[Spoilers]Arrow doesnt have anymore strong female characters.

It's a misleading term because 'strong' can mean physically strong, or it can mean compelling, interesting, and well-characterised. The first definition implies physically powerful, badass, skilful, independent characters, like Buffy. The second definition implies well-realised, complex, interesting characters, with developed personalities and distinct voices, who aren't necessarily perfect or without flaws. Like Buffy.

The confusion undermines a lot of these conversations before they get started because it's not always clear what you mean, and people assume you meant one or the other. Whoever invented the phrase should really have picked a more specific adjective.

Strength can refer to non-physical resilience: characters like Dana Scully, Daria, or Leslie Knope are strong in that they are determined, strong in their convictions.

But a character doesn't have to be powerful at all to be worthwhile and deserve to exist. They can be pathetic, they can run from danger, they can hide behind others. Those are things people do. Think of... I don't know, George Costanza, Beni from The Mummy, any given Michael Cera character. They're physically, mentally, and emotionally weak, they make almost nothing but bad choices, but they're well-crafted and narratively interesting characters - if not heroic or necessarily sympathetic. A degenerate scumbag can be a strong character if they're well-characterised, three-dimensional, you understand who they are and what motivates them, they engage you when they're on-screen, they're used to tell interesting stories. Game of Thrones is full of absolutely reprehensible, despicable characters, who are used to tell really interesting stories. Although I suppose people are looking for role models when they lament the lack of strong female characters, and those aren't that.

On the reverse of that coin, a character can be a super-strong badass but have no personality. When a character is too perfect, you can't really tell an interesting story around them: they themselves aren't interesting, and they have all the skills to easily handle any challenge, so there's no tension.

I think when people say 'strong female character' they generally want both. Someone who is resilient, either through physical strength or skill, or some other talent that allows them to be self-reliant more often than not, and who therefore is able to have their own agency, to make and follow through with their own choices without needing the permission and assistance of male characters, while also being mentally and emotionally complex.

But then a character can have all those traits and it can still not matter if they never actually get to do their own thing in the story.

Personally I think Donna Smoak actually comes really close to being a good character. She's a narcissist. She's a terrible mother. She has no respect for privacy or boundaries. Her values are warped: the way she presents herself demonstrates the high importance she places on physical presentation like hair, clothes, makeup, jewellery, and accessories, but she's in such a bad financial position to pay for those things. The way she interacts with others shows how detached she is from reality. Felicity clearly had a really difficult relationship with her, almost to the point of estrangement, and yet also inherited certain traits from her. Despite being so terrible, she's interesting because it feels so real and familiar. People like that exist. Where it critically fails is in the execution: despite all this characterisation, they play it off as comic relief. Her obtrusive meddling instead becomes love, her inappropriate questions and remarks becomes comedy, her shallow nature becomes goofy and quirky.

/r/arrow Thread Parent