Redefining feminine strength

I don’t get it. It’s 2017. Why are we still struggling to create a strong feminine character in films?

Right about now, all the self-proclaimed supporters of gender equality will rise up in protest and quote various movies which have badass female characters as their leads, but no, you misunderstand me. When I say ‘strong’, I don’t mean physically strong. Sure, over the ages there has been a steady progression of females transitioning from quiet roles to more central, badass, influential roles. But in most of them, the definition of ‘strong’ has been purely physical. 

Welcome to this article about redefining strength. 

Like every other person or creature, females have layers of complexity to them that have to be separated to understand the motivations and inspirations behind whatever they do. But it feels like the more we try and subvert the stereotypes surrounding females, the more we play right into them. Maybe because we are merely trying to change their outward portrayal without changing our cast-in-stone mentality. Throwing together a female character who wears leather jackets, always ties her hair, pretends to be heartless and always walks with an anti-feminine swagger doesn’t make her a strong lead. It makes her a manly lead. And what this implies is that if you want to be badass and strong, give up all feminine pursuits and become as manly as possible. 

There are so many things wrong with that. I have so many questions. First question: Does it automatically symbolise frivolity if a girl wears dresses, skirts, shorts, make-up, jewellery or such? A woman embracing her femininity shouldn’t be considered weak. Second question: Is it so utterly impossible to comprehend a woman who doesn’t have to choose between being beautiful and being badass? I was watching Baahubali recently to refresh my memory for the sequel and in that, Baahubali — in what is intended to be a very romantic scene — helps Avantika (female lead) realise her hidden desire to give into beautification which is apparently considered a vice now?

And that somehow unlocks her love for him because yes, that’s what women do — we love men who stalk us and tell us that we should be beautiful. Apparently that’s also the only reason why they show females in movies. 

If you thought this was bad, I watched Baahubali 2 a few days back. Storyline aside, I was so impressed with Devasena’s strong warrior portrayal until she fell in love. Suddenly, this impressive warrior princess needed help in all kinds of things. In one second, she was ready to follow Baahubali to the ends of the earth and give up everything. Trust me, I get the romantic appeal of giving up your life for love but realistically speaking?

In a society that is still struggling to understand the difference between Yes and No, we can’t be propagating, even unintentionally, such stereotypes. In real life, a woman doesn’t have to choose between two qualities. She can be beautiful and tough. She can be feminine and serious. She can wear six-inch heels and still be able to kill you. 

Emotion isn’t weakness. But excess of emotion portraying women as people who melt if you do one nice thing for them isn’t realistic. For all my criticism of Baahubali, there were quite a few great leads like Ramya Krishnan who balanced the delicacy of motherhood with the strength of a monarch perfectly and even Anushka Shetty had a pretty good run otherwise. What we should be focusing on portraying is mental strength.