We are not things,or wait, are we?: Cosplaying as objects

I love cosplay. It is one of the best parts of attending cons: seeing it, doing it, and thinking about what I might sew or adapt next. Cosplay has also been central to the increasing numbers of women attending conventions . It makes cons a more welcoming environment for women because it highlights the combination of geek culture with the creation of costumes, an activity associated with women.

However, there are certain types of cosplay that bother me. While many people find revealing costumes uncomfortable, the ones that give me pause are more subtle. Specifically, I get uncomfortable when women cosplay as objects. My discomfort with this stems from the fact that I haven’t seen any discussion of this, which suggests complacency with seeing women dressed as objects and the gendering of the non-humanoid as female, including robots, objects, and even ideas such as the Nation state. Most often, these cosplays are robots, which have personalities and agency, but for every 100 woman dressed in an awesome TARDIS dress or costume you have only one male doing the same.

This also bothers me because as a possible replacement for revealing costumes, some women have turned to dressing as objects and that seems awkward. Obviously, dressing as an object does not mean you will be objectified but it seems an odd choice when one could cosplay as a women character. Additionally, the lack of representation of such adapted attire for men and the fact that it is more common for them to be the human male counterpoint or owner of the robot or object in question adds another layer of discomfort.

It reminds me that as much as cosplay has allowed cons to be more inviting for women the type of cosplay one does matters just as much. It reminds me about how important it is to think about who/what you are signifying when you cosplay. It is true that robots and other semi-sentient things, like the TARDIS, are awesome but are you choosing to be an object over an active woman character? If so, why does that appeal to you over the female character? How does this inspire or make others more comfortable? Or does your cosplay accidentally play into an agenda that does not support women?

Two Lesbians Who Talk About Nothing Other Than a Man

This is partially due to my slow, and ongoing, estrangement from Doctor Who but there is something very specific that this show has done to irritate me. I mentioned this in my previous post and it’s “two lesbians who talk about nothing other than a man.” This probably happens in other places, as I have a strong memory of this being true, but Doctor Who, and very particularly the seasons with Matt Smith, have done this so often I can’t stand seeing the very awesome and progressive pair in an episode.

My criticism piggybacks on the fact that since the departure of David Tennant, and I can’t speak to any of Peter Capaldi’s run, the development and use of female characters on the show has been really infuriating (and even during the pre-Matt Smith seasons of the reboot it wasn’t amazing). The series during that time had a lower percentage of episodes that passed the Bechdel test and, in general, fans were getting annoyed with the poor development of female characters . As an actual archaeologist, but one who LOVES to suspend her disbelief, my personal annoyance was with the backstory of River Song (another post for another time). Beyond that, this came at the same time as comments made by makers of the show along the lines of “the time isn’t right for a female Doctor”. Yay! Nothing like telling a good portion of their fan base that they can only ever hope to be the sidekick until some eventual time when we want it enough.

Anyways, I was, and continue to be, very pleased that Doctor Who has introduced regular LGBTQ characters into the show who are unabashedly together and live during the Victorian era. A sort of double middle finger to anyone who might want to suggest that Doctor Who needs to be historically accurate. Or that any FICTIONAL story has a need to be historically accurate. They are awesome badass women who are not only in a same-gender marriage but are also in an interspecies/racial relationship. It’s a person of a different Alien/Earth race instead of a person of color but that’s ok, it still adds an extra level of intrigue to their relationship especially combined with their prominence in the show.

HOWEVER, after watching a few episodes, I noticed most of their conversations are about the Doctor. Yes, he is the main character and we probably wouldn’t be seeing these characters if it wasn’t for some mess the Doctor has made but dear god the writers had a walking Bechdel test at their fingertips and still managed to muck it up. The two are in a relationship and still the majority of their dialogue revolves around talking about a man. It’s one of those infuriating tidbits, which on top of the other dissatisfaction I’ve had with Doctor Who, made me bored and annoyed. Even further, while regulars on the show, their characters continue to be poorly developed, as most of the other female characters are, and, at least in my watching of the show, felt like caricatures. Madame Vastra comes off as haughty and cold without reason and Jenny feels like a “yes, ma’am” occasional ninja with no real personality. Additionally, M. Vastra talks down to Jenny all the time and Jenny just sort of takes it, even though they are partners, which seems like an unhealthy way to portray a partnership, even if one of them used to be a maid. I hope this improves because it’s a damned fine place to start but I want these characters to have a real relationship not just be a box checked off of the diversity list.