Finally, another person who sees Sophie Gray for the Mary Sue she is! It’s not that I strongly dislike her or anything, but her character is extremely overrated and has been hyped up continuously both in series and by fans for the sole purpose that she is Scott Malkinson’s space alien queen love interest. She literally did not do anything particularly remarkable or noteworthy in the episode she appeared in other than show confidence in standing up to the boys and offering to become Scott’s friend, yet fans will still place her on a pedestal simply because she has a fancy design that was intended to be “pretty”. I mean this as no offense to fans who like her by the way. I just don’t think Sophie Gray deserves the hype she has been getting for no reason. She seems almost too perfect at times, as the fact that she managed to win over the affection of 10 other boys besides Scott the very moment she showed up as the new girl seemed unrealistic to me. She almost felt like a badly written self-insert that was created by a fan. I honestly wouldn’t care if she were to never appear again.

I agree for the most part, though I don't really dislike Wendy. Definitely agree about Sophie Gray, though.

If Sophie came back, the only way she would be a good character is if she was ripped on by the girls like the boys did to pip

You know what, I think I’m gonna do this. And despite my ramblings, no it will not be a hate post.

Interesting chart, I agree with a couple, but in my opinion I don't think Bebe and Red are the best girls (I still respect your opinion though).

First, I don't think Bebe is all that good of a character, due to the lack of substance brought to her character. As @Peregrina and @IdkAUsernameIGuess have mentioned before me, the creators seemed to have forgotten about Bebe's likable characterization in "Bebe's Boobs Destroy Society" and turned her into a stereotypical popular blonde girl. She's catty, two-faced, and behaves much like a high school popular girl rather than a nine year old. But that's my problem with all the South Park children, a majority of them act unrealistically mature for their age, and for me, part of good writing is characterizing your characters in a manner that is appropriate for their age, but I know a lot of people may disagree with that.

Sorry for getting off-topic, now let's get to Red. I honestly do not really have anything against Red, other than the fact that she's a really underdeveloped character whose pretty hard to rank. But based on all the times where she is characterized, she seems to be no more than a stereotypical popular girl, and like I've mentioned several times before, all the girls seemed to be the same person who act like clones of one another, and that problem doesn't seem to present with the boy characters, as they have been shown to have their own individual personalities.

Finally, someone who agrees with me on Heidi. I never did understand why so many people like her, she's a terribly bland character who didn't add anything to the show. Part of the reason why I hated Cartman and Heidi's relationship, was because Heidi wasn't even a good character. She's a largely two-dimensional and one-note character who only served as a plot device to showcase Cartman's negative traits, not to mention that she's inconsistent from her previous characterization. Prior to season twenty, she hardly had any development, but from the times where she did get characterized, she had a cheeky attitude and had a strong personality. I'm usually down for character development, but it has to be coherent to the story and be gradual, this drastic shift from Heidi's bitchy attitude and having utter disdain for someone like Cartman, to a nice girl who allows herself to be a punching bag totally comes out of nowhere. So yeah, if they ever give Heidi a role again, I think she could certainly use some improvement by actually giving her a personality or adding depth to her character.

While I do believe that Wendy is a middling character, I don't think she's the worst. In earlier seasons, Wendy was mostly only Stan's one-note love interest, but grew to be more. While I do like how they gave Wendy more of a personality, the problem is that the writers can't seem to make up their minds with what kind of direction they want to go with Wendy's character. But I do find her more tolerable than Heidi, because yes, Wendy is a very inconsistent character, but at least she has character, Heidi on the other hand straight-up has zero personality, she's more bland than Craig and Clyde's voices combined (yes I stole this concept from Diesel Patches' "Why I don't like Pokimane" video, but my point is still relevant).

I don't really have much an opinion on Sophie Gray, but like you said she seems like a Mary Sue, and she doesn't really have much to her character other than Scott's love interest and that one girl all the boys want to woo. She also seems like she has no flaws, which is very unrealistic. And it is a shame they killed of Leslie so soon.

So yeah, as I've mentioned multiple times before there is a big problem with the way the female characters are written on the show. I've seen some people say that the female characters are very well-written and accurate, I couldn't disagree more. Those people are basically saying that all girls are the same with inconsistent personalities, and that's just not true. They're still human and just like us guys, we are not all the same. The girls are all one-dimensional and act like clones of one another, and the adult females behave similarly. I have mixed feelings about the main boys' mothers and I'll explain why:

• Liane is a very shitty mother who doesn't know how to take care of her son. While she may come off as sweet and humble, she is full of issues herself and seems to have narcissism of her own. For one, she relies on her child for self-approval, and she is way too lenient, as she hardly ever puts her foot down and treats Cartman more like a friend rather than a son. That has to be one of the worst parenting styles imaginable, because Cartman has no positive role models in his life and has no proper or moral guidance, and a crucial part of a child's character and personality is discipline, respect, self-confidence, and humility. Cartman was never taught about right and wrong and was never exposed to positive moral values, and with all that said, I think Liane is definitely to blame for much of Cartman's behavior. But that's not all, she's also extremely promiscuous and does a terrible job at hiding it. She brings all these strange men in the house to have sex with, often when Cartman's present, and considering his young age, that can definitely scar him for life. And if I'm not mistaken, I believe it's been implied that Cartman has been sexually abused, possibly by one of Liane's lovers.

• I don't really have a problem with Sharon, but she does come off as a bit one-dimensional, as she has no more to her character other than to stand in with Randy's stupidity. Hell, this very own wiki has no personality written for Sharon, simply because she does not have one.

• Sheila is also extremely overprotective, but that does not appear to be as prominent in recent seasons.

• Carol barely gets any screen time so it's hard to make any crucial judgements on her character, although she does seem to neglectful.

With all of this said, I don't think any of the female characters are particularly well-written. And one major problem I have with characters, not just in South Park but lots of different media I've seen, is that they let a character's race, gender, sexuality, or religion be their defining trait. They have no layers or substance to their characters other than a couple of traits, and that's not how you properly write for any character, as anything or anyone should have a distinctive personality. I get that the writers are predominantly male, so they may have a harder time writer for girls, but I really don't see the problem. In fact, I know how to solve this problem. Just write a great character who happens to be a girl, bam, problem solved. And as I mentioned above, I really wish the writers can be more accurate with the mannerisms and behaviors of child characters, because they all act like adults in children's bodies, and it's just not fun to watch, for me at least, because don't get me wrong, I'll take storylines with children over the adults any day, but I think it's funnier when the kids actually act their age, because that's what gives them charm. Like @BlackGiro has mentioned, I think South Park would be better if the storylines were driven more by character and more of a mature version of Peanuts, because nowadays a lot of the storylines revolve around current events, and I would like to see some originality.

Those are my thoughts, sorry for mentioning some irrelevant opinions, but since we were talking about female characters I thought that would be appropriate to this discussion.

This reply is addressed specifically at @Sega&Nicktoons fan 3000 who had put forth an argument which in of itself is something that seems quite daunting at first (purely due to the sheer length of it). However, upon further inspection there are numerous flaws which become evident. - This, I hope, is something which becomes apparent once I have finished scrutinizing it. I will also delve into the overall context which the author had put forth.

First of all, @Sega&Nicktoons fan 3000 attempts to be able to dissect the "character" or Bebe. This is something which is done in an extremely misleading manner. This could be argued to be both out of negligence, with the OP forgetting about the earlier appearances of Bebe which is something that could be expected (and justified) considering the sheer length of South Park, and how arguably there had been a large amount of character changes throughout the years. - Granted, the female characters did not necessarily receive this with Wendy and Liane Cartman (the two major females within the show) remaining largely the same. They both have the same overall characteristics with Wendy being still plagued with jealousy (The Hobbit and Bass to Mouth), and how at the same time she can be quite aggressive in her methodology in an attempt to counter Cartman (Breast Cancer Show Ever and The Cissy). Liane Cartman does also share her main overall core values from all the way back in Season 1 with her also being quite an easygoing mother who allows Eric to do as he pleases and is unable to properly deal with him (shots being the most recent example), with Cartman ultimately being victorious. However, at the same time this could be done out of bias in an attempt to point her in a positive light. Out of both cases, negligence is the most likely because of @Sega&Nicktoons fan 3000 stating "I don't think Bebe is all that good of a character".

With the objectivity of Sega (although, it should be noted that there is also a clear subjective aspect about this which will become apparent in future paragraphs with their personal leanings being also linked with how much they enjoy them) now established in this regard, when Sega states "the creators seemed to have forgotten about Bebe's likable characterization in "Bebe's Boobs Destroy Society" and turned her into a stereotypical popular blonde girl" is something which is NOT true on the simple basis that in previous episodes, Clubhouses (Season 2 episode 12) it is made clear that Bebe has a crush on Kyle and acts similar to the "stereotypical popular blonde girl". This is most clear in how towards the end of the episode, we can see that she dumps Kyle to immediately go off and date Clyde.

Now, this argument is something which is up for debate purely because of it being apart of Season 2 which Matt and Trey were not that involved with, with there being other writers brought in to help support. This however, begins to fall apart when we are to come to the later seasons the show. Most notably in the case of "The List"(Season 11 Episode 14) whereby Bebe had chosen to be able to forge a list in order to justify dating Clyde once more for shoes. Evidently, when we are to look at the wider picture we can see that there are in fact links with her season 2 portrayal, and thus it could be argued that Bebe was portrayed differently in "Bebe's Boobs destroy society". Furthermore, she had also been presented to have enjoyed the popularity that she had received until it had begun to become too overwhelming (when the boys would consistently fight over her).

After this point, @Sega&Nicktoons fan 3000 had chosen to be able to continue off of their point, whereby they state: "She's catty, two-faced, and behaves much like a high school popular girl rather than a nine year old. But that's my problem with all the South Park children, a majority of them act unrealistically mature for their age". This itself is something which misses one of the general points of the show whereby the children, who are essentially the main focus of the show (well, during the earlier seasons anyways) are not meant to act like normal children. In quite a lot of places they are presented to be more exaggerated, and to be something which you would generally not expect from children. This is most notable in the case of Eric Cartman. However, this itself is an argument that is based around the show on a more fundamental level and is not necessarily the focus of the post.

Generally speaking, I would have to agree with the overall sentiment put forth over the character of Red as yes, she generally does not have that much overall character presented as yes, she is shown to not be that important. However, halfway through the 3rd Paragraph, starting on line 15 Sega states: "she seems to be no more than a stereotypical popular girl". This argument itself does not have that much development whereby there is nothing to back it up,

Instead, what is mentioned is "I've mentioned several times before, all the girls seemed to be the same person who act like clones of one another". This is something which although may seem so on face value, with the argument being made generally there are some visible differences presented between them. This is most notable with Wendy (who is arguably the main 4th grade female within the show) whereby she is shown to have had multiple differences in regards to the presentation of the character. First and foremost, she is presented to be arguably quite mature compared to the other characters, the more clear example of this is that of her overall focus on politics, with her engaging in things which would not generally be expected of her age. This again links back with Breast Cancer Show Ever. Another notable example of this is that she had been presented to be a part of a band within Season 4 in "something you can do with your finger". Again, this is something which the other female characters within the show have not been presented to do.

The reasons as to why a lot of the female characters seem the same is because they have not been the focus of an episode. For example, Leslie. She had been presented to be quite boring and had been someone who would just chat in the background until the later end of Season 19 in order to be shown as the advertisement.

This of course, does not mean that there are not similarities as the truth is. There are, which the females within the show are not meant to be the focus (With them only having a major role when there is meant to be a boys vs girl rivalry eg season 20). Had they been the focus, then they would be characterized more with South Park generally being revolved around male characters anyways.

This then explains as to why the problem does not apply to the male characters, although it should be noted that there are still others who do not have a lot of personality (clyde or Token) because these are not meant to be the focus of the show, they are meant to help support the otherall humor of the show and are simply placed in order to be a plot device, or to receive a pay off (This is especially noticeable in Wendy, even though she is not a male). Butters father for example exists purely to ground Butters within the earlier episodes. This is his gag, which itself is similar to that of the one whereby Kenny would die.

If you would like to go to a wiki, or a community, whereby background characters have been fleshed out I would have to recommend Wookiepedia (Star Wars).

After the paragraph on Red, which was simply meant to be able to serve as an excuse to attack the overall characterization within the show, we then go onto the paragraph stemming around Heidi.

First, @Sega&Nicktoons fan 3000 states that "I never did understand why so many people like her". This already allows a general gist of the arguments which the poster would put forth. Which, in conjunction with the already apparent standards set forth objectivity is something which is not expected. The first point that is made is that of "she's a terribly bland character who didn't add anything to the show". This itself, is something that is quite a flawed judgement as she did add things to the show in regards to Season 20 and 21. Now yes, her purpose of a "plot device" is put forth later in the paragraph whereby this point will overall be addressed. Of course, if she is bland is something that is mainly up to personal judgement, with her not having that unique of character traits. However, what could be said positively about her bland traits was that of how they had countered Eric Cartman's. - This becomes more apparent in Season 21 with her veganism. This itself was meant to serve as a means of setting up further plot points.

Sega then explains the reasons as to why she disliked the relationship, with it coming primarily down to how "Heidi wasn't even a good character. She's a largely two-dimensional and one-note character who only served as a plot device to showcase Cartman's negative traits". First and foremost, I would have to agree that a large portion of her character was meant to serve as set up (with this being something that is extremely apparent with South Park in general) future jokes.

However, I would have to disagree with the overall purpose of her character which Sega puts forth. Yes, it is meant to show the negative side of his character but it is also working to atleast try to show how Cartman goes from the state of where he was earlier in the season, (notably with how he was different to previous versions of the character) with him becoming more and more like his old self again. We see how Heidi works to unintentionally revert back to his older self, with Butters arguably playing quite an important role within this.

As much as some others may disagree, social commentary has always been a large part about South Park. Especially when they try to tackle issues within a single episode (such as with Britney Spears or the Death Camp of Tolerance). Which, this case is no exception. The issues brought up with Heidi begin primarily around how much social media dominates our lives, but then evolves into being about abusive relations.

Hence, I would have to disagree with the main reason as to why Heidi was a plot device.

Furthermore, Sega then brings up that "she's inconsistent from her previous characterization". This is something which is largely true as yes, she is different from when he was presented within the margarine episode however, context is something which is important. During the margarine episode Heidi is shown to be in a more positive light having a sleep over but in Season 20 she is shown to be more down due the bullying of Gerald, and as such they should not be expected to be the same character as they are both in incredibly different situations. Furthermore, throughout Season 20 and 21 we can see that she becomes ever more influenced by Cartman until they break up.

The argument about character development then continues with Sega stating "I'm usually down for character development, but it has to be coherent to the story and be gradual". This in of itself is done in order to prevent a logical fallacy with this being used off of as a jumping point to then argue that: "this drastic shift from Heidi's bitchy attitude and having utter disdain for someone like Cartman, to a nice girl who allows herself to be a punching bag totally comes out of nowhere". However, it does not. As already mentioned, there is pressure placed upon Heidi due to social media where she became alone with her losing all of her friends due to Social Media. This in of itself was presented to be a kind of suicide with her becoming a form of ghost who was forced to befriend Cartman in order to prevent being alone. This motivation is clearly developed upon in the park scene (I forgot the specific episode) quite early on in season 20 where it is mentioned how social media dominates people's lives.

Which, to end the paragraph off Saga then argues: "I think she could certainly use some improvement by actually giving her a personality or adding depth to her character.". This is something which is largely wrong, as she did have depth of sorts. Her main arc could overall be summed up as her thinking Cartman was a friend originally after being pushed beyond her limits, with this then resulting in her losing all of her friends over a toxic relationship. Of course, it should be noted that her friends are not perfect either with them having their own motivations. However, she does have a personality with her being presented to be quite naive and open to manipulation.

And now onto the contentious issue of Wendy...

First and foremost, @Sega&Nicktoons fan 3000 makes the simple argument of stating "In earlier seasons, Wendy was mostly only Stan's one-note love interest". This is something that is generally thought about Wendy, however it neglects multiple character defining episodes. First of all, in Weight Gain 3000 her main character trait of jealousy is defined. This itself is something which defines practically every element of her character in the further seasons. In that episode, she had immediately thought that Cartman had cheated on this essay competition which had wanted to win, of course her distaste for him had already been established in the pilot beforehand, but in this episode we can see the introduction of this.

This is later built upon in the episode "Tom's Rhinoplatsy" whereby we can see that she develops jealousy after the substitue teacher "Miss Ellen" begins to gets the attention of the boys in the class, Stan in particular, whereby they begin to compete for her affection. We even see Stan puke for her, which is something that is generally associated with Stan liking Wendy. Consequently, we then see that Wendy has Miss Ellen launched into the sun. This element of her character is still apparent in later seasons, with The Hobbit already being mentioned. Even still, there are other elements of this existing within the show. For instance, we can see this within "You Have 0 Friends" (Season 14 Episode 4) with Wendy getting annoyed over Stan's relationship status. This is also apparent within Bass to Mouth with Wendy getting annoyed over the email leaks from Stan.

This then, debunks the later point made by @Sega&Nicktoons fan 3000 whereby it is stated that: "While I do like how they gave Wendy more of a personality". This is something which is simply not true, her main character tenets had been established within Season 1. She was also socially aware back then as well, as shown within Weight Gain 3000 with her essay. The next made also made, is also wrong where Sega argues that "the problem is that the writers can't seem to make up their minds with what kind of direction they want to go with Wendy's character". Which, is also wrong. Her role within the show is yes, quite open with her fulfilling multiple jobs (lead 4th grade female, stan love interest, Cartman rival etc) however it has always been like this. Her direction is set in stone, and she is usually used to introduce new social issues. Her role within the show is primarily down to being a plot device, eg Tweek and Craig with her introducing the "Art".

We then go into a more subjective aspect with Sega mentioning how terrible they are but then it is stated that "Wendy is a very inconsistent character". This again, is simply wrong as already mentioned as Wendy is infact one of the most consistent characters in the show with her core character values.

I'm going to mainly gloss over the next paragraph as there is not much to mention as yes, the point of Sophie is that she was meant to be a Mary Sue of sorts with this being the joke about everyone liking her. This is something which especially makes sense with the Star Wars connection that is made with "The Mandalorian", but I would also like to add that it was the last non-holiday episode which had came out before the release of Star Wars Episode 9, with the character of Rey also being viewed as a Mary Sue.

Very little is mentioned about Leslie overall.

We then now go onto an overall analysis about female characters overall where Sega mentions that there is a big problem with the characters presented within the show. Sega argues that some people would argue that the characters within the show are very well-written and accurate. Which, yes I do disagree with that statement as they, like all the other characters, are not accurate with them being meant to be hyperbolic however they can on ocassion have clever writing in regards to the development of a joke. An example of this is that of Dancing with Smurfs were we can see the gradual buildup of Wendy's distaste to Cartman whereby Carmtan just wants to annoy her. Which, we can then see Wendy defeats Cartman by using his talk show and by making Cartman class president.

Which, Sega does also disagree with the statement with Sega then saying: "Those people are basically saying that all girls are the same with inconsistent personalities, and that's just not true". This entire point first of all, neglects the point of South Park with the characters not being meant to be accurate. It is an overly exaggerated world meant to provide humor with parts of social commentary added in. Which yes, I have met people similar to South Park characters before in real life such as someone being quite similar to Wendy. Although, this person was 16 at the time and not in the 4th grade but still. Which yes, I sort of get how that conflicts with what I have stated earlier but there were still some differences in how exaggerated the person was.

Which yes, we all understand that girls are still human. No one is denying that.

Sega then goes on to say "The girls are all one-dimensional and act like clones of one another,". This, as already mentioned is wrong as there are aspects of motivation between characters with them having overall motivations, eg Heidi and we see aspects of confliction. However, again, South Park is not a character study.

This then stems onto the parents now, with this going onto Liane Cartman not knowing how to take care of her son. Which yes, she does have issues. She is presented to enable her son, Eric to do the things that he does with very light punishments. Which, Sega then argues that "Liane relies on her son for self approval with her also being lenient, and hardly putting her foot down and treats Cartman like a friend rather than a son." This of itself, is meant to be the purpose of Liane Cartman in regards to how humor is derived from her and Cartman's relationship. Which, there are episodes which are specifically based around Liane and Cartman's relationship which use this for humor. Eg, the Dog Whistler.

We can then see that Sega does infact begin to forget that this is a show with a discussion starting primarily based around around why Cartman is the way that he is. Of course, everyone watching the show knows that is not how you are meant to raise a child. South Park itself is based around all of this extremes.

We then go onto the part of Liane Cartman's sex life. This is of little important however, as it is meant to primarily exist to state that this introduction to sexual activities has scared Cartman, forgetting that this is again. Meant to be a joke.

It is then brought up that Sharon is simply one-dimensional. Which, is sort of true, as she is another character that is meant to be reactionary. Her role is to react to the antics of Randy.

Little is then said about Sheila.

Little is also written about Carol, even though there is definitely the room for this but I suspect that this could simply be down to fatigue. Yes, she is presented to be neglectful with the McCormicks being continuously presented to be poor.

Which now, this brings up into the home stretch with Sega's conclusion. Sega argues that none of the characters are well-written. This is something which I have already gone over so I'm going to mostly gloss over this however, there is one thing in particular that I want to mention and that is that Sega just states "In fact, I know how to solve this problem. Just write a great character who happens to be a girl, bam, problem solved". Of course, this is something which is not helpful whatsoever as if that was the goal of South Park, then they would have been written. Which, if this is something which has also been attempted, then this is something which South Park has failed with. You simply just cannot say that.

Which, this then leads onto the whole point about the children being: "adults in children's bodies". Which again, is meant to be a large part of South Park. Why would the children be cussing as if they were drunken sailors, if they were meant to be children?

This then ends off with Sega stating that South Park would be better if "the storylines were driven more by character". Of course, South Park is a comedy and the goal of the show is not really for character development, unless that is meant to be specifically be the joke. Eg, Scott Tenorman must die.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The argument put forth by Sega is one which is significantly flawed, and feels as if it was meant to be pure opportunism for @Sega&Nicktoons fan 3000 to be able to present their own beliefs about the show, as the post originally made by @Alumi0nix was clearly meant to be a joke. This is evident in the language and the style of which the writing was in.

@General Von Klinkenhoffen Its not ment to be a joke-

@General Von Klinkenhoffen I give your essay a B+

@Sega&Nicktoons fan 3000

These characters are all pretty much exactly the same so there's no reason for anyone to have wildly different opinions about them. There isn't enough depth in this pool for a dive.

I used to hope the show would do more with them, but over time I saw that its a commentary on current events and the characters only live to serve the satire.

You'd be better off finding like minds elsewhere