She’s fabulous.
Her hair is done. Her makeup is flawless; her coat, luxurious. She’s single. She’s thin or she’s fat or she’s muscular or she’s old or she’s young but she’s never ever cute or soft or scared of you.
She’s hungry. She wants money, and she wants more luxurious coats, and she wants power. She wants to sit in the chair that is currently occupied by whoever’s in charge, and she doesn’t want to wait for the world to give her that throne. She doesn’t have time for that. She’s not going to wait. She’s going to take it.
She wants a voice. She wants your voice. She’ll use it to yell when she’s angry and to cry when she’s frustrated and to murmur poison into the ears of some nearsighted boy-king who doesn’t see what she sees. He can’t even begin to see the web she’s weaving, so she’ll wrap him up in a little cocoon of silk and she’ll set him aside, where he can’t ruin any of her plans.
She runs a business. She makes a thousand decisions every day and she never feels the need to justify any of them with a shrug or an “I don’t know, I just thought maybe we could…?” Woe betide the man who speaks over her in a meeting.
We love her and we hate her in equal measure. We feel that way because she revels in being all the things that we are told we aren’t allowed to be. She is confident, and she has wrinkles, and her nose isn’t a formless nonthreatening comma in the middle of an ill-defined wide-eyed face—it’s a knife, or an arrow, or a scythe. She frowns. Everyone in the audience and on the internet wants to talk about whether or not she’s sexy but they’re asking the wrong questions and she’s laughing at them for it. She wears bright colors, nonprimary colors that coordinate with her green skin or her purple eyeshadow. She’s too good for this game, too smart for her boss, tired of getting stepped on. She gets mad and she gets even.
Her lipstick is flawless and her eyebrows are the boss of you.
Why is it that female cartoon villains get to be all of these things, to have all of these things? Why do they get to have hairstyles—no, Hairstyles, with a capital Hair—while their protagonist counterparts are drawn small and soft and childlike? Why does Ursula get to have a beauty mark and the most impeccably waterproof makeup a sea witch could hope for, while Ariel gets the same wide-eyed small-jawed face as every other white Disney princess? Why does Maleficent get a headpiece that defines menacing elegance and dark grandeur, while Aurora gets generic late-fifties bangs? Why does Shego get to mouth off to Drakken and read magazines by the pool and decide what is and isn’t her job, while Kim Possible has to leap into action regardless of whether she’s tired or sad or sick or, heaven forbid, too busy?
Why is it that I can easily remember the faces and voices of female cartoon villains, but if asked about female cartoon heroes, all I can remember is the clothes?
Female cartoon villains define transgression. We look at thin-wristed shy-smiling nice-haired female protagonists and we see what’s expected of us: wait. Be patient. Be nice. Be happy with your lot, enjoy what you’re given, and don’t look for more. Make wishes, not plans. Have animal friends, never henchmen. No one should work for you, but everyone must love you. Look soft and small and breakable, and cry with your head flung into your arms so no one has to see your puffy eyes. Be afraid that no one will ever rescue you. Be afraid that you’ll have to live your whole life without adventure ever finding you.
We look at female cartoon villains and we see what’s forbidden: ferocity. Never laugh with your head thrown back. Never apply your eyeshadow as a cut-crease. Never draw in your brows or dye your hair. Don’t wear nice clothes (unless they’ve been sewn for you by people or animals who love you, or delivered to you by magic). Don’t look in mirrors. Don’t want things. Don’t get old or fat or tall. Don’t make demands. Hope, maybe, but never expect. No, not even if you’ve dedicated your life to a goal—even then, don’t you dare expect. Work hard, but don’t grind for years and years building an empire because if you do, then you’ll get taken down and the audience will cheer at your suffering. Don’t carve your face into a mountainside, because that territory is reserved and your name is not on the list.
We’re sold on the female protagonists, and I do mean sold. We admire their spunk and their tenacity, because it’s accessible—it’s rebellion in the form of wanting. It’s gazing at the stars at night after spending all day scrubbing the floors, and believing that wishing will be enough. But once they graduate to getting what they want? Once they’ve made real sacrifices in pursuit of their dreams? Once they’ve made it, or even once they’re almost there?
That’s when they become dangerous. That’s when they become the villainess. Somewhere in there, they stop caring about what other people think, and they get what they want, and they turn into cautionary tales: something bad is waiting for the woman who goes that way. We believe it. We repeat it. We look at women who are running things and we’re suspicious, because we’ve spent our whole lives looking at women with ambition and knowing that they can’t possibly be allowed to grasp whatever it is they’re reaching for.
Oh, sure. They do bad things. They’re petty and jealous and rude and they grab and they take and they hurt people. They’re not nice. They’re not role models.
But, then again, what if they were role models? Aren’t they the versions of ourselves that we wish we were bold enough to be? We fear them and we hate them and we envy them and we want to be them. What could we become, if we threw our heads back when we laughed? What could we become if we were willing to push aside everyone who stands in our way? What could we accomplish? What would happen to us, if we decided that we didn’t want to scrub floors during the day and wish on stars at night and wonder when the adventure is going to come find us?
How might you laugh if you’d burned every bridge that needed burning, and there was nothing standing in the way of your ambition? How might you look, if the only person you needed to please with your fashion choices was you? It’s delicious and frightening to think about becoming the type of woman that a Disney illustrator would light from below, surrounded by billowing smoke, with your henchmen cowering in the background and every opportunity spread before you. It’s thrilling to imagine a life where your only fear is mortality, and even that can be negotiated out of the way if you know the right people or brew the right potions. It’s wonderful and terrible to think about having that much power, because as we all know, that much power makes you a villainess.
And that’s a bad thing.
Right?
Sarah Gailey’s fiction has appeared in Mothership Zeta and Fireside Fiction; her nonfiction has been published by Mashable and Fantasy Literature Magazine. You can see pictures of her puppy and get updates on her work by clicking here. She tweets @gaileyfrey. Watch for her debut novella, River of Teeth, from Tor.com in 2017.
I’m sorry, but this article is quite illogical. You admire these characters, because they transcend the typical female image, but you focus on their hairs and makeup? Is this the more important thing for a female character? If not, why do you talk about it so much?
I am not trying to be offensive, but very often the feministic articles in Tor (i.e. all the acticles in Tor) focus on the wrong things.
I don’t think it is offensive if a female character is represented as timid or nice or shy. These are normal human traits. Should we teach our daughters that they should be rude and inconsiderate, just so that no one sees them as weak?
What I find offensive is if a female character is represented as stupid, or if the most important thing about her is her looks. But you focus on looks as well. How is this less offensive? It is not important if Ursula has a beauty mark, but Ariel has not. I have a beauty mark as well and I’ve always been a chubby kid, but this didn’t stop me from identifying myself with Ariel because of her bravery, Belle because she’s smart and Snowwhite because she made friends so quickly. These are the important traits, and not their hairdo.
Great article, Sarah!
@salix_caprea: The way that a character is represented is important, especially in animation. It isn’t so much hair, or makeup, but how the character (read: “the artist”) chooses to represent themselves. There is a shorthand between visuals and personality, and Sarah outlines that in the article. She’s not saying that being inconsiderate and rude is something to aspire to, but that fierceness and individuality is relegated to only the villains, is seen as something to fear, whereas the protagonists typically are drawn to be soft and welcoming.
Yes, I guess seeing the visual image as a code for personality makes it important, but the focus on female looks is still much stronger. I haven’t seen an analysis of why the Beast (at the end) has a long hair, or no Disney prince has a beard. Nobody cares, and the same should be true about the female characters.
Personally, I find the new “strong female character” fashion to be a bit disturbing. If a woman is shown as much as shedding a tear, she’s proclaimed as “weak”. So again it’s a tendency to have only perfect female characters, only the image of perfect now means “strong and fierce” instead of “nice and quiet” like it used to 50 years ago. But it’s still an unrealistic image, because all human beings have their weak moments, weak spots and their fears. So these new role models will inspire much insecurity, because every time a little girl has fears or concerns, she will feel she doesn’t live up to her role models. So I think the most important thing for all characters are to be realistic and to stop focusing on their sex. A double-standard is a double-standard no matter the direction.
@@@@@ salix_caprea “I don’t think it is offensive if a female character is represented as timid or nice or shy. These are normal human traits. Should we teach our daughters that they should be rude and inconsiderate, just so that no one sees them as weak?”
It’s boring if the heroines are always portrayed as timid or nice or shy, because while they are indeed normal human traits they aren’t the only ones women have and are not exclusive to women, but how often do you see heroes depicted as timid or nice or shy as compared to how often you see heroines depicted thus? As for not teaching our daughters to be rude and inconsiderate that really depends on what you consider rude and inconsiderate to be for females, because there is a lot of evidence that if a woman behaves in ways that are considered acceptable, even praisewothy, in men then they are described as rude or inconsiderate along with other negative adjectives like pushy or power-hungry.
As for the way heroines look it is all too often insipid and weak versus the villainesses distinctive and powerful images. Why can’t a heroine in a cartoon be distinctive and powerful?
“What could we become if we were willing to push aside everyone who stands in our way?” This is rude and inconsiderate no matter the sex. This (and all the talk of makeup and hairstyles ;)) triggered my initial response.
It’s cool if heroines are distinctive and powerful. But I think we are observing an overreaction. Suddenly all heroines must be powerful. If there is a weak woman, this is sexist. If all females are bad-ass, this is empowering and cool, even if the men are total idiots. I don’t see this as an improvement.
Maybe it’s just a cultural difference. I’ve always been taught that I can become whatever I want, I’ve been surrounded by ambitious working women and I’ve never thought women should be more timid or “nice”. So, as a grown up, I’m experiencing only the reaction to all this and for me it seems like an overreaction.
Anyway, I like the discussion and I’m glad no one is offended over my comments ;)
I have two glorious, fierce, amazing nieces. They love Disney princesses.
I was more of a Warner Brothers cartoons kid, and never became overly attached to the Disney princess bandwagon. Bugs and Daffy were my jam, yo.
My nieces show kindness to others (most of the time), because they see kindness modeled. They try new things, learn new words, make friends with other people, ask for help when they need it, and speak their minds when they disagree with something because they see these behaviors modeled. They are respectful, loving, and completely full of determination and grit. Right now, one is all about Sofia the First and the other has moved on to Ariel, Ana, and Elsa. Would I like to see them focusing on a long term goal like Izma? Being gloriously body-proud like Ursula? Definitely. But appreciation for the qualities in a villainess comes with time.
My SIL, especially, gets the girls to talk about what a particular character does and says and why their actions may have been good or bad, what they could have done differently. She and my brother are creating these little analytical thinkers while fully indulging the sparkly pink princess love of two tiny humans. Is this a perfect scenario? Not even close. But it seems to be a darn good balance so far.
Awesomesauce, though the commenters have good points.
I’ve always been a pushover for villains, especially villainesses, and those motivated by envy or rebelliousness are the most relatable. I thus thought The Isle of the Lost (prequel novel to the Descendants film) was The Best Thing Ever when I started reading it, but I think it didn’t give the villain parents their due. So thank you for this article.
@salix_caprea
I don’t want to be offensive and presume that you are young because you might be my age or older, but if you are, part of it may be your age. Younger women are growing up in a MUCH more female/feminist positive environment than I did even though I’m only 36. I grew up with an empowering message at home but within a very strongly macho family and surrounded by the cultural messages referenced in the article. It is well established that our culture has certain very strong norms for what is feminine or female and those traits are NOT aggression, confidence, loudness, assertiveness, ambition. Many women work to live their life as they want but for some of us it is a struggle every day to contradict the social messages we received growing up.
Under some circumstances, important female leaders have to behave like “villainesses” to hold and keep power. Elizabeth I of England famously said that she had the frail body of a woman, but the heart of a prince. She acted like a man, and the people around her treated her like one, giving her the same deference and fear that they would have shown to a male tyrant. Elizabeth also never married or had children, maintaining her separation from the “women’s sphere”. Margaret Thatcher went far, far out of her way to avoid even the slightest appearance of sentimentality, knowing that any display of kindness or feelings would instantly cause people to assume that a soft-hearted woman wasn’t suitable for the job. Both of them had power, but they held it by ferociously avoiding the stereotype of emotional women, choosing to invite the hatred that too many of their contemporaries felt for “unnatural” women rather than accepting the casual, thoughtless condescension reserved for women who behaved the way they were expected to.
Power should be about purpose. If your only goal is to rise to the top yourself, to smash everyone out of your way, and to rule with an iron fist, then you’re probably not going to be a good role model for little girls. The only lesson they’ll learn from these villainesses is the oldest story in history; the oppressed become the oppressors, and the wheel turns and turns, with each group rising and changing to become the same old tyrants. Once you rise to the throne, having sacrificed everyone you are in the pursuit of power, you won’t care enough to change the world for the young women who are still hoping for a better future.
Spider-Man says it best: “With great power comes great responsibility.” Mulan decides to take on a traditional man’s role, protecting her father and her country from Huns. She acts decisively, rather than waiting for events to shift her way, and she breaks her society’s rules in the process. But she stays true to her principles, even if she’s not obeying tradition anymore, and she doesn’t decide that other people aren’t real whenever they get in her way. She knows that power is something you use to make things better, not just a form of personal protection or satisfaction. Emancipation from the rules of society for herself is not enough; tyrants love freedom. Their freedom, to act as they please, without a thought for the consequences. To truly love freedom, heroines (or heroes) have to desire freedom for others as well as themselves. That’s why we can’t defend villainesses, who desire to rise to the top of the system instead of altering it, and forget their origins in their rush to become their old enemies.
“I have a beauty mark as well and I’ve always been a chubby kid, but this didn’t stop me from identifying myself with Ariel because of her bravery, Belle because she’s smart and Snowwhite because she made friends so quickly. These are the important traits, and not their hairdo. “
That is picking up right role model, which at least for me is not the same as identifying. Identifying is more about whether character has some trait similar to mine (e.g. I understand why character acts as it acts even if the behavior is not perfect and can relate to it) or some I would find cool to dream about having.
So, many criticized Elsa for closing the door to her sister in Frozen. I could relate to it, I understand the need to be alone in situation like that.
Or, I used to be shy to a fault and passed chances to do things I wanted, because I was too shy to raise the hand and say out loud “yes I want to do that”. When kids were skipping turns or being mean, I would not defend my position – partly because it would felt like I am mean/inconsiderate, but mostly because I did not knew how to do it. After all, defending yourself on playground requires pushing back and saying mean things back.
Consequently, “bad girls” had traits I wished to have myself. It felt better to identify with them, because being more like then is how you get in position to do interesting things and what allows you to push back to real life mini-bullies. (Kind of like Batman or James Bond or all those detectives who about who abuse their power to get criminals, but are framed as good despite their actions are bad actually bad.)
@dptullos “Their freedom, to act as they please, without a thought for the consequences. To truly love freedom, heroines (or heroes) have to desire freedom for others as well as themselves. That’s why we can’t defend villainesses, who desire to rise to the top of the system instead of altering it, and forget their origins in their rush to become their old enemies. “
In a lot of ways, they are female equivalent of James Bond who does “act as he please, without a thought for the consequences”, female equivalent of all the cool detectives who break the rules to get criminals, female equivalent of some of what is found in batman and so on.
The main difference is that while Bond and detectives have thin “rationalize all those actually bad actions by intentions or happy results”. Female villanness dont have that. But then again, we dont really have many female characters who would had feel good story slapped on traits that are not nice if you think about them.
So, you are choosing between a villain without that rationalization and shy nice girl with good intentions. So, if the fantasy in question is Bond/detective like “came to room, acted impulsively, took what he wanted and it was right” then villains are all there is.
I LOVE this blog! Thank you for writing it.
There is nothing in this blog advocating for spite and manipulation; it is about the portrayal of self-directed powerful lives vs. meekly waiting for destiny to MAKE you do something. And yes, even right now, horrifyingly, women and girls will STILL be judged on the “meek and mild” standard, rather than the “assertive and powerful” one.
Own your power, women, and know that it will cost us, but it beats the hell out of the alternative.
This article honestly captures why I found Xena Warrior Princess and Catwoman to be the best characters as a kid and even now. These were women who weren’t afraid of acting in their own self-interest. I see a lot of the critical comments want to push this idea that this article is pushing for women to be rude or that timidity is weakness. What I got from the article is that female villains are the most visually diverse group of women in animation or even live action. The art of animation is incredibly important because they set up visual clues and codes for the audience, in other words emotional triggers. There’s a reason Malificent and many female noir villains wear red lipstick or have red nails…that color was and by some still considered a color worn by immoral women. As an artist even unconsciously I make choices about how we design and dress a character. Before someone argues…think about how Jews, Chinese, and Blacks were depicted in 1890 versus 2016. There was a very particular coding happening then too and there is now in a entirely different way. So what do we see when we look at these characters? Usually a very stark contrast one that is repeated throughout media. To be a heroine as defined by media is to be naturally beautiful, shun sexuality, put others before ourselves, never lose our tempers, always pursue a relationship with a man, etc. To be a villain is to be sexual, put one’s self first, be “hysterical”, shun relationships with men or alternatively, pursue relationships with men where a woman has power, be “self absorbed” i.e love fashion for her own sake. In much the same coding as many male villains being coded as effeminate or gay this remains far more common than it should.
Breaking the mold of what a “good” woman looks like in the male ideal is associated with being criminal, villainous. Being too sexy is much the same. Heroines are defined in a narrower lens, which is why so many women are drawn to the uncompromising power of the villainous alternative.
Even Mulan whose story is about her not being that redundant and overly common heroine…is constantly depicted that way in art and books. Same with Merida. There is a particular standard for what makes a good woman or a bad woman. The appeal of villains to many women is that they offer an alternative…an alternative where we can be confident from the word go, not care about other people’s feelings instead of putting them before ourselves, and indulge our desire whether that be for “more luxurious coats” or live a life of wanton adventure like Shego. Men are allowed to be single minded, ambitious, adventurous, and are admired. The other commentor who referenced James Bond and Batman is 100% correct. When you look at the variety of male heroes from their stories, their actions, and their designs there is a lot more flexibility and difference happening.
As a girl I saw Catwoman as a the ultimate liberator. She did what she wanted when she wanted whether it was good or bad or neither. She lived her life the way she wanted regardless of other’s expectations. She wore make-up, and diamonds, and was sexy because she liked feeling sexy. More importantly she didn’t just do what other people told her was good. I saw Xena as the ultimate woman. In the name of evil she did things that most men cowered at and then in the name of good she made gods bow before her. She had power, intelligence, and fearless drive without having to be quirky or “tomboyish”. She was Xena and everything that went along with that was incredibly powerful. Both of these women loved without compromising themselves. Both of these women could be quiet and timid when they wanted, but never hesitated to tell you exactly where you stood. These days we may not cling so hard to the stereotype of women as timid, but we certainly love the quirky ones…and my girls Selena and Xena had none of that. They were uncompromised.
Great article! Wendy Pini, creator of the legendary fantasy comic series ElfQuest, shared it on Facebook, and so I wanted to add her delicious villainess Winnowill to the list. She embodies everything this article describes and fits in well with the rest of these fabulously wicked women.
Loved this essay! I remember seeing Sleeping Beauty and Snow White as a little girl and being drawn to those wicked women. I knew I was supposed to like the princess, but for me it was always about the witch. Reading this, I could not help but think about current politics, particularly the lack of trust and disdain many people have for Hillary Clinton. I’m sure that in the back of their minds they’re thinking that a woman having that much power cannot possibly be a good thing, right?
As a girl I saw Catwoman as a the ultimate liberator. She did what she wanted when she wanted whether it was good or bad or neither.
How is a person doing what they want regardless of whether it is good or not something to celebrate? That sounds like textbook Ubermensch philosophy which is absolutely horrible. .
@13 D.D.
Power is about compromising between our good and the good of others. Our choices have consequences for other people, so we place limits on our own actions to avoid harming those around us. Batman acts outside the laws of society, but he Does Not Kill, even when it would be the easy solution. James Bond…really isn’t a hero. He’s a man with a gun who happens to be opposed to villains who pet white cats and plot WWIII. Bond is only on Team Good Guy by default.
Rejecting the false narrative that heroines have to be timid, caring, and patient doesn’t mean that it’s bad to be timid, caring, or patient. Female protagonists shouldn’t be limited to a narrow stereotype, but the “liberation” of villainous behavior doesn’t offer a better path. Villainesses aren’t just single minded, ambitious, and adventurous; they’re also evil, or at least unethical. Cruella de Ville indulges her desire for luxurious coats by kidnapping and plotting to murder adorable puppies.
As children, unlimited power can seem attractive. Catwoman gets to do whatever she wants, after all. During a time when we have to go to bed early, get up for school, and eat our vegetables, that kind of freedom has a powerful appeal. It’s only when we grow up that we begin to understand that power shouldn’t be free, and that the people around us are just as real and important as we are. Children can want to do things “in the name of evil” because they don’t really understand what that means; adults know that burning down orphanages isn’t okay.
Power, intelligence, fearless drive…those qualities describe Darth Vader as much as Han Solo, and Ra’s al Ghul as well as Batman. Strength and independence aren’t good or bad qualities in themselves, but the worship of power without restraint is inherently immoral. Every time someone boasts of being “uncompromised”, of getting what they want regardless of the cost, we should ask ourselves who ends up paying for what they want.
Thank you for this article! And what the eff ever to the dudebros in the comments here who are totally missing the point of the article.
I loved the female villains when I was growing up. I felt like each small peak into their lives was so precious.
Being fabulous doesn’t make a villainess a villainess.
No, it’s what you DO, or want to do, with that power that makes you a villainess.
And the willingness, or lust to destroy anyone in your path to getting it.
I’m sorry, but this idea of “female protagonists” comes across as a very narrow view, ignoring every single female protagonist that is inconvenient for the argument. (After all, “spunky princess” is a stereotype for a reason.)
I don’t have fantasies about bringing harm to others for my own benefit and being an evil selfish person in general, so I can’t find myself idolizing pure villainesses all that much when I can enjoy and appreciate characters who strive to achieve their goals without stepping on everyone in their way, who defy the rules not when it’s just convenient for them but the right thing to do, and who are willing to help others even if it means putting their own goals on hold—whether they wanted to in the first place or not.
I really loved this blog. Thank you for these words!
@nicky13, haha, I’m really glad I sound young ;) Actually, I am 33, but I guess it is still up to cultural differences. I grew up in an ex-communist country where equality and working women were considered part of the socialist utopia (at least on paper). For example, a housewife was a totally foreign concept for me until I got older. So I’ve never seen men and women and having such different roles and never expected a man should “take care” of me or something.
“I’m sorry, but this idea of “female protagonists” comes across as a very narrow view, ignoring every single female protagonist that is inconvenient for the argument.”
I totally agree with this. Yes, maybe Snowwhite and Cinderella were meek and their only defining quality was that they were good at cleaning, but the princes in these fairy tales were not particularly bright as well, were they? On the other hand, Belle and Ariel were defined by their thirst for knowledge and the desire to be more than was planned for them. Both took matters in their own hands and didn’t wait for luck or destiny to strike. Same could be said for Mulan and Jasmine.
I never comment on anything EVER, but you, my QUEEN, need to know that this is EVERYTHING. Thank you for this. I laughed. I cried, I bought a giant fucking coat. <3
I adore this post! I’ve always loved Disney (and other) villainesses. My kids ask me why I like the “bad guys” so much and I tell them the princesses are boring — they’re almost always waiting for someone else to come along and ‘save’ them. The villains are much more interesting characters, with multiple layers to them. I find myself actually wanting to know more about them, their history, their background, why they are the way they are, and wondering if perhaps they’re just terribly misunderstood. And judging by the popularity of books/productions like Wicked or movies like Maleficent, I’m not the only one who feels that way. Long live the villainous queens!
it’s fine to admire the classiness of villains of either gender as long as you don’t have to encounter them in real life. I have. Professor Umbridge’s real-life counterpart was my principal once, and believe me, you wouldn’t admire her if you knew her! She was a bully pure and simple. So, imagine having Maleficent or Cruella as your boss and ask if you’d still say, “Ooh, she us do classy!
Her hair is done. Her makeup is flawless; her coat, luxurious. She’s single. She’s thin or she’s fat or she’s muscular or she’s old or she’s young but she’s never ever cute or soft or scared of you.
I LOVE everything about this article!!!!
Yes, villainesses are the women who defy feminine stereotypes of how women are supposed to act, and fiction has for centuries delighted in tearing those women down. THANK YOU THANK YOU for making this so clear.
And yeah, if it wasn’t clear, #ImWithHer
I find it interesting that people find the villainesses multi-layered and possibly misunderstood when villains don’t get the same treatment; of course, because the patriarchy.
I do love “Wicked”, and I’ve never seen “Maleficent”, but these are basically fanfiction of “what-if”. Their origins could have been from just pure greed and envy – like so many other villains. However, there is a different treatment and sympathy when it comes to men and woman in the villain department. As fabulous as the villainesses look, they still are willing to kill and mow down innocent people for their vain causes; it’s EVIL.
I’m honestly not into princess culture. My daughter’s princess phase came and three and left at four, so I’m really not from a team that praises princesses. However, I think this counter-princess culture is just as detrimental because it just says, “It doesn’t matter how you get there. Just get there and look fabulous”. Both are interesting in different ways. How is a person able to just be so bright and cheery, despite having to do slave work all day? Man, I wish I could wake up most days and feel like that. Instead, the the muck and mire of everyday life can just get under my skin. I don’t see the princesses as too fragile, but a different point-of-view on being forced to do something they’d rather not do.
This opinion-piece is just plain shallow and really doesn’t consider the moral implications of villains actions. This is the kind of thing that justifies a predator because said person was also sexually abused in their past. It’s understandable, but c’mon… there are serious moral and ethical implications on continuing the cycle.
@cecilia
This opinion-piece is just plain shallow and really doesn’t consider the moral implications of villains actions.
No, it is pointing out that these villains are coded as evil because of the way they defy traditional femininity.
A great example is Elsa. I can’t count how many people I knew who coded Elsa as the villain based on the trailers, because she has fabulous hair and glamorous clothes and makeup.
The essay then segues into noticing the way we’ve applied these assumptions to actual women. That women who present feminine defying traits, like ambition, women who laugh with their heads thrown back(and this is key to the point the article is making, see here), are suddenly cast as the villains with no consideration as to the morality of their actions.
I enjoyed this article. It makes you think about the way women are portrayed in so much of fiction. And especially in Disney films, villainesses are the ones that get to be stunning, driven and assertive. More often than not, the heroines are attractive in a wholesome manner, cooperative and caring. Lately we are getting more assertiveness from the heroines, which is a step in the right direction.
One of the problems with the whole villainess/heroine thing is the problem with dividing characters into categories of good and evil. I read a very compelling article by Ben Bova some years ago where he pointed out that in real life, almost no one thinks they are a villain. Most of the human race thinks that they are doing the right thing from their perspective. Instead of heroes and villains, we would create much more compelling fiction if our characters were protagonists and antagonists.
@cecilia Male villains have their fans too – Klingons and Romulans in Star Trek have their fan clubs, Dark Vader is popular, even Moriarty has his fans. Pretty much all bad characters in Game of Thrones (except two complete psychopaths) have fans who like them. With the exception of evilly evil guy that basically look like enemies in James Bond and disposable action movie enemies with no personality, male baddies have their following. Dexter is quite popular and he is nothing but killer.
I have even knew kids who pretend played Garamel more then schmufs.
More importantly, there are many grey men in movies – guys who are not likable, quite egoistic, don’t care much about other people, but somehow ended on the “right side”. There is a whole subgenre of gritty “conventionally unlikable” (I like them, many like them) guys starting with westerns, continuing through various detective stories and comic to actually game of thrones. Remember Saul from Galactica? Even characters like Londo or G’Kar from Babylon 5 are kinda similar through not the same.
Granted, those are adult movies – but the discussion here is by adults who you accused of lack of empathy towards male villains.
Latest children movies have cranky octopus, overly competitive cars/planes/trains with various personality flaws that makes them egoistic or unlikable at times. There is Raphael in Ninja Turtles who is constantly angry if I recall right. People, including kids, like that both in male and female form, but there is a bit less to choose among females. There seem/used to be artificial binary – she is either nice and sweet and selfless or evil. She is rarely simultaneously cranky and good, a bit egoistic and good, attracted to power and good, really angry and at the good side.
It is villain or sweet princess (through active in some movies). Villains are various in their flaws while princesses too much of what I am supposed to be – even as that level of niceness is not actually good for anybody in real life. Sweetness is just one of many possible molds and if it is not your preferred one, then there are only villains to choose.
This might be reason for why Elsa is more popular then Anna – kids can relate to Elsa being cranky or angry or not nice to sister – while Anna is commendable with her niceness Elsa feels more real.
> “How is a person able to just be so bright and cheery, despite having to do slave work all day? Man, I wish I could wake up most days and feel like that. “
It is not. No one is like that in real life. It is as much unreachable myth as action hero who single handedly fights whole army. You can put on cheery face up to the point (and the slave will reach the point), but the real emotions will eat a bit of you – in worst case coming out as a lot of passive aggression or angry blow up. In better case just being unhealthy resentment. I am not even sure why being nice and cheery would be something aspirational in that situation.
> “This opinion-piece is just plain shallow and really doesn’t consider the moral implications of villains actions.”
I think that opinion was more about what kind of women are placed into evil role. It is not that they are not doing bad things, it is that main positive male hero could have many of those traits and still be on the good side. He could build an imperium or impulsively run into pointless fights and still be the good one. He could be mean or backstabbing toward romantic competitor and it would be depicted as cool. On the other hand, too sweet of a hero would probably depicted as week and his personal growth would mean to become harder.
Then again, we rarely consider moral implications of good guy actions too. The morality of most movies, including children movies oftentimes, basically is “if a good one does it then it is good or at least cool”. For example, it is ok for good characters to steal cars and destroy other peoples property.
Since fans of supposed good characters are not expected to consider that in their opinions (pretty much never), fans of villains should not be judged to harshly for ignoring or rationalizing that aspect of the story.
Asajj Ventress has the best hair style.
Great piece – I’m working on a costume design thesis about pretty much this: coding of subversive female characters through scenography. Love your wit and turn of phrase!
@cecilia have you been living under a rock? Check any tumblr tag for a male villain and your life will never be the same. I don’t think there was ever a villain as misunderstood and multi-layered and so universally-abused-that-his-failed-attempt-of-planet-wide-genocide-was-totally-justified as Loki.
Fans are CRAZY about male villains. And moreover, male protagonists are allowed to do things female protagonists will be skinned for. I mean Jane Foster slapping Loki was painted as torturing a prisoner.
Disney villains, or movie villains in general, are a really interesting mirror of society and what society considers appropriate or one sex or the other. See also, effeminate male villains.
I really loved Maleficent. It kept the things that only villainesses are allowed to do, and had them be done by the main character. Perhaps, one day, people will be able to write original stories wherein women get to do all those things and be the heroines, and not have to write a woman as the villainess first in order to realize that women can do those things.
@thornbrake: Not so sure Winnowill is a good example of this – in Elfquest, there’s a bit more variety for heroines than there’s in Disney movies. And absolutely everyone is sexy. She doesn’t stand out as much as Disney villainesses.
I feel like Disney has done a fabulous job of recreating the princess image to reflect a larger spectrum of non-physical traits. We can’t fault the princesses of the 30’s, 40’s & 50’s for being what a woman (at the time) was expected to be. They are an amusingly flat reflection of the “ideal” woman. Modern princess must be much, much more. Beginning with the bookish and independent Belle (who wasn’t going to stay in her wing of the castle, despite what the terrifying beast told her), to Mulan, (technically not a princess, but defied her father and filial piety to do what she felt was right) to Merida (my favorite wild haired princess who rides bareback and refuses to be corseted) to Tiana (a hard-knocks no nonsense princess who tried a short cut to success, only to realize that hard work is the only way) and, finally Elsa, who had this incredible power that she feared, which ultimately led her to being unintentionally destructive (metaphor, anyone?). Being a woman is all of these things, as well as at times being timid, scared, weak, & likeable. To think that you have to be a villain to be strong, to suggest that you must be destructive, cold, conniving and calculated to be successful is as much as a detriment to young women as being “princess-y”.
I say this as a person who has always loved Disney (and other animated) villainesses (Ursula, Maleficent and the White Witch from my animated Narnia movie were amongst my favorites growing up and I could quote their whole movies as a kid and did my best to perfect their cackle – but I never got it) but I’ve never quite gotten the full on fascination. I can understand the fantasy of being powerful, of getting what you want, of getting to be BAD. But I don’t really want to be that person – the person who crushes other people, who causes grief and suffering, and who hurts and bullies and is cruel. I’ve known people like that, fabulous hair and all, and they are vile, toxic people. I don’t believe that’s what it means to be a powerful woman either, and I don’t believe that criticizing that type of behavior means criticizing women who dare to seek power (I think that IS a thing, though) and those women deserve to be criticized.
For that matter, I think a lot of the Disney heroines get a bit of a bum rap in terms of the way we think of their personalities.
It’s also not totally isolated to women – actually, many of the Disney princes are even blander than the princesses! And even characters like Luke Skywalker are considered the ‘boring’ character. I think in general we consider good boring and bad fun, and that makes a certain amount of sense. Villains are usually amongst the interesting characters who get the best songs, the best costumes, the best witty rejoinders, etc.
But I think this article is a good jumping off point for how we think about ambitious women (and I say this as somebody who is known and sometimes criticized for my ‘direct’ nature and works professionally in a STEM field), and women who won’t fit into the box society puts them in and have big dreams and desires. Hopefully we can get to the point where you don’t have to be a villain to reach those goals; where the only recourse isn’t to go full on villainess if you don’t want to be the demure/meek princess (and again, I think a lot of the Disney heroines don’t necessarily fit that mold in the first place).
Brilliant! It’s a shame so many people are missing the point–that pop culture heroines NEED more of the characteristics reserved only for villainesses. More individuality, more agency, less whining and wishing. That they need to display ambition beyond mere longing. That they need to be allowed more sharp edges and verve and escape the cookie cutter blandness and always nubile/juvenile cuteness that dulls their characterd. Fashion and hair are metaphors for individuality and diversity in age, body type, and personal style. You’ve nailed the mainstream pigeonholing of femininity in this essay. Kudos!
I wrote a paper on this. Little girls want to be Sleeping Beauty, Snow White, the princess. No one wants to be the Wicked Witch, w her pointy nose, green skin and hideous cackle. But, she has agency. She has power. I love how Angela Carter subverts all this in The Bloody Chamber. Her girl protagonists aren’t afraid to get their hands dirty. I’d like to see more of this; feminist writers re-visioning fairy tale and myth.
Powerful women/people do not have to crush people under their boot though. It’s interesting that we are viewing cruelty/ruthlessness as strength. It takes a lot of strength to be kind and generous and forgiving. It’s not weakness to forgive someone or to offer someone a hand up when they fall rather than stepping on them to climb up. Beauty isn’t power either by the way.
I liked the article and I have a thing for villains too but it’s frightening to think of them as role models.
Generic protagonists aren’t so much a Disney thing as they are a general adventure story thing. Generic main characters are easy to “slip into” and identify with, as Cracked showed brilliantly in this After Hours video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrbKuOaVF3k. Villains tend to be more interesting because they have an agenda–they are the ones who get the plot moving. It’s not about gender. Also as MeghanW said, Disney princesses aren’t actually that generic after 1990.
Thw whole point of heroes is that they do the right thing even when it is something that they really do not want to do. And the whole point of villains is that they don’t. Of course villains have more fun – what do you expect?
This isn’t only about heroines and villainesses; it’s a pattern in which the nominal hero and heroine of the story are merely the people the story happens *to*, not necessarily the ones with the agency to make the plot happen.
Look at what ciphers the various Prince Charming characters are in princess movies. (There’s an article on this site about how the battle in _Sleeping Beauty_ is Maleficent vs. the fairy godmothers, not vs. the prince.) Look how the hero of _Aladdin_ is the Genie, not Aladdin.
Cf. _Pride and Prejudice_: Jane would have made a classic Disney princess- but the author was smart enough to focus the story on the characters with agency, Elizabeth and Darcy. P&P owes a lot to _Much Ado About Nothing_, in which, amusingly enough, the passive-heroine character is named Hero.
Puts me in mind of this article, in relation to the approval ratings of Hillary Clinton.
https://thepolicy.us/thinking-about-hillary-a-plea-for-reason-308fce6d187c#.t9969dr08
Long story short: When Clinton *has* power her approval ratings go up; when Clinton *seeks* power her approval ratings go down.
I.e., she’s perfectly competent, but women who ask for power are unacceptable.
this is fabulous!! I love the villains mor than the heros or the princesses! Thankyou for making this!! You are realy talented.
A lot of people in the comments are arguing that this article is suggesting that little girls should try to be like villains, which is obviously not a good influence. That’s not what the article is saying though. It’s not saying “Ursula was evil but she did what she had to do to make herself happy so be like her.” The article is commenting on how traits like originality, ambition, self-interest, being commanding, not accepting disrespect, standing up for yourself and your opinions and desires even if you have to say something other people don’t want to hear or don’t approve of, and putting your own feelings before other people’s are all traits associated almost exclusively with villainesses. These strong, loud, demanding, against-the-flow attitudes are, themselves, vilified. Being fat, too tall, having a big nose or beauty marks, wearing bright makeup, wearing extravagant clothes, when women show these traits in cartoons, they are never the woman little girls are supposed to want to be. All children learn to associate those traits, as well as strong, forceful women, with evil. They’re taught that that’s not right. People like that are bad. It’s not about being like a villainess. It’s about wanting little girls to be able to express traditionally un-feminine, domineering, loud, distinctive traits, and not think that if they act that way, if they go to lengths to get what they want, if they long to be powerful and successful and in charge, if they want to dress lavishly and express themselves through extravagant makeup, if they’re fat or tall or bony or have sharp, angled features or a big nose or crooked teeth or a brash laugh, then they’re only like the villains, and that’s something to be ashamed of. We’re not saying little girls should be villains. We’re saying we need to start making women with these traits the role models that little girls can look up to.
Something I wanted to point out but forgot to mention in my last comment: Plenty of men and boys in cartoons have these traits, but that doesn’t automatically make them the villain. Male characters who act like this can be the villain, the hero, the sidekick, the best friend, the scientist, the love interest, any type of character. Men are expected to express these traits. It’s only seen as unacceptable when female characters do it. While any male character can have these traits, only female villains have them.
@46,47 – as somebody who was a little critical of how the argument in the article was presented, I really like your points :)
Made similar points in the Chronicle of Higher Education a while back about powerful wicked women, and of course we all echo Atwood’s Spotty-Handed Villianesses–I look forward to reading more of your work: http://www.chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/wicked-stepmothers-and-good-administrators/32922
I just…wow. This is great. Really, really great. And that last paragraph? I welled up a bit.
This is my new favorite line.
@ salix_caprea- ‘I don’t think it is offensive if a female character is represented as timid or nice or shy. These are normal human traits. Should we teach our daughters that they should be rude and inconsiderate, just so that no one sees them as weak?’
Maybe you haven’t looked up the definition of timid in awhile?
Timidity is not a trait I would want for my kids, no matter their gender.
Also, the opposite of nice or shy does not default to rude and inconsiderate.
@52/Noel: Isn’t “rude and inconsiderate” pretty much the opposite of “nice”? I would want my kids to be nice, no matter their gender.
Oh god YES. But there are so many people commenting on the original article that just don’t seem to get it — if a female character isn’t a downtrodden doormat, or if she isn’t “feisty” (in a cute and non-threatening way), she is more more likely to be the villain of the piece rather than the protagonist.
Just a reminder to keep the discussion civil, and avoid making disagreements and criticisms personal in tone. The commenting guidelines can be found here.