Positive Discrimination

When the Token Minority can do no wrong. […] This trope can usually be averted simply by adding more than one of the given minority; then they can spread the competence around. Failing that, they can try not making it a big deal that the character is X, and maybe no one will care that they’re also depicted as flawed human beings (what a concept!) (source)

I’ve found the pitfalls of this to be especially true in teen girl fiction when the main character has a token gay or ethnic friend.  I think it’s great to diversify your characters, but a lot of these characters turn out unrealistic so the author can avoid looking X-ist, which bugs the crap out of me.  It ends up being worse for the story than not having a token character at all and sometimes even slides into a heavy-handed political message.

I like the suggestions offered in the article — it really is easier to make a minority flawed if you don’t have just one.   I personally prefer “try not making it a big deal that the character is X, and maybe no one will care that they’re also depicted as flawed human beings.”  People are people.  (Though that doesn’t mean I won’t watch my step when I need to.  I just refuse to make anyone perfect to avoid Unfortunate Implications.)

Heavy-Handed Political Messages

Don’t get me wrong, I loved Captain Planet.  Nothing wrong with a little in-your-face WIND! and WATER!  I sang the theme song at the top of my lungs in the bath as a kid, even though my dad hated the show for being an indoctrination of America’s youth.  But, well, I still like Captain Planet, even though I see where my dad was coming from.  It makes me nostalgic, and it’s fun to laugh at how hard they try to get everyone not to litter.  (I do recycle, and I don’t litter, though this is simply because I think it’s polite to do these things.)

But.  Yeah.  Stories that plop their own morals on you when you’re just trying to have a good read?  Not so fun.

This is why I avoid religion, politics, and sexual orientation for the most part in my writing.  I’m not interested in making anything preachy, and it’s hard to have those things without taking a position (or getting Positive Discriminatory because you’re afraid someone will jump down your throat if you don’t), and I just don’t think controversial material is appropriate when you want to settle down and chillax.  For books that are intended to be controversial and heavy, fine, that’s what they’re written for.  That’s reasonable, and you know going in that you’re getting something with a position.  But getting the writer’s views sprung on you in cute little adventures?  Sigh, eyeroll, ugh.

Emasculated Men

I’ve been seeing this more and more in books with strong female leads.  Not all of them, mind you, but enough to make it a trend.  You might say it’s strongest in commercials — Alex and I agree that in any given commercial with a married couple, the woman is all-powerful and the man is a bumbling idiot.

You know it’s true.

It’s probably a form of Positive Discrimination, but I don’t have a problem with female leads being strong — I have a problem with the male lead being weaker because he’s male.  I don’t like it when male leads, who are supposed to be equally strong and intelligent (and thus desirable to the female lead), are randomly kidnapped, defeated, or depicted as needing rescue.  I might describe this as female writers putting men in the sexist role that women used to play, like inverting Walker Texas Ranger and his girlfriend.  I can only presume that this is an attempt to bring women into the strong role that men used to frequent, but the complaint with the old way was . . . it was sexist!  And it still is sexist, but now it’s women subjugating the male characters.

I think Meg Cabot has some of the best male leads (in teen girl fiction) to support her strong female protagonists.  Her men are strong-willed and powerful in their own right, but their strength is often different from the protagonist’s and (most importantly) they know when to step aside and let the protagonist do her thing: in Code Name Cassandra, Rob accepts the fact that he’s in the way of the protagonist’s plans and removes himself from the situation to allow her freedom to maneuver.

Cabot’s male leads are always smart enough to know when they’re making things harder for the protagonist.  They don’t insist on being pig-headed overbearing jerks who argue fruitlessly for ten pages until the woman outwits them.

My favorite books have strong men who can and even do help the female protagonist.  These men don’t get knocked down a few rungs on the Ladder of Awesome so the girl looks better.  Equality and mutual respect are vital to any good relationship — real or fake — so it matters to me that I’m able to respect my male characters at the end of the story, whether or not they get to help save the day.

Conclusion and Inspiration

There are other things that annoy me, of course.  But these are the big ones for today, inspired by a few library books.  I enjoyed Need (which had some pleasing moral ambiguity and a great system for chapter titles) but am chafing with Evermore (at page 104, still no realistic reason why the male lead noticed the female protagonist and I’m beginning to think it’s a story full of personal wish fulfillment).

Evermore is the reason for my current frustration with positive discrimination — I’m so sick of the main character being on the “uncool fringe” of high school and the popular girls are all mean and bigoted and the only people who talk to her are the stereotypical uncool kids (here, a goth girl and gay guy) who are great people but totally misunderstood, just like the main character.

If you want to delve into being hated by the popular people while still being completely realistic and engaging and awesome, watch Veronica Mars.  That’s all I have to say about it.