To pass the time (procrastination) today I read a chapter or two of a book detailing the changes of the female gender role depicted by the western media (American) in the past decade or two. Like most of these books they began by discussing the characters of Ripley (Alien) and Sarah Connor (Terminator), which is one of those old thesis that I absolutely adore to read. I wanted to have Ripley's babies for the longest time, and wanted to be Sarah Connor post viewing Judgement Day (it's those arms). What made this book interesting was that it had a whole chapter dedicated to Aeryn Sun of Farscape (the book also talked about Xena and Buffy, the former being amusing, the latter of which I ignored.)

So, the chapter about Aeryn Sun touched on many fascinating points. It talked about there being a gender role reversal between John and Aeryn, and described, in several paragraphs, on their relationship being 'homoerotic' as Aeryn’s gender is what one would call ‘masculine’ despite the fact that her sex is female. I find both points interesting but at the same time slightly worrying, the logic of defining their relationship as ‘homoerotic’ is understandable, but I feel slightly uncomfortable with the whole argument. Why can’t a female be strong, having traits that are traditionally considered to be male, without being considered ‘male’. Sure, the author takes the argument in a direction where she explicitly states that the gender roles adapted by Aeryn and John can not be defined by masculinity or femininity, but rather a mix of traits that best suits them. However, I’m still disturbed by the fact that the author seem to make the connection between ‘Kick-arse-woman’ and ‘Sensitive-guy’ equals ‘guy/guy’ relationship without much problem. Isn’t there something fundamentally wrong here that one seem to link the presence of a strong woman immediately with the nature of a man? I admit I can be slow on the uptake at times, and I also admit that I read a copious amount of gay pron, but when I like a het couple, where the woman can kick the man’s arse (and does so), I do not think that the relationship is homosexual, that the woman is really a man in disguise. It is the farthest thought from my mind. The whole thing makes me uncomfortable. Am I making any sense?

Now, I have to hunt down the book again.