TROPES

The Scarlet Watch from Elkie Atherton The Tropes: Dissecting the Stereotypes of Our Screen

Welcome back to the Scarlet Watch, in this addi�on I’m doing something quite different. I’m going to break down our favourite tropes and see the deeper meanings behind them; explaining how to combat these tropes because of the nega�ve impacts on real-life these stereotypes have. I hope you enjoy this ar�cle. This ar�cle was inspired by the YouTube channel The Take so if you are looking for more content like this, I would recommend them.

Bad Boys: The trope of a Bad Boy love interest falling for a girl who fixes him is a tale as old as �me –reference very much intended. The Bad Boy stands out. He doesn’t care but he’s s�ll likeable and is not inclined to have “normal” morals. This sets him apart from the nice guy. He’s caring in an odd sort of way. The Bad Boy is strong, silent, mysterious and a�rac�ve. Men want to be him; women want to sleep with him. He is the pinnacle of heteronorma�ve masculinity. He is a myth. His charisma jus�fies his danger. Tragic and genuinely fragile under his hard exterior. The love of a good girl is all he needs. A woman’s love and hard work can fix a man’s bad behaviour. These ideas date back to Greek mythology. It’s roman�cizing toxic rela�onships and condi�oning women to expect this behaviour to find their Prince Charming. Men in real life who exhibit this toxic behaviour usually aren’t secretly sensi�ve souls and women don’t owe men their hard work for a glimpse at a be�er man. Intriguing as he is on screen the bad boy isn’t always the way to go and should remain what he is: a fantasy.

Cool Girls: This term, coined in Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn and known from Rosamund Pike’s monologue from its subsequent film, the Cool Girl is essen�ally one of the guys. She likes stereotypically masculine ac�vi�es that correspond to the male protagonist’s interests. She is effortlessly hot though loves junk food and beer. Fun-loving and not like other girls, the Cool Girl is a myth invented by the men who lust for her whether, as some people believe, due to suppressed homoero�cism or misogyny or a mixture of the two. The Cool Girl can be used to put down more feminine women crea�ng a toxic dynamic of women reflec�ng the anxie�es of men. Cool Girls are on a �me limit because of how incredibly challenging this performance can be. This is evident in the story of Gone Girl. The problem is people try to emulate the Cool Girl. In real life women have interests in tradi�onally masculine ac�vi�es and (uncommon to many people’s belief) this isn’t a performance for men. Women are as wi�y and as carefree as the Cool Girl, but it seems to be irrelevant because they don’t reach the impossible standards of beauty. As we move forward with the Cool Girl we should write her with a key difference; not trying to get through in a man’s world but trying to destroy the man’s world.

Bombshells: All you’ll need to know about the Bombshell is in her name; her sexuality is comparable to a weapon of mass destruc�on. Originally coined in the 1933 film Bombshell; she grows from there. She makes heads turn, disarms men, isn’t known for her brains, is involved with lots of men and will probably die a young and tragic death. Embodying the materialism of the 1950s, she can display the American dream. Marilyn Monroe and Elizabeth Taylor displayed both blonde and brune�e bombshells respec�vely in their Hollywood heyday. Desirability is their main characteris�c in the gaze of a heteronorma�ve man. The lore of the Bombshell originates from the goddess Aphrodite, and this is most evident in their mutual link to water. She is a reflec�on of the male gaze where the camera performs as the eyes of infan�lized heterosexual men. The iconic slow-mo�on shot is used in conjunc�on with her. She is a visual delight separate from sound, silenced in every sense because we already know who she is. Some�mes she can be empowered by the hold she has on men, using it for personal gain. She is a perfect look at the contradic�ons of being a woman: she is animalis�c yet childish, she is a seductress but naïve, she is put on a pedestal for her beauty however villainised for her promiscuity. Sexualised women are punished but sexualisa�on is usually done by the people around you. Even the actresses –for example, Megan Fox – are wrapped up in this villainy. Their deaths can be an example of the Women In Refrigerators’ death –the death of a woman to propel a male protagonist’s storyline. To improve this trope’s screen �me, storytellers need to keep in mind that we need more POC Bombshells, need to let these characters age, we need to go beyond the surface, delving deep into these characters and we need to shi� away from the default male gaze. Then we can get the character we need and deserve.

Bad Mums: Bad Mums don’t conform to society’s idea of a dependable mother and are a rejec�on of the perfect mum. The Bad Mum can be broken down into three types. First, the Outrageous Mum. They are cruel, comedic and incredibly over the top. Unfiltered, snarky and self-centred she is deligh�ully vicious. But she is a part of every mum. Though hos�le she is fiercely protec�ve and the mutual sniping she enjoys with her children is a sort of love language. Maybe she’s a scheming jerk or maybe she is just a deeply flawed caricature of the truthful mum. Secondly, the Dark Side of Mum. They are insecure, cruel, terrifying, emo�onally draining and display severe mental illness. They are abusive to their kids and embody society’s fears of the possibility of violent women, especially with a lack of maternal ins�ncts. They are infected by the patriarchy either trying to survive in it or being discarded by it. They are a cau�on tale and deeply unse�ling but have created iconic stories. Thirdly, the Mums Are People Too. They are relatable, humanized, imperfect and sympathe�c mothers. They are exhausted, mistreated mums who don’t let their motherhood define them. They reject society’s expecta�ons but are essen�ally (especially from a sympathe�c perspec�ve) a good mum. They are the needed empathy for mums.

Best Friend: The trope of the Best Friend is alive and well in every aspect of cinema and television. They basically exist to propel the protagonist’s story. They are more likely to be POC, queer, trans, disabled and not conven�onally a�rac�ve than the lead character. They are undyingly suppor�ve; they’re a cheerleader and a life coach. They are selfless in terms of their own happiness. Tokenism is a main feature of this trope, evidenced in the gay best friend and the sassy black friend. They are denied heroism, othered and full of poten�al as a lead character. Moving forward lead characters should be POC, queer, trans, disabled and in other ways othered because that wouldn’t only be good for representa�on but would create wonderful stories. Screen �me can be split between two characters and inequality breaks friendship.

An�-Hero: You guessed it; the An�-Hero is the protagonist yet not a clean-cut hero. They are some of the most beloved characters, but should they be? Let’s break down the two itera�ons of the ever-evolving An�-Hero. First up is the An�Hero 1.0. The first kind of An�Hero can be summed up in one phrase; a difficult man. This breed of protagonist has been heavily cri�cised in the quake of the Me Too movement especially a�er House of Cards’ Kevin Spacey’s scandal – which I think is exactly the appropriate cri�cal lens. The intelligent, powerful and charisma�c An�-Hero 1.0, who is usually a white cis het man, is deified by the men who want to be him. His toxic masculinity, corrup�on and eli�sm are all things that make him undesirable in my eyes but make him goals in other people’s eyes, however incredibly fic�onal and falsely hopeful he really is. There is always hope he will turn good which, when applied to real life, becomes incredibly problema�c. He is mythic, yet as people enter the world he owns through his eyes they are en�rely invigorated by him and he barely passes the very low standards society has set him. Yet he is s�ll beloved and in my opinion the way he is celebrated and not held accountable makes this first cycle of the trope quite problema�c. The second itera�on is the An�Hero 2.0. The key difference between 1.0 and 2.0 is that the 2.0 has li�le to no hanging suspense of the hope that one day they will be good. The An�Hero 2.0 is more likely to be a woman and not like the tradi�onal white cis het protagonist previously seen. We are discouraged from fully iden�fying with these characters. They are not a role model because we see the pain they cause and we are allowed to punish them for their mistakes and bad decisions. They are morally compromised and messy. They are relatable but not jus�fiable because bad decisions don’t necessarily make a bad person.

So that’s it. I hope you enjoyed the breakdown of these tropes and can see your favourite films, shows and characters in a different light. Stay safe and watch some Ne�lix.