Let's Talk About the Girlboss Trope

You’ve seen it everywhere, the #girlboss. The determined and tenacious woman in a man’s world, taking charge and not taking no for an answer. Doesn’t sound too bad right? Sends a good message on how women can do everything men can do. But only when written correctly.

Unfortunately, there seems to be an ongoing problem of producing badly written girlboss characters that are just bitchy, empty, and cringy. I often wonder if the writers have ever actually meet a woman before or if this is some gender-bend self-insert. I want to talk about these characters—the badly written ones. The Mary Sue type characters that have no real depth. Why are they bad and what is the solution? And why are there so many of them?

The Mary Sue Trope Overlap

So I feel like there is a lot of overlap between these badly written girlboss characters and the Mary Sue trope. If you are unaware of the term, a Mary Sue is a character, usually young, that overcomes her obstacle with relative ease. She has a sort of perfection and lacks any real flaws. A Mary Sue is often loved by male characters straight off the bat. Rey Palpatine from the sequel Star Wars trilogy is often described as a Mary Sue. She has amazing power that she’s able to harness with no real training and able to make friends extremely fast. A mysterious backstory. All the classic signs of a Mary Sue. There may not be a lot of people calling her a girlboss, but that title is held by another character in the series by the name of Admiral Holdo.

So, Admiral Holdo is a purple haired admiral of the Resistance in Star Wars: The Last Jedi. Remember her? Maybe not, she’s not all that memorable. Yet, she is considered a girlboss. Why? She holds a job usually held by a man and she’s strong and determined. But what I have noticed is that, by being in a position usually held by a man and in power, the male characters are kind of turned into comedic relief. I find this a lot, that in order for a women to be in control, men below her are clowns and are not taken seriously. And these powerful women tend to be bitchy and condescending and not all that likeable. It’s more annoying than being a symbol of female empowerment. Instead of being empowered, I cringed through her scenes.

This brings me to Carol Danvers…

And the Award for the Worst Female Superhero Goes to:

I keep thinking, why does Carol Danvers bother me so much? Why do I find her so boring? Well, it got me thinking – is it because there really isn’t a struggle?

She has it all: power, ego, a forgettable catchphrase – all thats needed for a superhero character. So what’s missing? Let’s take a look at Tony Stark for a minute.

“Higher, further, faster, baby.” – Carol Danvers, Captain Marvel

Tony Stark has a lot of similarities, especially in the beginning, to Carol Danvers. Very cocky, egotistical, powerful, and a lot of witty one liners. So whats the difference you ask? Character growth, plain and simple. He had to overcome a major obstacle, he found out a lot about himself and his family company, he overcame and had an awesome power-up moment. One of the best superhero origin stories of in cinematic history, in my opinion.

Now, back to Danvers. Her growth was more accidental: she got a power-up from absorbing energy from an Infinity Stone and then was kidnapped by the Kree, an alien warrior race. Her real story seemed to be just getting her memory back and not listening to what others thought of her. But she’s still incredibly cocky, annoying, and just boring. Her supporting characters were a lot more interesting.

There was no real sense of urgency, of connection, a sense of growth for the character. She managed to power-up and then blew up a Kree ship. Not really exciting. It feels, to me, more like a Mary Sue character. She managed to understand her powers pretty quickly. She’s spunky and witty and has a “I’m not like other girls” type energy. She’s more like the annoying girl in school who thinks she’s all that but no one can stand. I think she has a lot of potential, if written correctly. Hopefully she has some real character development in her second movie. But if she continues on like this, then I’m not interested. She’s too one dimensional, hollow, and did I mention boring?

The Male Gaze Problem

While I understand that the girlboss movement tends to be leaning towards a more feminist movement and female empowerment, I still feel like these characters are trapped within the male gaze. Perhaps that’s why they still bother me—they are still sexualized. I don’t feel like all girlboss characters fall into this trap, but I see it often enough. I’ll see the hashtag on twitter, yet they’re still talking about a character that is obviously written by a man and written through a male lens. They are not well fleshed out characters.

The Impact and Female Representation

Why I see this as such a major problem is because future generations, children, are looking at these characters as a source of inspiration. They’re growing and being molded by media, by the environment. Regardless of gender, these children are given a bad example or poor expectations given to women or female presenting individuals.

What bothers me about these charactrs, as a woman myself, is I don’t really feel represented. These characters are not something I can relate to. They don’t really have a personality nor really a good backstory. They don’t have a lot of real growth. I often find myself connected more towards male characters because they are often the only ones really written well. I find it a real shame because these characters, if they just have been written better, have a lot of real potential.

Possible Solution?

So I admit this isn’t a great solution, but I think it could be a start for some who hit a roadblock. I think perhaps one solution is to write them in a similar fashion to how you write men. The female character, Dee, in It’s Always Sunny In Philadelphia, was written originally in a way that seemed like it was written by a man who had never met a woman before. I believe the actress finally told the writers to write her as they would a man. She became more realistic from then on and much more interesting. Perhaps writers who have no real experience writing women could start with that.

I think to get out of that tough spot is you have to get rid of the male gaze and you have to start seeing female characters as you would any other character. They are human. They have flaws too. Women, also, have challenges to overcome. We are not objects, we are not all that different from men. We need to remove certain barriers of gender roles for many reasons, but especially so all genders can be written as, well, human. If you write a character as if they’re a complex human instead of a one dimensional Mary Sue, then you can have a much more interesting character.

So, Who Is My Favorite Girlboss?

To move forward, I think we need to look backward. By doing that, I want to talk about two of my favorite characters I would consider to be girlbosses.

First would be Sarah Connor from Terminator. Some may not really count her because her main goal is to have John Connor, the savior of mankind.

However, without Sarah Connor, there is no John Connor. Sure, she had some help from a dude from the future. But who evaded and killed the Terminator? Sarah did. Who raised John Connor as a single mother and prepared him for the future? Sarah did. She represents a good mix of a badass mom and woman. I feel like she’s a good representation for those who are or want to be mothers and those who just want someone to look up to.

Sure, not everyone wants to be a mom but some do and I think she’s excellent representation for them. She has been someone who I’ve looked up to since I was a child. Sure, John Connor was the main protagonist, but I always kind of felt like he was in the background. I honestly think Sarah would have been a better candidate to defeat Skynet. But then again, she seems to be more of a lone wolf instead of a leader which is also intriguing.

Next would be Ripley from Alien. Now this is where I want to talk more about my kind of problematic solution from above. Ripley was, originally, written to be a man. I wonder if that has something to do with how she ended up so much more complex.

She is hard, intelligent, and incredibly human. She has flaws and has character development. Ripley is a character that you can really connect to and end up rooting for. Not just because she’s a woman, but because she’s written like a complex human character. It’s something we need more of.

Conclusion

So to summarize, I believe these characters need to have depth and complexity. You need to be able to relate and connect with these characters. But these one-dimensional girlboss characters are written like stick-figures—they have no soul. You can’t connect to something that has no filling. You can’t connect to a being who has no real flaws. How can you connect to something that is perfect in every way and can grasp something without problem? It’s almost impossible, at least for me. These characters have a lot of promise, if written correctly.

Did I miss a #Girlboss? Who’s your favorite? Which #girlboss do you think could have been written better?