'Wonder Woman' - More Feminist Than You Think

Written by Kate McHargue

THIS IS THE EMERGENCY SPOILER ALERT SYSTEM...YOU ARE ADVISED TO READ AT YOUR OWN RISK...

The unfortunate truth about the latest DC installment is that more was riding on Wonder Woman’s success than there should have been. For most superhero movie releases the goal is just to make a decent opening at the box office, sell some more merchandise, maybe setup for the planned but not yet in production sequel, and leave the fans satisfied with their comic book movie fix. But for Wonder Woman, there was the dangerous and unspoken understanding that meeting these standards wasn’t going to be good enough. It needed to be better, make more money, and leave audiences astounded. Anything less than this would have been the studio’s cue that films with more feminist themes and greater female representation are not worth making.

Thankfully, Wonder Woman is surpassing the baseline expectations and captivating audiences worldwide but it’s problematic that (once again) a woman is having to work twice as hard just to be recognized for her accomplishments. Some reviews have taken shots at the film and director Patty Jenkins for being too zealous in the quest for diversity and representation or, as the National Review put it, “Jenkins is not an action director; clearly, she was hired only as a politically correct token.” These reviews are further proof that the dominant and privileged identities don’t know what to do with a movie that wasn’t made specifically for them.
​
For me, Patty Jenkin’s film was nothing short of revolutionary. As a director, Jenkins managed to deliver a quintessential super hero film (naïve warrior learns the true meaning of heroism while forming strong relationships and kicking ass) while also subverting the sci-fi/fantasy/superhero tropes that actually DO tokenize marginalized identities and perpetuate stereotypically representations. And in honor of Jenkins smooth and subversive superhero feminism, I’m going to explore a few of the ways in which Wonder Woman is more feminist than you think.

---

Naïve Not Gullible

One of the tropes that is rampant in Sci-Fi and Fantasy is that of a female character who is a sexy bad ass but, for whatever reason, is a little naïve to the ways of the world. She therefore must rely on someone to explain things to her. This character is usually a man (sometimes the first man she has ever met) and inevitably one of the things that requires explanation is the idea of sex or intimacy. One of my favorite YouTubers, Pop Culture Detective, gives an in depth analysis of this trope, which he has dubbed ‘Born Sexy Yesterday’, and explains the way in which this trope perpetuates dangerous ideologies in regards to women’s sexuality and men’s desires. Essentially, this trope represents the fantasy of having a woman who is physically sexually mature and available, but mentally innocent and easily influenced by her ‘wiser’ male companion.
​
Diana, by virtue of having grown up with only women and never having left the island of Themyscira, could have easily fallen into this trope upon meeting Steve Trevor. In fact, there are several scenes that certainly play into Diana’s naïvety and misunderstandings about the world. But these scenes focus entirely on humor and, in some cases, point to the absurdity of our world. And rather than having Diana come across as inexperienced and in need of guidance when it comes to ‘pleasures of the flesh,’ the film outright rejects this trope and Diana makes it clear that she understands her sexuality and the concept of desire but, most importantly, does not require a man to show her how. The Guardian’s review seemed befuddled by this concept, writing, 'Confusingly, Diana later explains that men are essential for procreation but when it comes to pleasure, unnecessary.'

I’m not sure what is so confusing about this statement but as Diana assures Steve and I can assure readers, women can feel pleasure all on their own (or ya know, with other women) and men are in fact not necessary.

Some may object to this and point to the fact that Diana and Steve do end up sharing a romantic (and assumed physical) relationship, but that’s neither here nor there. The point is that Diana retained her agency and maturity as a woman and was allowed to choose for herself how best she wanted to act on her desires. Her sexuality was her own and not a realization of male fantasy.

---

Emotions as Strength

One of the things I am most tired of hearing is the idea that women aren’t fit to be leaders or heroes because we are ‘too emotional.’ The implication here is twofold. First, that men are unemotional and therefore superior. Second, that having emotions is a bad thing that does not allow for tough decision making or direct action. This is where the film doubles down on its feminist message by addressing these implications head on and smashing them to pieces.
​
Diana is immediately characterized by her desire to do good, to help those in need who are suffering, and to hold those who do evil accountable. We see the deep emotional connections she has, first to her fellow Amazons and later to her comrades in arms. Even more than the personal relationships she clearly holds dear, we see the empathy she feels for strangers and the innocent people affected by the war. This empathy and ability to grieve and to love is precisely what gives her the power to destroy Aries. Her emotions are framed, not as a weakness, but as an unparalleled strength. And while I’ll admit I found the moral of ‘the answer is love’ to be a little too on the nose and cheesy, I love that the film was not afraid to give power to this traditionally feminine trait.

Likewise, Steve is shown to be just as capable of this empathy and this belief in humanity as Diana. It is his primary motivation for charging into battle and it is the reason he sacrifices himself at the film’s end. In one scene he tries to act impartially, to ignore the suffering of innocent people and to charge ahead with the mission. He reasons with Diana that it is impossible to save everyone. And he may be right, but Diana reminds him that this is not a good enough reason not to try. Together they liberate a small town from occupation and his departure from impartiality is proven to be the right decision. What’s more, it is Steve who reminds Diana of this necessity for action and compassion at the film’s climax. As she wrestles with the realization that mankind is genuinely capable of the cruelty and horrors she has witnessed, she begins to lose faith in her quest to save them. It is Steve who quite simply says, ‘It’s not about deserve. It’s about belief.’ He reminds her that the point is to end suffering, regardless of its cause.

---

Acknowledging Oppression

Going back to the National Review article for a moment, the consensus seemed to be that the inclusion of POC characters and strong female characters was inherently politically and therefore detracted from their enjoyment of the film. I can agree with at least half of this conclusion. Yes, including this diversity in representation is political but the fact that the National Review seemed disgruntled by it is precisely why it is necessary. The truth is that providing diverse representation should not be seen as a political act because, ideally, we’d be able to see marginalized identities on the big screen just as often as we see dominant ones. But yes, National Review, until that day comes you can bet that Jenkins was intentional with these characters and your response only provides fuel to that fire.
​
While the representations of these POC characters may have been a little one note and tiptoeing the line of tokenization, the film does not shy away from acknowledging the ways in which they (as POC) must adapt and perform to find success in a world where they are the minority. The Chief talks openly with Diana about the oppression of his people. She is appalled and asks who is responsible for such atrocity. He very simply nods towards Steve and replies, ‘his people.’ Later on, after fighting to liberate the small French town, Sameer tells Dianna that he never wanted to be part of the war. He explains that he wanted to be an actor but was ‘born the wrong color,’ so he became a soldier instead. These are powerful instances of POC characters giving voice to the oppression they experience. And for Diana, they are also the first steps in her realization of the darkness within mankind. She meets two exceptional people who have suffered at the hands of their fellow man and yet are willing to lay down their lives to preserve and protect humanity. It is the first and subtle introduction of the theme Steve will inevitably drive home, that mankind may not deserve saving, but if enough people believe in humanity then perhaps one day it could.

Many reviews will overlook these characters as sidekicks or comic relief, but the truth is that they are catalysts for Diana’s growth and understanding of mankind. To truly understand the darkness of our world, one has to recognize the systems of oppression that are accepted as normal. And to truly combat evil in the world, one most do so in all its forms. It’s not enough to just punch Nazis. We also have to examine how such ideologies are even allowed to find seats of power. Patty Jenkins illustrates this beautifully by confronting her protagonist and audiences with the truth of oppression and the power in acknowledging it.

I could go on about the other ways this film subverts norms and provides platforms but I’ll leave you with those three. Wonder Woman is not a perfect film and there are certainly things I wish had been different. I would have liked to see more about what happened to Dr. Maru after Diana spared her life. The use of General Ludendorff as a red herring could have been a bit subtler. As with most films, there were moments where the story dragged. All of these are acceptable critiques that I will gladly admit to having. But I am justly frustrated at those critics who seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding about the importance of this film. There are those who will say that Wonder Woman shouldn’t be above criticism just because it stars and was directed by a woman and to that point, I agree. But the problem is that critiques of this film are focusing on precisely that and implying that any issues or downfalls are a direct failure of these women by virtue of their womanhood. Last time I checked, no one was claiming the Transformers franchise was bad because Michael Bay is a man. And it does not go unnoticed that the majority of these bad reviews, which include cracks about Gal Gadot’s face/body being the best part of the movie, are written by men.

You don’t have to like Wonder Woman and not liking the film does not make you a sexist. But if you blatantly dislike this film because it didn’t slip into the sexist tropes and oppressive ideologies the super hero genre is prone to…it might be time to examine why that is. And to anyone who finds themselves in that position, I’d be happy to discuss this film further. I’ll get the tickets; you can get the popcorn.

---