![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
athousanderrorsvia http://bit.ly/2M9vViO
wondertrevor:
steve trevor and diana’s relationship has existed since 1941 and yet the discourse surrounding it continues to prove that it is still, by today’s standards, a radical concept. rejecting this relationship isn’t as simple as “combating heteronormativity in media”, and to believe that is willful ignorance.
to start off, steve and diana’s relationship is, to put it simply, a relationship where the woman is unquestionably better than her boyfriend in almost every way, but most significantly in physical strength, the supposed traditional “masculine” quality. and he never resents her for it. on the contrary, he’s awed and impressed and reverent. he never feels emasculated by her strength and competence because he’s secure in his own worth and masculinity. he doesn’t have to one-up her to boost his own ego, he knows he’s good. she’s just better, and that’s okay, that just makes her more awesome to him. that’s why when diana does compliment steve’s skills, it’s not to placate him, he doesn’t need the reassurance. it’s because she loves him and chooses to let him know how much she values him, and ultimately that’s what’s truly feminist about their relationship.
steve trevor is a physically attractive man, charming and suave, a competent soldier in his own right. he’s a fighter pilot, he’s an intelligence officer, he’s a spy. he’s set up to be the traditional male hero. but he also exhibits commonly “feminine” traits: he’s sensitive, caring, loyal, sweet and affectionate, and not afraid to show his emotions. he enjoys cooking (another skill associated with women and femininity), and is canonically a much better cook than diana is. within the context of wonder woman stories, he’s often the damsel in distress, the metaphorical princess in the tower waiting for the knight in shining armor to rescue her. again, none of this compromises his own masculinity. he’s very much a badass, it’s not his fault he’s constantly up against supernatural creatures or greek gods. the comics make it clear: it’s okay for him to need diana’s help.
steve and diana are a gender role reversal, but at the same time not. diana is the physically powerful one who battles monsters and saves the day, but she’s also a compassionate woman who, in many earlier stories, is interested in typical “women” things such as shopping and make-up. on the flipside, steve, for all of his feminine-coded traits, is a capable soldier who kicks ass and takes names and at one point leads a government organization. they are proof that men and women do not have to fall into stereotypical gender roles, that despite their subversion of gender roles they can still be nuanced and complex. that men and women can achieve true equality by complementing each other, that good men can and will stand by a woman, and a woman doesn’t have to hide her true capabilities to please male ego, she can be her own brilliant self and be loved and celebrated for it.
the fact that there have been very few mainstream romances reminiscent of steve and diana’s dynamic is telling. the fact that people will often pair diana up with men who are considered “masculine” enough is very telling. the fact that people never question male heroes who have girlfriends but insist on taking away diana’s boyfriend means we are willing to let women be an accessory, an appendage in a man’s story, but when the story’s focus is on the woman, we insist that in order to prove her strength, she needs to bear all of her burdens alone, even though we would never ask male heroes the same thing. it means we buy into the toxic masculinity that a man who stands behind a woman is emasculated. it means that we believe love is a prize to be won, to prove yourself worthy to. it proves that yes, we still need relationships like that of steve and diana, even in this day and age.
(Your picture was not posted)
wondertrevor:
steve trevor and diana’s relationship has existed since 1941 and yet the discourse surrounding it continues to prove that it is still, by today’s standards, a radical concept. rejecting this relationship isn’t as simple as “combating heteronormativity in media”, and to believe that is willful ignorance.
to start off, steve and diana’s relationship is, to put it simply, a relationship where the woman is unquestionably better than her boyfriend in almost every way, but most significantly in physical strength, the supposed traditional “masculine” quality. and he never resents her for it. on the contrary, he’s awed and impressed and reverent. he never feels emasculated by her strength and competence because he’s secure in his own worth and masculinity. he doesn’t have to one-up her to boost his own ego, he knows he’s good. she’s just better, and that’s okay, that just makes her more awesome to him. that’s why when diana does compliment steve’s skills, it’s not to placate him, he doesn’t need the reassurance. it’s because she loves him and chooses to let him know how much she values him, and ultimately that’s what’s truly feminist about their relationship.
steve trevor is a physically attractive man, charming and suave, a competent soldier in his own right. he’s a fighter pilot, he’s an intelligence officer, he’s a spy. he’s set up to be the traditional male hero. but he also exhibits commonly “feminine” traits: he’s sensitive, caring, loyal, sweet and affectionate, and not afraid to show his emotions. he enjoys cooking (another skill associated with women and femininity), and is canonically a much better cook than diana is. within the context of wonder woman stories, he’s often the damsel in distress, the metaphorical princess in the tower waiting for the knight in shining armor to rescue her. again, none of this compromises his own masculinity. he’s very much a badass, it’s not his fault he’s constantly up against supernatural creatures or greek gods. the comics make it clear: it’s okay for him to need diana’s help.
steve and diana are a gender role reversal, but at the same time not. diana is the physically powerful one who battles monsters and saves the day, but she’s also a compassionate woman who, in many earlier stories, is interested in typical “women” things such as shopping and make-up. on the flipside, steve, for all of his feminine-coded traits, is a capable soldier who kicks ass and takes names and at one point leads a government organization. they are proof that men and women do not have to fall into stereotypical gender roles, that despite their subversion of gender roles they can still be nuanced and complex. that men and women can achieve true equality by complementing each other, that good men can and will stand by a woman, and a woman doesn’t have to hide her true capabilities to please male ego, she can be her own brilliant self and be loved and celebrated for it.
the fact that there have been very few mainstream romances reminiscent of steve and diana’s dynamic is telling. the fact that people will often pair diana up with men who are considered “masculine” enough is very telling. the fact that people never question male heroes who have girlfriends but insist on taking away diana’s boyfriend means we are willing to let women be an accessory, an appendage in a man’s story, but when the story’s focus is on the woman, we insist that in order to prove her strength, she needs to bear all of her burdens alone, even though we would never ask male heroes the same thing. it means we buy into the toxic masculinity that a man who stands behind a woman is emasculated. it means that we believe love is a prize to be won, to prove yourself worthy to. it proves that yes, we still need relationships like that of steve and diana, even in this day and age.
(Your picture was not posted)
