The article Strong, or Strong for a Girl honestly surprised me. When I first saw at the top of the webpage that the article would be discussing the feminist messages of Hunger Games, I assumed it would be arguing why Katniss was a feminist character. I viewed her as a confident and determined girl, one who would be a great example of a feminist character. However, Meg Roy argued for the opposite, claiming that Katniss is an antifeminist character since she exploits her femininity to win the Hunger Games.
Roy makes this conclusion because she sees Katniss as possessing a strength that requires her to use her feminine side to get what she wants. She sees Katniss’s journey as one where she becomes forced to use her feminine side to appeal to audiences. Because of this, she characterizes her as “strong for a girl” since she doesn’t have the ability to win the hunger games without Peeta.
But the problem with this argument Roy makes is that she never actually defines strength in the article. Oxford English dictionary defines one who has strength as someone that “possess[es] skills and qualities that create a likelihood of success.” From this definition, it seems that the primary characteristic of strength is control, or the ability to decide the events occurring in life. This also seems to be a more general neutral definition, less influenced by masculine conceptions that characterize strength as being muscular and violent, concepts commonly associated with males in Western society.
Under this definition, Katniss definitely has strength since she gets what she wants – she wins the Hunger Games. Even though she may exploit her femininity as a strategy to win the games, she makes the decision to do so. Because of this, she still maintains control over what happens in her own life and adheres to the definition of strength, thus making her a feminist character according to Roy. That Katniss even uses her feminine side to win the games also makes her even more of a feminist character because she embraces her femininity. She doesn't venture into the Hunger Games trying to present herself more like a male, but instead decides to use her femininity as an advantage. She plays up her beauty and the romance as a part of her strategy to stay alive. To me, this seems about as feminist as you can get since the novel sends the message that women should be proud of their femininity and use it to their advantage.
Roy makes this conclusion because she sees Katniss as possessing a strength that requires her to use her feminine side to get what she wants. She sees Katniss’s journey as one where she becomes forced to use her feminine side to appeal to audiences. Because of this, she characterizes her as “strong for a girl” since she doesn’t have the ability to win the hunger games without Peeta.
But the problem with this argument Roy makes is that she never actually defines strength in the article. Oxford English dictionary defines one who has strength as someone that “possess[es] skills and qualities that create a likelihood of success.” From this definition, it seems that the primary characteristic of strength is control, or the ability to decide the events occurring in life. This also seems to be a more general neutral definition, less influenced by masculine conceptions that characterize strength as being muscular and violent, concepts commonly associated with males in Western society.
Under this definition, Katniss definitely has strength since she gets what she wants – she wins the Hunger Games. Even though she may exploit her femininity as a strategy to win the games, she makes the decision to do so. Because of this, she still maintains control over what happens in her own life and adheres to the definition of strength, thus making her a feminist character according to Roy. That Katniss even uses her feminine side to win the games also makes her even more of a feminist character because she embraces her femininity. She doesn't venture into the Hunger Games trying to present herself more like a male, but instead decides to use her femininity as an advantage. She plays up her beauty and the romance as a part of her strategy to stay alive. To me, this seems about as feminist as you can get since the novel sends the message that women should be proud of their femininity and use it to their advantage.