The Female Character Flowchart

I encountered a fascinating topic on metafandom a few days ago: The Female Character Flowchart, that seeks to label every stereotype that concerns women in literature and the media. It's stirred up some controversy, though I've only read two posts and ten times as many comments on the issue (it's a project I will have to save for a day that does not involve a VIE and rehearsals). What I've read is primarily concerned with the extent of the flowchart: it's so massive that it gives the impression that:

1. There is either a) only one way to create a Strong Female Character or b) no possible way to create a Strong Female Character that does not fall prey to some stereotype.
2. If a female character possesses any traits that appear on the chart (for example, she is a part of a team or family, is a love interest, or happens to need saving at some point), she has lost the right to be called a Strong Female Character; she is an automatic stereotype and for shame, bad author, for creating her!

I will admit, the flowchart, when I first saw it, is overwhelming. It's a massive 2147 x 1926, which means a great deal of scrolling left, right, up, and down, following a spiderweb network of arrows all over the place. But it's worth the initial confusion. It's a fascinating chart, and rather amusing: it puts me in mind of a parody (there's argument over whether it's one or not). The parody theory gained more credence the more the arrows I followed, and watched branch out into more arrows, all dotted with traits, until it seemed the entire spectrum of character traits had been covered and labeled as a stereotype.

I don't have a problem with the immense size of the flowchart so much as with what it suggests: that there really is only one way to create a Strong Female Character. I agree with the criteria that characterizes a Strong Female Character: she carries her own story, is three dimensional, does not represents an idea (but what does that mean, exactly? She is a theme personified, like Patience, Virtue, Honesty? Might not male characters - even the best of them - fall into that same trap? And do so with as much regularity as women do?), is flawed, and survives the third act. But a female character can be part of a team/family and be her own character. She can be the love interest and still carry her own story. Of course, the point of the chart, and of the criteria of what makes Strong Female Character, is that as long as these points are fulfilled, a character can still possess those cliched traits and not end up a stereotype.

But I don't get a sense of that from the flowchart, not exactly. My first impression was that for a female character to possess any of the stereotypical traits was to brand her a type. If she ever needed saving, she is a Damsel in Distress. If she is part of a family or team, she is (pick one) a rogue, a healer, a voice of reason, etc.

But I mean to read more, and develop more thinkyful thoughts on this flowchart, because such thoughts are fun. I also think it would be awesome if someone created a quiz a la the Mary Sue Litmus Test, just because.

Anyhow. I should really finish up a Very Important Essay (VIE) right now - it's due tomorrow, and the questionable luxury of writing into the deep night is not one I can afford at the moment. I've never realized that it was possible to be so busy: two VIEs due back to back, rehearsals for a performance that opens next Friday, two novels to read for English (as well as responses to other readings and research for a term paper), and an urban planning project for geography. Yikes! And this is barely half of it. I'm trying to take this all one thing at a time, in a valiant attempt not to feel overwhelmed, but I can't help myself: I'm starting to count down the days until the semester ends. My Christmas break? Shall be spent lying in bed wrapped in blankets, drinking hot chocolate with cream, and reading the Gothic novels of Ann Radcliffe. And when my eyes are sagging from the weight of sympathizing with swooning maidens and ghostly sob-stories, I'll go downstairs and bake something. Many somethings, preferably.