[chasingtides.livejournal.com]

I'm not entirely sure how Pamela wasn't a threat. By the same note, I also don't see how Jo was. I wasn't in fandom at the time, but it seems pretty clear to me, when I watched the episodes, that nothing would happen between then.

Maybe sexual attraction does play a part. I'm pansexual, so maybe I'm just too attracted to the attractive male and female characters or something. However, I mostly go, "Hey, strong character I can relate to! Awesome!" so I don't know that my sexuality plays a huge part. (Admittedly, though, I have a massive fictional-character crush on Jo. But that's because she's awesome. *nods sagely* And I definitely wasn't feeling any attraction Bela or Ruby last season, but I liked them then.)

[mresundance.livejournal.com]

I have little to add except: yes, this.

The show itself is pretty sexist at points. But the way the fans contribute to it is appalling. They never seem happy with any female character, regardless of how smart and competent she is. Jo interferes too much with the boys so she has to go. Nevermind that she's smart, sassy, and has a natural talent for hunting. Bella outfoxes them and makes them look like chumps (and rightly so), so she's a "bitch" and has to go. Nevermind that she's savvy, self-motivated and independent and no damsel in distress.

Ruby is too "mean" when Cassidy played her (ie, a bitch, again), and has to go. Nevermind that she is a seriously badass women and seriously awesome in her moral ambiguities. Cortese's Ruby is too "flat" so she has to go. Never mind that she is still pretty awesome and her ambiguities are now all over the place.

Nothing that the writers can do will ever please some members of fandom. I am not always happy with the women characters - particularly if Sera Gamble writes them. She seems to write some of the weirdest, most contradictory and unrealistic women of the series (women who attempt to come off as "empowered" but then just end up being relegated to "Winchester sex conquest" kind of status, or "damsel in distress"; blargh). But, yes. Fandom is a big ol' chunk of it. It is not just Mr. Kripke or Sera or the producers or whatnot.

[pandarus.livejournal.com]

Aw, your ICON. I don't think Joss is quite as Feminist as he thinks he is, but I still think he fucking rocks.

[pandarus.livejournal.com]

Crumbs. Okay, I'm feeling very lucky not to have frequented those communities, and conscious of being a bit out-of-the-loopy. I was aware that the show had its squicky gender issues, and that slash fandom in general has a grisly tendancy to be misogynist - and I've been aware of negativity toward Ruby and Anna, because plenty of comments to my stories have been along the lines of "yours is the only Ruby I like!" etc. (Er - that sounds a bit self-congratulatory, but I just mean that feedback has been tempered with that whole rather bemusing '...but in general I think she's a cow' thing.) But I didn't realise it was as extreme as this.

But I believe you. I've not had any particular inclination to join communities for anything other than fanfic, and you've certainly confirmed me in that!

fwiw, I loved the hell out of Ellen and Jo; I thought Cassie was fine (but the actress's delivery wasn't all it could have been, imho); I thoroughly enjoyed Bela (and had no problems with her backstory, actually, although I know that's controversial); and I've enjoyed both Rubies, although I think Katie Cassidy's was better than Gen's version. (...but Gen gets brownie points from me for shallow and obvious reasons, because - guh.) OMG, and Pamela was FAB. Poor Pamela. And Anna - I liked the first episode quite a bit, and the second half of the story a LOT. Bringing her back for 4.16 was great, though - I really enjoyed what we saw of her there. I'd like to see more glimpses of her badassery, but generally speaking I'm good with her.

Reading through the comments here is quite disheartening. I don't move in circles where people slag off characters, particularly not in this casually misogynistic way, and this is making me want to hug my little corner of the internet.

Um...what do you mean by "Capslock community"?

[fannishliss.livejournal.com]

well, for example, I'm in this crazy comm called fuckyeahruby. It's called a capslock community cause you have to CAPSLOCK ALL THE TIME. If you wank they throw you out. It's pure crack over there tho.
"Sam is in a cage cause he IS BITCHIER THAN RUBY." would be an example!!

[watchsnowfall.livejournal.com]

Huh. Being new to LJ and pretty much completely outside of Fandom besides MISHALAND and Fandom!Secrets, I had no idea for the longest time some fans disliked the women so much.
I mean....I've always wanted to be the female characters, not replace them. I was pretty stoked when I found out Bela and Ruby would join the show, because I've always been a fan of strong females, and woman-of-the-week was tiring (although I was never really a Jo fan...go figure).
I don't know, it's tough to say. Sometimes I feel like the actresses are just chosen for how skinny they are, regardless of talent. That's obviously society's problem, just not Supernatural. We've grown up in a place that makes it okay to comment and be snarky, and if you couple that with internet anonymity and non-accountability, it's ridiculousness galore.
I also feel like some fans forget - they don't know J2. No matter how many interviews we read and watch, pictures we stare at or conventions we go to, no matter how much J2 fic we write, we don't know the actual people because J2 is performing all the time. Kinda like in 4x18 when that publisher was like "I don't need anyone making fun of my boys."
That's thing about fandom. Despite disclaimers, people feel like they've come to own people who aren't real.

I know you from MISHALAND and got here from gembat's journal, hope that's okay. =)

[oatmeal-queen.livejournal.com]

I really liked the organization of this post. You pulled in a great deal of examples that are unfortunately well-known to a lot of the more sane fans in this fandom, and also brought to light some things I hadn't even heard about (yet). It's true, there is a great deal of female-character bashing from the outside perspective of those who are not interested in Show. We have become hypocritical stereotypes of ourselves with the actions of few compared to the amount of viewers that Show actually has.

What I find the most unfortunate about this issue, however, is the fact that I don't really feel like the fandom as a whole is as vicious and fanatical as we may appear. I, for one, pick and choose characters I like based on (wait for it) their characterizations. I know I'm not alone in this, but the difference between those of us who judge rationally and those who don't, are the noise they make.

I'm not an avid poster in communities. I don't voice my opinion all that often and tend to glance over the general posting of irritations, bitchings and all around wanking in favor of more interesting things. I'm also guilty of not commenting very often to the fic I read, but that doesn't mean that I don't have strong opinions about what I like and dislike, especially when it comes to the characters.
Knowing this, and recognizing that the odds of me being alone in how i feel are slim to none. it allows me to glance over the misogynistic and ludicrous fan spillings, and -not -use them as a base example to my fandom.

My voice does not reach the press, the writers, the directors or the cast because I don't voice it. Even if I did, those kinds of rationales are more than often swallowed. I see no reason to leap into an argument that will get me nowhere, as do many other silent lurkers. On the other hand, because those who are so loudly opinionated usually do have these tendencies to hate and wank and gang up on others publicly, they are the image that presents itself of -us- as a whole.

Some female characters I like, some I don't. The same works with the male ones. I'm guilty of slashing Dean/Cas, but that doesn't mean I didn't sit there and watch Dean/Anna with a great big grin on my face. The actors aren't their characters, they have relationships and marriages and families that have nothing to do with me or Show, so it's none of my business. Doesn't mean I don't blush and stutter like a moron when I get to meet them in person.

I am not the minority of this fandom; the noiseless are, in fact, the majority. If you look at it this way, the misogynists and the haters and the wankers/whiners are only representing the fandom as a whole because they are the only voices that can be heard. The rest of us, well, we are wisely keeping our peace.

but that's just my opinion X)

[chasingtides.livejournal.com]

Oh, I agree. Not everyone is a woman-bashing hater in this fandom. This post and the comments are example enough of that. And there are communities where bashing is either unusual or not tolerated (like the capslock ones).

However, it does become problematic when they're the only ones talking - or the only ones being heard. How does the old saying go? All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. Perhaps the wrong gender and too religious, but the right memo.

[marycontraire.livejournal.com]

This is a frustration I've had with this fandom since season two, when the Jo wank erupted. Personally, I love Jo. I was really, really hoping that she would stick around and become a recurring character. Ever since then, I have barely read any fanfiction for this fandom, even though it's clearly the show I'm most fannish-ly involved with. But there are so many communities I feel like I need to avoid because of all of the wank and misogyny.

And Jo is not the only female character I've been disappointed to lose. Whatever happened to Ellen? And I know I'm very alone in thinking this, but I really loved Bela.

It really makes me wonder if there is something unique to the show itself-- to the writing, to the world it has created-- that brings this out in us. Because I don't think that Supernatural fans are by and large people who dislike women on television. I know I will watch and enjoy pretty much any show about girls "kicking ass and taking names"-- Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Veronica Mars, Firefly, The Sarah Connor Chronicles. I love seeing strong women on television. I love seeing girls kick guys' asses.

It's old news that Supernatural, as a show, is very much an exploration of masculinity, and what it means to "be a man," particularly in the United States of America. If the Winchester boys are the answer to that question, masculinity seems to involve physical violence and a lot of guns, being able to fix your own car, taking care of your family at all costs, and, apparently, drinking away your nightmares instead of talking about them. I think Supernatural tries to show us both the good and bad side of living up to America's masculine ideal. But where do women fit into this hyper-masculine world? And do we want them to?

[chasingtides.livejournal.com]

Well, I'd hardly say that I think we're supposed to be looking at season four Sam and Dean as people we want to be. They're broken, unhappy people this season. And I do think it's an interesting commentary that they turn to drugs - alcohol and demon blood - to deal with it. Perhaps in such a masculine world, we need women more than ever.

(I also loved Bela until her backstory. I have so many issues with "And then she became evil because daddy molested her and she sold her soul to make it stop." That is SO problematic for me.)

[deccaboo.livejournal.com]

At first, I found it hilarious that someone could seriously hate a female character, not dislike but absolutely hate them, based on whether or not they exchanged a few words with Sam and/or Dean. I mean, look at Jo Harvelle. She had a crush on Dean, she never voiced it, he never really acknowledged it, they never slept together and for his own personal reasons, Dean kept Jo at arms' length...yet her character is roundly despised. Cassie is hated with a passion and she is never mentioned again. She was just a one-episode wonder...and anyone destroying Cassie in fanfiction is obsessing over a character who means nothing in the grand scheme of things and would be much better placed venting their spleen on more important matters.

If you look at it from the outside it's bonkers. As I now look at it from the inside it is actually a lot more subversive and permeating than I originally thought. I now find it disgusting that many fans treat female guest stars so badly and it is another level of line-crossing entirely when someone's real romantic life is brought into it too.

However, I don't think TPTB help the situation either. I get the strong impression that female characters are brought in to redress the balance in this overly male show, only for TPTB to crumble at the slightest fan resistance. If they had any faith in their characters, their story and their casting at all, they would plough ahead and get on with the story to be told. I was very upset to discover that Katie Cassidy would not be returning as Ruby and I think that fan venom had a great deal to do with recasting that character for season 4. Clearly Ruby has a purpose in the show, otherwise she would be completely written out, like Jo, like Ellen...but she had to be recast because of the awful, awful people who can't reconcile that it is ok to hate a character, but not ok to hate the actor who is bringing them to life.

The other issue is sexuality. I am admittedly bisexual and there are very few men I am actually attracted to, so perhaps that has something to do with why I am more interested in female characters, want to see more of them and care what happens to them? Is the 'internalised misogyny' a het fan thing, or does it bleed into the other parts of the spectrum too? Do gay male fans have issues with the female SPN characters, for instance?

[yourlibrarian]

I, for one, am not a fan of Genevieve Cortese and her Ruby. However, I greatly hesitate to say that, though I love many other female characters who have graced the screen, for saying that I find Cortese's acting to be flat is tantamount to misogyny.

Headnod on that one. I liked KC's Ruby, and I really don't think GC is a good actress (at least not in this role). But there's such vitriol about her that it clearly has nothing to do with her acting. Of course, I imagine it's gotten so bad because she's receiving a triple dose of criticism -- she's not a good actress, she's in a role a lot of people didn't like to begin with, and then it turns out she's an offscreen girlfriend. That must be the trifecta.

Wow, that story summary about Cassie is alarming. I sure hope it was an evil!Sam one.

[chasingtides.livejournal.com]

I wish it was an evil!Sam story. Sadly, it was a "happy Wincest" one where Dean realised the error of his (het) ways. It's really bad - but indicative of a genre.

Can't We All Just Get Along?

[reddwarfette.livejournal.com]

Good read. While the name calling can get out of hand it is perfectly acceptable for fans (both men and women) to actively dislike characters and/or the way they are portrayed. That's everyone's right to make choices in force. What really frustrates is when our (women mostly) opinions are dismissed as 'oh, she's just jealous' or 'a fangirl wanting *insert character here*' straight away.

My idea of feminism is not that I jump for joy or sing hallelujah just because there is a woman on the screen - the character, storyline and actress inform my opinion. And if I don't like them on their own merit, can't that be it? This is the same process I have for male characters and actors. Alternatively there have been characters whom through their journey have become more likable to me, e.g. Spn's Bela and on the flip side ones that through their actions or the acting have turned me off, see Angel's Fred.

It is funny that Joss and his works should be mentioned as a feminist standard when there are a lot of aspects in his work that I find insufferable particularly when it comes to female characters – and this is from a huge BtVS, Ats and Dr. Horrible fan! Then again, there are quite a few hypocritical male characters I couldn’t stand in there either. It is inevitable that when we become so emotionally invested in our chosen shows strong opinions are going to be formed.

I guess the point is that scrutiny or criticism isn’t necessarily a negative thing. It can and has created wonderful debate, meta, artworks, a catalyst of creativity for fandom when expressed respectfully. Here's hoping Spn fandom turn to this more often than persecution.

[fringelement.livejournal.com]

I think it's absolutely awesome that more fans are realizing that parts of our fandom are just as toxic as our canon. (I find it even more interesting that TPTB acknowledge the sexism in Show's fandom without, seemingly, being aware of their own - which is a whole 'nother post altogether.)

I've been in the habit of avoiding the SPN fandom at large for the very reason that it is so toxic, but I'm almost wondering if there isn't something more we can do - it's not like we can force people to read meta and think about why they hold the opinions they do, but there must be something.

[reddwarfette.livejournal.com]

Word. On tptb inability to address their own textual sexism.

[dragon-lord.livejournal.com]

Realizing that this is probably just throwing gasoline on the fire...

I really liked Jo and S3!Ruby. I wish they would bring both of those characters back. I hate S4 Ruby for one purpose, and it's not because of who the actress is, I could really care less. I think Genevieve is cute, just like Katie was, but what I despise is that TPTB took a really kick ass female character and turned her into a fucking love interest. Yeah, way to go with that femme power there. =/ It doesn't matter which show it is, whenever a female character is brought on for the sheer purpose of being a love interest, I absolutely hate the character, because more often than not, that's all they are, with no depth or personality or any real reason to like them.

[zazreil.livejournal.com]

I think that what is forgotten is that the internet does not represent the whole fandom just the a small portion, and that when someone is with a character they don't complain and they don't often remember to compliment where are the ones who are unhappy become the vocal minority. They serve a purpose but they are not the whole fandom, which is why I think that some of the actresses are pleasantly surprised at how well they are received when they attend conventions.

Also its ok to dislike a character - some are written to be disliked. So disliking Rubybeing distrustful of her actually suggests that the writers and the actress is doing a good job and delivering the message that they are supposed to.

As for myself I liked Ellen, Jo, Pamela. Ruby I think is a great character and I happily dislike her but then I think I am supposed to. I dislike Anna too - but that is because I can't help but wonder what were the consequences of her leaving her post? Its like a soldier deserting sentry duty because he wanted to go to a party, well boo hoo, he put everyone in danger with his selfishness. But then I am not sure that isn't exactly how Kripke expects me to react. The only character I really thought was badly written was Bella, I think the actress did a marvelous job with the character, and Bad Day at Black and the first half of Red Sky at Morning were brilliant,b then, instead of making her just smart, the writers made Sam and Dean stupid instead.

Oh and the real life bruhaha over the girlfriend is just silly, I would love for Jensen to bring her to every con, he is so much more relaxed and happier when she is around if you know what I mean ^_~ ^_~

Zaz

[femmenerd.livejournal.com]

Despite the talk about the show itself being sexist, I've never seen anyone look specifically at the sexism and misogyny present among the primarily female fans.

I agree with you here in this post, on almost all counts besides this one. Which is not to say that I don't think it's important to have a reminder such as this, and it's embarrassing to have one of the actors name internalized misogyny in the fandom so clearly.

But we were talking (arguing, debating) about this years ago. Alongside all of those wanks you mentioned, there were "side wanks" that sometimes verged into "SHUT UP FEMINISTS SHUT UP IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT WATCH ANOTHER SHOW." And sometimes, some equally unnuanced responses. There were many times where I felt like just making a post with both the words "supernatural" and "women" in it might be controversial.

Two Wincons ago, myself and a couple others led a panel about feminism and SPN fanfic. For the record we talked about misogyny and critical interventions both.

In general, I think SPN is read in some wildly disparate ways by different people, and that includes all those young men we don't know who are making up major CW demographics (some of whom are my students!). To quote myself from this post (http://femmenerd.livejournal.com/305408.html) of over a year ago:

I've heard it implied that SPN gets "unfairly" or disproportionately targeted within fandom in terms of gender and racial representation, especially given that these are areas where television at large tends to fail. (I'm not actually sure if this is at all true - the relative amount of critique, I mean - a lot of people on my flist are willing to make critical observations about a variety of things that they watch.) I have a couple of things to say about that: First of all, yes, our media and culture at large are threaded with racism and sexism. But, how exactly do we talk about that without bringing up specific instances? ALSO, if in fact it is true that SPN is the object of more critique than other shows, I think this might be for two seemingly contradictory reasons. 1. Maybe it's merited. 2. But ALSO, a lot of the critical voices are coming from WITHIN SPN fandom - i.e. people who are fannish about SPN and so clearly don't outright hate it - and so it follows that this particular show, while in some ways arguably problematic, also ATTRACTS people who are interested in (presumably "progressive") representations of race and gender. I think it's fair to surmise that there are probably aspects of its representational politics that *do* appeal to them.

I don't say all this to be all fandom hag, etc. - I thought perhaps it would be cheering to hear that this kind of ick hasn't just been the outright hegemonic position the whole time.

[chasingtides.livejournal.com]

Oh yes. When I said that I haven't seen it, I meant that I haven't seen it.

I haven't been in the fandom long - just over a year now. There's tons of stuff I haven't seen because I wasn't around for it and it's not archived in places I can easily find (meta especially falls through the cracks as time passes).

It makes me really happy to know that people have been talking about it.

And I agree that SPN fandom talks about things like this - but about the show, more usually than the fandom - more than most fandoms I participate in. (Firefly, in particular, seems to be allergic to people having issues with the show.) There's got to be a reason we're still watching. (Someday I'll talk about why I like SPN over other shows - and how part of that is how it's talked about - we don't say SPN is a revolutionary in terms of sexuality/race/feminism/whosiwhatsis and I think that's *important* to me as a viewer. It's one of the problems I have with Whedon's shows and that I enjoy about SPN. I also think... urgh. Yes another post for that.)

[impulsiveanswer.livejournal.com]

My problem with some of the female characters on Supernatural - and many other shows that add female characters after the initial pilot - isn't with the characters themselves but with their execution. Jo and Bela were very interesting characters in and of themselves, but the way they were tossed into their storylines totally screwed them.

With Jo, it was pretty obvious from her first few scenes with Dean that they did not mesh romantically. However, the show runners decided that she was a love interest for Dean before she was ever shown on screen and that's how she played out for a few episodes - leaving viewers wondering how long they'd have to watch this forced mess of a situation. She was attached immediately to Dean and had almost no interaction (or reaction) to Sam, something that stopped her from fitting into the show properly because both boys are the main characters (hell, even Ruby - who's supposed to be a divisive force focused on Sam - has more interaction with Dean than Jo ever did with Sam). She was also the victim of bad timing, namely No Exit: it must have seemed like a good idea to bring Jo in on the case to make up for Jared's medical-induced absence. However, many already-touchy fans saw it as their worst expectations - Dean cozying up to Jo while Sam remains off-screen on multiple extended coffee runs. If they'd let her grow as a character naturally rather than toss her in as a love interest things might have turned out differently.

The problem with Bela's character execution was that she never really got to grow beyond the one-shot character she was originally intended to be. Bela endangering the boys with attitude and a smirk? Them screwing her out of the rabbit's foot and her screwing them out of the lottery tickets? Cool - what a bad-ass! However, she continued to improbably be a part of their lives: bumping into them coincidentally was bad enough, but the times they actually worked with her and/or called on her for help when they had no reason to trust her just made the boys look stupid. Bela was an interesting character but her execution in the show never gave anyone a reason to actually care about her.

[kira-bouviea.livejournal.com]

Hello,

I was browsing through spn_heavymeta and found your post.

This? Was wonderful.

I am a very recent addition to this fandom. (I started watching in the middle of season 3, and only just recently started even participating in Fandom). While I didn't notice at first, all of the bashing of wemon, it's very hard not to notice it for long. While I actually do not like Anna's story line (I really hope they expand on it, cause Dude, she has got some great potential for a free agent), and it's taken me a bit to get used to Genevieve Cortese's portrayal of Ruby (I just really missed Katie Cassidy). I know that I can start to fall into the role of disliking wemon in this show. (Which *very bad me*)

I think that we need more people within fandom basically pointing this out. It's hard to fix something that people know is wrong, but that isn't thrust into the spotlight.

We, as fan's, need to realize what a problem we have, and at least try, to fix it.

I'm not too sure how much attention has been paid to this issue inside of Fandom (Cause, dude we really need to fix this), but I for one am very glad that you've posted this.

BTW - I miss Jo (My friend, who got me into this show, let me borrow her seasons 1 & 2) Do you know if there is a specific reason that she's never come back? or Ellen for that matter?

So in conculsion. This post = win.

[(Anonymous)]

Hey, I just stumbled across this. I'm pretty sure I wrote that quote about Anna, and I'm very uncomfortable with you characterising it as an example of misogyny. I've written negative things about Castiel on that site, and I've been one of the few defenders of Genevieve Cortese. I happen to very much dislike Julie McNiven's acting, for reasons which I explained in the forum post which you took one sentence out of context from.


I basically agree with you about misogyny in SPN fandom, but will you please remove that quote? It's no more sensible an example of misogyny than your quote "I, for one, am not a fan of Genevieve Cortese and her Ruby." In fact I actually wrote in the Anna thread, quite possibly in that post, that I hate it when I find myself disliking female characters. And I'd have elaborated on the reasons for that (fandom misogyny) except it's actually against the rules on TWOP to discuss that kind of thing.

I know it's not doing me any harm but it squicks me to see something I wrote in that context. Thank you. (You can judge the extent of my squickedness by the tealdeerness of this comment.)

[chasingtides.livejournal.com]

The point of the TWoP paragraph is actually to take all of the quotes together. I don't think that one person disliking a character or an actress is misogyny (I think most people know that I am not a fan of Genevieve Cortese's Ruby in any way). It's when you take all of these comments together, that these are - from what I've seen - the majority of the comments made on the female characters in the fandom, outside of very specific communities (for example fuckyeahruby is obviously for Ruby appreciation).

I'll put it this way - I'll remove the comment if you like, but it only means that I'll go back to the TWoP boards and find another one. If you're good with that, let me know.

[horusguard76.livejournal.com]

This is a very interesting post. I am quite new to the SPN fandom - I got into SPN only this year in March but it definitely has a place in my heart already. (not to mention it is one of the few fandoms I write for.)

Anyway... women. Now that is a topic I should probably stay away from because I am not totally 'pro women'. My reason? I have attended 9 years of girls-only-grammar school in Europe (Germany) and I can definitely say that I rather trust a man than a woman.

I have learned the hard way that in contrast to men women are prone to vindictive behavior and are pros at backstabbing. Men settle disputes in a much more forward fashion and I have come to really appreciate that in working life.

Now, despite all that I can still say that when it comes to tv shows and movies I truly only care about talent and craft only. I don't care for looks (beauty is in the eye of the beholder anyway) but rather focus on a crew's overall chemistry and how an actor portrayals a character.

It is sad that female characters in SPN seem to either die quickly or be left behind forgotten. I come from fandoms like Stargate Atlantis, One Piece or StarTrek where strong female characters are the rule and not the exception. And I love them and they inspired me in the best ways.

Ripley from the Alien series? I truly and absolutely worship that woman.

So yes, these misogynistic tendencies in SPN were something I did notice right away and after diving into fandom it became clear to me that some of that might actually be blamed on the female fans.

And their regular outcries over any female who 'dares' to approach their beloved Dean or Sam. Or heaven forbid the actors in RL, because it is so much their business what the actors do in their private time - oh, right I forgot - the female fans OWN the actors. My bad. Seriously, I am over 30, I simply don't get that kind of attitude.

A character is a character and an actor is an actor. Those who cannot distinguish between the two should take a step back and grow up some more. Sounds harsh but maybe then those misogynistic tendencies would stop.

I can easily state that at my age - I have a partner of 13 years and I know who I am - I really don't care about the sex lives of actors. So it might also be a matter of maturity and being comfortable as a woman in general.

I wouldn't be too surprised to find out that many fans project their own desires onto the actors and are merely fans because of the actors' looks and not their talent. Funny enough - in SPN the actors actually do have tons of talent and are not just pretty faces. (unlike so many other shows these days.)

I do agree that the producers of SPN do seem to indulge the female fans and kill off any potential female lost interest. (How ironic that Castiel came, saw and almost swept Dean away from the first minute they met on screen.

First time my partner watched them interacting, he turned to me and asked me since when SPN was a show favoring a gay couple. lol )

Well, I would conclude by saying that actually female fandom reactions and producers seem to enable each other in the worst way. It is cool that the makers listen to the fans but maybe they shouldn't have. This show already heavily focuses on two males, there was no need to add misogyny into the mix. And the general portrayal of women = damsel in distress.

It's either demon = whore or family member = angel/saint. It's only logical that those kind of stereotypes, even if not spelled out directly, will get through to the fanbase and be treated accordingly aka turned into bashing and hate fics.

(it's late I hope this post made some kind of sense still.)

my POV, part 1

[juanitadark.livejournal.com]

You know, this post is old but I'm going to reply anyway because out of all the things said about SPN what's never pointed out is the tropes used and how when you go to certain tropes without immediately/obviously challenging them and play into them to some degree (for at least two seasons as I see it on this show) you will attract a particular audience with, sometimes a particular viewpoint, that REFUSES to broaden their vision of how the show could be and you get railroaded into writing stories with a particular focus because of it.

Now I hated this show from the pilot, pretty much from the minute Dean held up his hand and went "No chick-flick moments" I decided that this was not the show for me. To be fair I'd already had an inkling that I might not like it but I thought it only fair to dismiss it AFTER a viewing.

You would think the story would stop there but... my mum was a rabid and immediate convert (and still is) - one who refused to learn how to use a video and who wanted the adverts edited out. I managed to miss a good chunk of S1 not without effort but still I caught episodes here and there, half hoping that I might somehow change my mind, and they pretty much made my blood boil about 90% of the time - so I didn't.

Why, I wondered, did it seem that all the female protagonists were either victims, evil or dead, or soon to be one of the above? Why the did the show insist on harkening heavily back to and era of TV when women weren't actively the agents in their own stories but had to wait for guys to come in and save them? Why did the supernatural element seemed very much framed as the feminine-mysterious-seductive-dangerous element? Why did the 'girly' one of the duo have to the longer hair and the girly 'sensitivities', and why was he the one-who-might-be-evil? Even the music seemed straight out of that era when men were men and women were chicks. It was like all the female-led shows of the last ten years never happened!

So okay, I wasn't a fan at all but I caught a lot of episodes - or bits of them. Until I stopped somewhere around S3, though I knew Dean went to hell at the end (which, incidentally, was rather a relief for me). It was only because of the angel storyline that I actually borrowed the DVD set of S4 from the library and decided to watch it voluntarily (I'd seen a lot of fandom icons with Castiel and was curious that they'd finally given the endless demons an opposite number, so I thought I'd give it a look). And I liked it. Really liked it! Big shock there. I then went back and watched S3 and had to give the writers a bit more credit than I had originally. Sure, all the things I hated about it the first time around were still in effect but I was now a little more tolerant of their inclusion and a lot more observant of the characters and subtexts. In other words - it still wasn't my favourite show but they'd managed to excell with what they had and I could appreciate that. They'd also gotten a better sense of humour.

Somehow they'd managed to underly the tropes with some subtle genuine characterisation. A shame, I thought, that that subtlety would be entirely lost most of the audience that would be attracted to said tropes. I also still wasn't especially fond of the first two seasons.

But my point is that I missed all the fandom wank particularly the alarm about Dean's perceived misogyny in S3. For me, who stopped watching it early I wondered why everyone seemed to have suddenly noticed Dean's, and to a degree the show's, prediliction as if it was a new thing. It had always seemed glaringly obvious to me. He'd always been like that to a degree. I just think the imminent hell holiday scared him stupid and his way of dealing was to upgrade the female haterade and direct it at Ruby.

my POV, part 2

[juanitadark.livejournal.com]

(sorry, long, and continued)

But still that's off my point. What I'm trying to say is that it's all very well the show suddenly being disappointed that their fandom won't support the female characters. My issue is that the tropes that they took up and established the show with and then hardwired into the mythology with a bizarre kind of nihilism/fatalism are the very tropes that would appeal to people who don't necessarily want to see strong female characters. It's going to appeal to people who want to see the boy pretty on screen all the time and female characters can fulfill a function and then get the hell out of dodge because ultimately the only way is going to be the Winchester way. It's practically set in cowboys and indians territory - why be surprised when people don't want to see a hot girl with a six-shooter? This includes actually the Samgirl and Deangirl splitting within the fandom. It's pointed that the rift against Sam really got going when he goes against Dean WITH RUBY (I honestly feel that if he'd done it alone, or with a male demon there might have been a greater capacity to forgive - but on the other hand the idea of splitting the two brothers up with a woman seemed to be on the cards from day one - PARTICULARLY given the tropes being set up, set forth and used with regularity).

I'd say eventhough the story starts out with Sam as the protagonist, Dean's character was always going to appeal to the people who enjjoyed the original tropes because he's kind of the poster boy for them.

In conclusion, the show is doing the equivalent of selling itself on it's prime juicy 100% beef cheeseburgers, filling its coffers with people who like the beef and then getting upset when they try to switch to lamb and the punters won't buy it. I'm like, you got people on board with the promise of beef cheeseburgers, you're now going to complain that the people won't accept anything other than beef? That's not just fandom being to blame then.

If you want a broader audience either challenge the tropes you set your show up on early and establish a wider viewpoint/story/universe/setpoint for your show, or don't bring in polarising tropes in the first place. Sure, fandom is crazy but fandom is also responding to the stuff put on the table in the first place. It's a bit rich trying to pass it off as entirely the fault of the crazy sexist fans, imo. They may or may not be batchip, sure, but they are still RESPONDING TO STUFF THAT'S IN THE TEXT. It's a bit disingenuous to try and pretend that's not an element that's involved when you end up with the audience you get.