But is that really fair? Lost is the story of a bunch of messed up characters. Fer instance, Locke is pathetic and messes up everything he tries to do, but I don't hate Locke.
Is it the casually misogyny the Interwebs are so well known for? Maybe. I've really searched my feelings on this subject, and am not sure I like what I've found. For example:
Lost has never handled its female characters very well. With few exceptions, the women on the show serve three general purposes: Romance angles, babies, or damsels in distress. Juliet was the only character that somewhat broke out of these roles (though, baby doctor!). Kate should be able to - she's tough, capable, spunky, etc. But instead: Disaster.
It raises a big point in my writer's head: How to write dumb or incompetent characters, well. It's a dangerous line to walk - you want to portray a character who's not all that bright (Kate's criminal career for instance is a joke), but you don't want them to be hated. I mean, in real life, plenty of people do dumb stuff all the time, and they're not villified for it.
Now, to the point I was getting at: It seems to me the vast majority of male writers (myself included) cannot write women characters at all. If they even include female characters, they will most likely be foils or love interests to the male characters, who will receive the vast majority of attention in the story. This is Lost to a T, and so many other stories as well. Sci Fi is rife with this phenomena.
Is it mysogny? I have to answer yes - a general, societal wide misogyny that permeates everything. I think Western Civ has made great advances in overcoming this misogyny in the past 40 years or so, but there's still plenty of work to be done.
On myself, and this world.
