ext_383070 ([identity profile] frolicndetour.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] lyssie 2010-01-23 09:14 pm (UTC)

Yeah, the thing that really gets me about these discussions is that they sound like they're taking place in 1970. At best. Yeah, there really weren't all that many interesting female characters in the original Star Trek. However many years ago that was. It's just not true anymore.* I actually saw one post on Metafandom using the ''no interesting women' argument as a reason for writing RPS. o.O I mean, on the one hand, while I'm certainly not pearl-clutchy about RPF, I can imagine the actors not liking the idea of it, so it's too weird to be like "you must write more porn about actresses for great justice." On the other hand, is this like, God-the-sexist-writer just didn't give us any interesting real women? Huh?

*And to the extent it is true, I think that's a function of what people choose to watch. You can't watch Supernatural and then claim that you are driven to slash because of the dearth of female characters.

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting