Why a woman can't be James Bond.....

[2aguy]

You have some people thinking it would be a good thing for a woman to be James Bond....rather than making their own new spy who is a woman...the Atomic Blonde movie would actually be a good start for this.....

But a woman can't be James Bond....here's why...

Why James Bond Should Never Be A Woman

Unlike any other character in a long-running franchise, James Bond is a male fantasy figure. As Sean Connery once said, “Bond is important: this invincible superman that every man would like to copy, that every woman would like to conquer, this dream we all have of survival.”

If you want a female British spy, then be creative and make your own franchise instead of co-opting one that has a character who personifies masculinity. Follow the lead of Star Trek. They didn’t cast a woman as James Kirk in the reinvention of the series. Instead, they showed their real talent as writers and producers and created a whole new storyline in which Kathryn Janeway excelled as the captain of Voyager.

------

But if men are so captivated by competency, wouldn’t they find a competent female James Bond just as compelling? Wouldn’t they still want to be like her, despite her sex? No, for two reasons. First, the value of competency for a man is between men and about men. Men appreciate competency in a woman, but it doesn’t excite them the way it does when they see it in a man, and they don’t usually want to compete with it.


Second, while a woman can be competent in many things just as a man, she can’t be in others, especially strength. An elite woman will never consistently physically overpower an elite man. This is a fiction perpetuated as reality by fiction. James Bond would defeat any woman in hand-to-hand combat—even one as fierce as Xenia Onatopp.

No matter a woman’s skill level, in the world of a spy where you’re dealing with other highly skilled men on an equal playing field, a woman wouldn’t hold her own in a physical fight the way a man would. Injecting this level of improbability even into fiction dampens the enthusiasm for competency. Put bluntly, Daniel Craig would pummel Charlize Theron every day of the week, no matter how skilled she is, and men know it.

Maybe it doesn’t matter if men don’t want to be like her. Women might. Strong female characters are certainly in vogue—just look at the popularity of Brienne and Ayra on “Game of Thrones.” But while we might be entertained by these characters, we really don’t want to be them (though, like Eowyn of “Lord of the Rings,” these characters retain much of their femininity, which makes them more believable and appealing). Women who are killing machines don’t inspire us the way James Bond inspires men, which is why the franchise is so successful.

Womanizing Isn’t Attractive In a Woman, Either

When it comes down to it, women don’t want to be a woman who acts like a man, especially one who is a “womanizer.” The truth is, most women aren’t into lesbian sex, and in a film that is supposed to be rich in masculinity, this just won’t inspire viewers. There’s no dance or erotic tension that’s unique to the male-female dynamic in lesbian sex. There’s no real, powerful masculine presence, and it’s this element that makes Bond so appealing.

 

[Auld Phart]

They tried it with a character named Melody Blaise..
decent comic book, lousy movie

 

[usmbguest5318]

Why a woman can't be James Bond.....

...Because Ian Fleming created the character as a man, not as a woman. There's really not much else to say about it. It might be plausible and work to use a British non-white actor to portray Bond, but that's about as far afield from Fleming's depiction of Bond as audiences are likely to tolerate.

The notion of Bond having a sex change just isn't going to work for me. All those years of philandering and now Bond suddenly becomes a woman? What's he then going to be a transgender lesbian? A hetersexually oriented transgender? Both? Normally, that wouldn't be something that crosses my mind, but, you know, Bond's as much a roué as spy, so that nitty matter must be addressed. Regardless of how it is addressed, the fact remains that few modern societies look kindly on the notion of women as libertines.

The TV series Elementary has a female "Watson," and that doesn't strike me as strange, but Holmes is still a dude, and a slut of one at that. A few of TV shows I'm aware of -- Murdoch Mysteries, Lost Girl and Miss Fisher's Murder Mysteries --- (maybe others) have broached the notion of culturally comparable sexual indulgence among men and women. I don't know how well or not well that's been received.

 

[Shusha]

Second, while a woman can be competent in many things just as a man, she can’t be in others, especially strength. An elite woman will never consistently physically overpower an elite man. ...
No matter a woman’s skill level, in the world of a spy where you’re dealing with other highly skilled men on an equal playing field, a woman wouldn’t hold her own in a physical fight the way a man would. Injecting this level of improbability even into fiction dampens the enthusiasm for competency. Put bluntly, Daniel Craig would pummel Charlize Theron every day of the week, no matter how skilled she is, and men know it.

This is simply incorrect. An elite fighter of any gender will be able to compensate for an opponent's physical strength. At an elite level, where each player has the ability to do damage to their opponent, and likely has weapons, strength is largely negated. (Strength is far more significant in combat between untrained fighters.)

It doesn't matter how "strong" Daniel Craig is if he has Charlize Theron's high heel in his throat.

That said, the movies do not rely on accurate combat to appeal. They rely on perception. So if there is a cultural perception of men's physical superiority, a female protagonist may fail to appeal. Men simply wouldn't buy into the illusion. But this culture of male physical superiority and dominance is fading. Wonder Woman and the Amazonians was a good example. Atomic Blonde is another. In fact, I can come up with a dozen or more good examples from recent movies and TV.

 

[Shusha]

Regardless of how it is addressed, the fact remains that few modern societies look kindly on the notion of women as libertines.

Which is exactly WHY it needs to be addressed.




Also, Starbuck in Battlestar Galactica. Brilliant success in a gender reversal from the original.

 

[2aguy]

Second, while a woman can be competent in many things just as a man, she can’t be in others, especially strength. An elite woman will never consistently physically overpower an elite man. ...
No matter a woman’s skill level, in the world of a spy where you’re dealing with other highly skilled men on an equal playing field, a woman wouldn’t hold her own in a physical fight the way a man would. Injecting this level of improbability even into fiction dampens the enthusiasm for competency. Put bluntly, Daniel Craig would pummel Charlize Theron every day of the week, no matter how skilled she is, and men know it.

This is simply incorrect. An elite fighter of any gender will be able to compensate for an opponent's physical strength. At an elite level, where each player has the ability to do damage to their opponent, and likely has weapons, strength is largely negated. (Strength is far more significant in combat between untrained fighters.)

It doesn't matter how "strong" Daniel Craig is if he has Charlize Theron's high heel in his throat.

That said, the movies do not rely on accurate combat to appeal. They rely on perception. So if there is a cultural perception of men's physical superiority, a female protagonist may fail to appeal. Men simply wouldn't buy into the illusion. But this culture of male physical superiority and dominance is fading. Wonder Woman and the Amazonians was a good example. Atomic Blonde is another. In fact, I can come up with a dozen or more good examples from recent movies and TV.

Sorry...your theory falls apart......Strength to the elite fighter is just as relevant...that is why you don't see men and women UFC fighters fighting each other.....the men will destroy the women....it is just biology......

There is no Culture of male physical superiority and dominance...it is a biological fact.......

 

[Bonzi]

Women as power figures are boring....

 

[usmbguest5318]

Regardless of how it is addressed, the fact remains that few modern societies look kindly on the notion of women as libertines.

Which is exactly WHY it needs to be addressed.

Also, Starbuck in Battlestar Galactica. Brilliant success in a gender reversal from the original.

Starbuck in Battlestar Galactica. Brilliant success in a gender reversal from the original.

I agree with you about the gender switch for "Starbuck."

That said, who's "Starbuck?" The object of discussion here is James Bond, not a short-lived 1970s TV cult sci-fi supporting character that got revived -- admirably so, no less -- in the early oughts.

 

[PredFan]

A female Bond would fail as hard a female Ghostbusters.

 

[usmbguest5318]

I think Angeline Jolie-Pitt did a decent job portraying a female spy/action character. It's not that I don't think a woman can assume such a role. I just don't think a woman can be Bond.

 

[Shusha]

Regardless of how it is addressed, the fact remains that few modern societies look kindly on the notion of women as libertines.

Which is exactly WHY it needs to be addressed.

Also, Starbuck in Battlestar Galactica. Brilliant success in a gender reversal from the original.

Starbuck in Battlestar Galactica. Brilliant success in a gender reversal from the original.

I agree with you about the gender switch for "Starbuck."

That said, who's "Starbuck?" The object of discussion here is James Bond, not a short-lived 1970s TV cult sci-fi supporting character that got revived -- admirably so, no less -- in the early oughts.

So, its okay to gender switch "supporting" characters (I disagree, btw, Starbuck was top-billed in both the original and the remake), but not cultural "icons"? Why not?

 

[miketx]

I'd like to see a movie about Barack Obama where he is played by a woman.

 

[Shusha]

I just don't think a woman can be Bond.

Because of the combat thing or the slut-shaming thing?

 

[2aguy]

Regardless of how it is addressed, the fact remains that few modern societies look kindly on the notion of women as libertines.

Which is exactly WHY it needs to be addressed.

Also, Starbuck in Battlestar Galactica. Brilliant success in a gender reversal from the original.

Starbuck in Battlestar Galactica. Brilliant success in a gender reversal from the original.

I agree with you about the gender switch for "Starbuck."

That said, who's "Starbuck?" The object of discussion here is James Bond, not a short-lived 1970s TV cult sci-fi supporting character that got revived -- admirably so, no less -- in the early oughts.

Yes...the main Characters on Battlestar were kept the same........they picked secondary characters who were easily changed......a main character, with decades of history....not going to work so much.....

They should just go with the Atomic Blonde Character and start a new franchise......no problems with that.....

 

[miketx]

I just don't think a woman can be Bond.

Because of the combat thing or the slut-shaming thing?

Both. In order for Moneypenney to be a slut, AND be shamed, she has to be a woman.

 

[Auld Phart]

Regardless of how it is addressed, the fact remains that few modern societies look kindly on the notion of women as libertines.

Which is exactly WHY it needs to be addressed.




Also, Starbuck in Battlestar Galactica. Brilliant success in a gender reversal from the original.

Also, Starbuck in Battlestar Galactica. Brilliant success in a gender reversal from the original.

Didn't watch either version.

( can't stand their coffee )

 

[Auld Phart]

I'd like to see a movie about Barack Obama where he is played by a woman.

Miss the last 8 years?

 

[Shusha]

Sorry...your theory falls apart......Strength to the elite fighter is just as relevant...that is why you don't see men and women UFC fighters fighting each other.....the men will destroy the women....it is just biology......

There is no Culture of male physical superiority and dominance...it is a biological fact.......

UFC is sport, not elite combat. Completely different -- largely because one can't bring LETHAL techniques to the "battlefield" / octagon. Its deliberately constrained by the rules to certain types of non-lethal techniques. That kind of scenario favors strength and endurance over functionality in combat.

Its an completely inappropriate example.

Training overcomes biology. Technology (weapons) overcome biology. Speed overcomes biology. Intelligence overcomes biology. Experience overcomes biology. That is the ENTIRE point of becoming elite! Not to be constrained by "biology" -- yours or theirs.

 

[2aguy]

Sorry...your theory falls apart......Strength to the elite fighter is just as relevant...that is why you don't see men and women UFC fighters fighting each other.....the men will destroy the women....it is just biology......

There is no Culture of male physical superiority and dominance...it is a biological fact.......

UFC is sport, not elite combat. Completely different -- largely because one can't bring LETHAL techniques to the "battlefield" / octagon. Its deliberately constrained by the rules to certain types of non-lethal techniques. That kind of scenario favors strength and endurance over functionality in combat.

Its an completely inappropriate example.

Training overcomes biology. Technology (weapons) overcome biology. Speed overcomes biology. Intelligence overcomes biology. Experience overcomes biology. That is the ENTIRE point of becoming elite! Not to be constrained by "biology" -- yours or theirs.

Sorry....you are just wrong.....with no holds barred the woman is even in a worse position.....if training and everything else is equal, the woman will still not be equal because the man will be stronger, more aggressive and will have the upper body strength that are so vital to combat....

A woman is just at a huge disadvantage...that is why firearms are so important to actual self defense.

 

[Shusha]

I just don't think a woman can be Bond.

Because of the combat thing or the slut-shaming thing?

Both. In order for Moneypenney to be a slut, AND be shamed, she has to be a woman.

I agree with you that the cultural propensity to slut-shaming makes it a hard sell. (But I disagree on the strength).