Snarky Pretentious (Female) Characters

[pugilistico]

I'm sure I'm not the only one who's noticed this trend that's been going on for a few years at least.

Why are there so many characters in movies and TV, who are snarky and insufferable? They come off as know-it-alls who act like everybody else around them is stupid.
And they're generally traits in female characters.

I saw this show up on netflix and the main character comes off as incredibly disrespectful. This may be a good show but the main character comes off as so unlikable I already lost any interest I may have had in it.

I see is a lot of shows and movies these days. I watched a few episodes of Night Agent and I stopped because I couldn't stand the woman who's constantly bitching and making demands to the one guy who's literally putting himself in front of bad guys shooting guns to kill her.

I think the writers want to have a character that's "eccentric and confident" but they themselves don't have the tact to write a character like that without them coming off like a dick. Captain Marvel is probably one of the best examples of this. I'm sure the new Snow White movie will be the same.

It just isn't women either. I think there's a trend for showing people lower in hierarchy being sticking it to those in authority.
Here's scene from the show SAS Rogue Heroes where a junior officer goes into a fucking general's office, makes demands while pouring himself a drink without asking and then doesn't salute when another general enters the office. I don't care how confident and necessary you are, what kind of junior officer acts like this to fucking general without getting reprimanded? Maybe this is what actually happened in real life but I find it incredible hard to believe.

 

[Razberry]

This has gone on for almost a decade but I guess people all take notice in their own time.

What it is, is the political ideology/religion of the people who create said project, infused into the story. It IS often the whole reason the story is told at all. It is the message, if you will.

If you want to work in Hollywood you WILL spread the latest version of the Marxist virus, or you won't be picked for projects in the future. You need to be picked. You can't have integrity and expect to walk on any red carpets.

Women are to be portrayed as smart, dangerous, capable, arrogant, competent and often down right flawless. Their role is to be the magic girl who is the key to everything. Their role is to show how utterly and completely useless men are to them, they can do everything men can do and twice as well. Their role is to lead.

Men are to be portrayed as dumb, weak, harmless, incompetent, immoral. Their role is to be berated and lectured by the morally superior female. Their role is to be scolded for their decisions which are always bad and wrong. Their role is to be cowards. Their role is to be the evil villain to be destroyed.

The same relation as described above goes for race as well as gender, where being white is male and being any other race is being a woman. Opressor and opressed.

In the vanilla version of their religion/philosophy the distinction of opressor and opressed was made through wealth. In this version of its evolution the distinction is made through identity, race and gender, but it's the same disgusting ideas at the bottom of it.

Once you have observed this, you will start seeing the pattern everywhere. Almost everything being produced in entertainment today is either completely saturated by it or at the very least has it as a prominent element.

 

[Spam On Rye]

Noticed back in the 90s but it's hit its peak now that the institutions are spitting out boss bitches. Occult feminism, Babeuf, Blavotsky, Hegel, Marx, Freud, and on and on and on. Deconstruct everything into nothing. Harold Bloom has some good work explaining how we got here that's worth a look.

 

[Berserker13]

started here

 

[khukurikoo]

Man vs woman has always been the chief divide pushed onto society through mass media. I think it's step one into destroying the most natural union. Feminism in the 60's convinced women taking care of a family was oppressive and rooted in misoginy, while serving corporate needs was liberating. Not only weakened the family unit, but screwed us all economically. Pushing porn in the 90's with girl girl action being the hottest thing available. Later on pushing anal as something to be most desired. Then sexual liberation and fucking everyone and anyone because that's how you should show your power as a woman. You can do whatever a man does. And now it's being an unbearable, self-absored, cunt is how you rebel against the system of oppression and show your power. I'm missing more things, and also the female perspective on how the minds of men have been warped too. Maybe it's just all run by group of homos that want more options.

 

[Renard]

Is this different from say, Cumberbatch's Sherlock Holmes? He comes in, magically connects everything from tiny hints that realistically could mean nothing, everyone is humbled, he walks out and it's curtains on the episode. Not to mention that Sherlock is snooty as fuck in that adaptation. I do think that people are willing to suspend disbelief for a dude, but for a woman the same portrayal doesn't fit in with cultural stereotypes so it strikes false. I'm not even sure it's cultural stereotypes, probably runs deeper than that, like dimorphic species collateral damage. Obviously there's a quality difference there, critically acclaimed show vs. McNetflix mind junk, but you get the idea.

 

[GSP_37]

There's a TV commercial I think featuring cast and characters from The Office and the one commenting about internet sorta fits the bill.

The woman from Drew Carey Show.

 

[Flower2dPeople]

Modern audience' strong woman.

 

[Oblivian]

Honestly, I don't get why people are turned off by shows if the character is unlikable. A ton of great shows have characters who are total pieces of shit. It's not about liking the character - it's about if they are interesting to watch.

 

[Thrawn33]

Honestly, I don't get why people are turned off by shows if the character is unlikable. A ton of great shows have characters who are total pieces of shit. It's not about liking the character - it's about if they are interesting to watch.

Heel heat vs Xpac Heat

There's well written and acted unlikable characters who make you hate them but add to the story (Geoffery from Game of Thrones is one of the best examples)

Then there's poorly written cliche unlikable characters that take away from the story.

Huge difference.

 

[pugilistico]

Is this different from say, Cumberbatch's Sherlock Holmes? He comes in, magically connects everything from tiny hints that realistically could mean nothing, everyone is humbled, he walks out and it's curtains on the episode. Not to mention that Sherlock is snooty as fuck in that adaptation. I do think that people are willing to suspend disbelief for a dude, but for a woman the same portrayal doesn't fit in with cultural stereotypes so it strikes false. I'm not even sure it's cultural stereotypes, probably runs deeper than that, like dimorphic species collateral damage. Obviously there's a quality difference there, critically acclaimed show vs. McNetflix mind junk, but you get the idea.

I never watched sherlock holmes so can't say but I do mention in my OP an example of a male character being this way. Check out the video I posted a junior officer walking into a fucking general's office and acting like he owns the place. I have a very hard time believing that's how that interaction went down in real life, especially back in the 40s.

Honestly, I don't get why people are turned off by shows if the character is unlikable. A ton of great shows have characters who are total pieces of shit. It's not about liking the character - it's about if they are interesting to watch.

There's a difference between being a likable asshole or a morally bankrupt character who's still interesting. My issue is that these characters are assholes, arrogant, yet not in a way that's interesting. It's poor writing to say the least.

started here

I actually disagree. I never got the Skyler hate. She was stuck between a rock and a hard place and acted out in the only way she could. And the show doesn't make her out to be an example of feminist triumph.

A better example would be Walter if the show portrayed him to be a hero instead of a guy whose ego became inflated when he got a taste of power.

Later show Walter (after he fully leans into being Heisenberg), the arrogant know-it-all, is the kind of character I'm complaining about, if the writers actually portrayed him to be a good guy and not the flawed person he was. And on top of that imagine if the show never showed how he got to be that way or the reason he has to be so capable.

 

[pugilistico]

This has gone on for almost a decade but I guess people all take notice in their own time.

What it is, is the political ideology/religion of the people who create said project, infused into the story. It IS often the whole reason the story is told at all. It is the message, if you will.

If you want to work in Hollywood you WILL spread the latest version of the Marxist virus, or you won't be picked for projects in the future. You need to be picked. You can't have integrity and expect to walk on any red carpets.

Women are to be portrayed as smart, dangerous, capable, arrogant, competent and often down right flawless. Their role is to be the magic girl who is the key to everything. Their role is to show how utterly and completely useless men are to them, they can do everything men can do and twice as well. Their role is to lead.

Men are to be portrayed as dumb, weak, harmless, incompetent, immoral. Their role is to be berated and lectured by the morally superior female. Their role is to be scolded for their decisions which are always bad and wrong. Their role is to be cowards. Their role is to be the evil villain to be destroyed.

The same relation as described above goes for race as well as gender, where being white is male and being any other race is being a woman. Opressor and opressed.

In the vanilla version of their religion/philosophy the distinction of opressor and opressed was made through wealth. In this version of its evolution the distinction is made through identity, race and gender, but it's the same disgusting ideas at the bottom of it.

Once you have observed this, you will start seeing the pattern everywhere. Almost everything being produced in entertainment today is either completely saturated by it or at the very least has it as a prominent element.

My take is a lot simpler than that. The writers themselves are projecting their fantasies of being badass women who can do anything better than men, but they are just not good enough writers to pull off such a character without making her annoying. I have noticed there seems to be a need to "dunk" on men/people perceived to traditionally have authority. They write snarky arrogant characters because themselves probably have shitty personalities and don't realize how it may come across.

Having a capable character is one thing, but I don't understand why they have to be so snarky and arrogant to others around them. That's what I don't understand.

I don't know how much of this is art imitating life or vice versa, I have noticed this trend in real life with American women. They always have something to prove and have to let you know how capable they are. This behavior would be douchey coming from a man and it's not flattering from a woman. I've had women "womansplain" shit to me and inject gender and race politics into conversations that don't belong. It's why I don't really meet American women anymore.

 

[Gutter Chris]

started here

That chick and her sister I think made me totally nope out of that show

 

[Renard]

My take is a lot simpler than that. The writers themselves are projecting their fantasies of being badass women who can do anything better than men, but they are just not good enough writers to pull off such a character without making her annoying. I have noticed there seems to be a need to "dunk" on men/people perceived to traditionally have authority. They write snarky arrogant characters because themselves probably have shitty personalities and don't realize how it may come across.

Having a capable character is one thing, but I don't understand why they have to be so snarky and arrogant to others around them. That's what I don't understand.

I don't know how much of this is art imitating life or vice versa, I have noticed this trend in real life with American women. They always have something to prove and have to let you know how capable they are. This behavior would be douchey coming from a man and it's not flattering from a woman. I've had women "womansplain" shit to me and inject gender and race politics into conversations that don't belong. It's why I don't really meet American women anymore.

The issue is that there's a body of research in psychology showing that men and women in identical situations are perceived completely differently. A male idiot savant character can yell orders at everyone, be as obnoxious as he wants, but ultimately be perceived as competent, rational and justified in his actions. You use the identical script but this time make it a female character and the audience will perceive her as shrill, emotional and non-credible. Those are automatic thoughts that mostly occur outside of one's conscious awareness. So you think the character itself is different or not written properly but it may just be an illusion of perception.

Essentially the only way for a woman to "win" in this scenario, whether it's in real life or fiction, is for her behaviour to be adapted to sex and gender stereotypes. The "alpha woman" is basically a beautiful woman, dressed and groomed beautifully, who's strong but not forceful, likeable and has an endearing feminine quality to her, and she's probably not the star of show but the co-star.

 

[moreorless87]

Is this different from say, Cumberbatch's Sherlock Holmes? He comes in, magically connects everything from tiny hints that realistically could mean nothing, everyone is humbled, he walks out and it's curtains on the episode. Not to mention that Sherlock is snooty as fuck in that adaptation. I do think that people are willing to suspend disbelief for a dude, but for a woman the same portrayal doesn't fit in with cultural stereotypes so it strikes false. I'm not even sure it's cultural stereotypes, probably runs deeper than that, like dimorphic species collateral damage. Obviously there's a quality difference there, critically acclaimed show vs. McNetflix mind junk, but you get the idea.

I would say someone like Cumberbatch's Sherlock or Tony Stark are more interesting and less insufferable because they have depth to them as characters, they have quite significant flaws and personal vulnerabilities, there not JUST snarky.

I'd say the truth is writers do tend to try and look for a shortcut, a lower effort formula they can follow and in the last 10-15 years the "strong female character" is definitely something they've done that with, basically Mary Sue like characters who's defining feature is their competence.

It can hide behind claims that its politically significant but for me good feminist writting is writting good female characters, characters like Ripley, Sarah Conor or more recently Furisoa are well written/acted "strong women" who don't just fall back to the Mary Sue formula.

 

[DaleBoca]

 

[fingercuffs]

started here

One of the funniest things on Sherdog ever was when very few of us were right about Walt's intentions with the drug lord thing.

 

[fingercuffs]

I don't know if I've hated a female character more than her mother in law.

 

[El Panteron]

This thread has all the mouthbreathers that didn't go to the thread with the guy complaining about women online. I was wondering where you guys ended up.

 

[DaleBoca]

I don't know if I've hated a female character more than her mother in law.

Marchand was hell of an actress. I wonder what would have it happened…

But you just reminded me of Janice. Man, I hated that bitch.