Too few female characters?

[Trick]

My question is, out of all the artificial choices a writer and/or publisher makes out of considerations of marketability, why does this one inspire resentment so much more than the others.

I feel no resentment about it. Perhaps others do. I really just want to avoid people jumping to conclusions because of the way dice rolled. If I got overwhelming opinions that I needed to add/swap to female characters, I would do it in hopes of better sales in future.

I think some resentment may come from this kind of situation:

"There are not enough female characters in your book."

"Are you saying I'm sexist?"

"No."

"Oh, so you think I just can't write female characters?"

"Not necessarily, but how could I know for sure? There's only one woman in the whole book and she's a deaf mute."

"I see your point."

"Yes, I think you have deep seeded issues."

--- That got away from me but you can see what I mean. If someone reads my book and notices a distinct lack of women that might cause them to think untrue things about me. But, at the same time, since those things are untrue, I should not have to change my book to keep people from jumping to false conclusions.

All of this is moot to a certain extent once a writer keeps these things in mind before writing the book...

 

[Gryphos]

I have to say that I think Ripley's role may have changed a little when the character became female. I was just thinking how I gender-swapped my DE barbarian. She still arm-wrestles like a man, but is also quick to play the big sister/mother-figure whenever she comes across captive children.

Why exactly did you think that the male barbarian would be incapable of acting like the caring parent-figure?

 

[Devor]

Yep. That's exactly the mistake people make: treating their character like a probability distribution instead of an individual. I've pointed out on here before that one of my best friends is a female who is very male in how she acts. To further separate her from what might be a stereotypical analysis, she's small, very feminine, and a very pretty lady. She doesn't look masculine, but growing up she played fast-pitch baseball with the boys in high school (the only girl who played), and she was in the army, and she's a weight lifter, among other things. If you distilled her personality down onto paper, it would be what people using traditional gender assumptions would consider male. So would a character based on her be invalid? Of course not. Nor would any male or female character who exhibited what people stereotypically associated with the opposite sex.

Here's the problem that I have.

You just described a personality as it exists on paper, at a point in time. But you haven't said anything about her story. I've listened to a number of women tell me their stories - I worked with a women who drove a garbage truck for a living, among many others - and regardless of their gender roles, gender still helps to shape their story.

I don't know about you, but I don't write to to fill out personality profiles, but to tell stories.

Now, don't get me wrong, there are many, many characters, and many, many stories, where the gender might not matter to the story. Whether the innkeep is a man or a woman probably makes very little difference. But if you're really telling the character's inner journey, then gender makes a very big difference.

 

[Steerpike]

I have to say that I think Ripley's role may have changed a little when the character became female. I was just thinking how I gender-swapped my DE barbarian. She still arm-wrestles like a man, but is also quick to play the big sister/mother-figure whenever she comes across captive children.

I think the relationship between Ripley and Newt would have been different with a guy Ripley. (Or I suppose the sequel would be different… or non-existent. I can't picture Alien making it as a series without Weaver. That's both good and bad. Should've stopped at Aliens.)

Yeah, I was going to say - I think they changed her a little bit for the second movie, but I don't think they did much changing for the first one, and I think she was just fine in the first film.

 

[Steerpike]

If men and women aren't that different, then what is the point of this? If they're basically the same, with different pronouns and maybe a few mentions of breasts, then who cares if characters are male or female?

Either they aren't different, and therefore it shouldn't matter how many male or female characters you have.

Or they are different and therefore it's important to have male and female characters because of diversity and all that.

It can't go both ways.

I don't agree. Representation does make a difference, and is important in and of itself. You don't have to attach gender stereotypes to your representations to make them significant.

 

[Gryphos]

If men and women aren't that different, then what is the point of this? If they're basically the same, with different pronouns and maybe a few mentions of breasts, then who cares if characters are male or female?

It matters in the grand scheme of things. If a girl grows up exposed to stories from every direction in which women are not portrayed as important, or not allowed to do all the cool things men do in stories, it will start to have a deep-rooted psychological effect on them in which they may start to believe they are somehow less valuable or important simply because they're female. This same concept applies to issues like race too. The point is that to try and combat this kind of thing from happening, it is important for writers to strive for representation, even though, in the end, men and women are not very different at all.

 

[Steerpike]

But if you're really telling the character's inner journey, then gender makes a very big difference.

It might. It seems to me it depends largely on how gender differences are perceived and treated in your fantasy world. If one gender or another is oppressed, for example, then that's going to be significant.

 

[Trick]

Men and women are different, specifically because every person is different from every other person. To swap a character's gender might make little to no difference for a given character but I think that in many cases it would change them quite a bit. For instance, changing a character from a good looking man to a good looking woman would fundamentally change the behavior of many men in her vicinity; it would likely also change the behavior of the woman in her vicinity. That's biological and factual. Regardless of social norms in a fantasy world, if it still has the same basic concept of sexual attraction and has humans in it, it cannot be avoided. If a person is attracted to a particular sex and they encounter a person of that sex and feel attraction to them, that would likely be gone if the person was swapped to the other sex.

 

[Gryphos]

Men and women are different, specifically because every person is different from every other person. To swap a character's gender might make little to no difference for a given character but I think that in many cases it would change them quite a bit. For instance, changing a character from a good looking man to a good looking woman would fundamentally change the behavior of many men in her vicinity; it would likely also change the behavior of the woman in her vicinity. That's biological and factual. Regardless of social norms in a fantasy world, if it still has the same basic concept of sexual attraction and has humans in it, it cannot be avoided. If a person is attracted to a particular sex and they encounter a person of that sex and feel attraction to them, that would likely be gone if the person was swapped to the other sex.

Yes, you're right, it may very subtly change how other people react to him/her. But it would not change his/her or anyone else's personality.

 

[Steerpike]

Yes, you're right, it may very subtly change how other people react to him/her. But it would not change his/her or anyone else's personality.

And even then, how those external changes present themselves, and to what degree, are going to be dictated by the society of your fantasy world. It doesn't have to turn into a case of New York City-style leering or catcalling at the character now that they've changed sex.

 

[Ryan_Crown]

The concern I have with this issue (as someone who's current WIP features 4 male leads and no significant female characters, for no other reason than that's how things worked out as I developed the characters), is that if I decide to make one character female because I'm worried about having an all-male cast, I now have a "token" female in my story, and I hate the idea of a "token" character of any sort, because it feels almost dishonest in some ways (in other words, I feel like my story suddenly has a female character solely so that people won't complain about my story not having a female character). Is my story better now because it's more diverse, or is it worse because I have a character who's only there to fill this diversity role?

Can't say I have a good answer, other than I'm going to write the story as I think it works best, and hope other people can appreciate it in the same light. I certainly wouldn't want my stories to be accused of being sexist, but at the same time I hate the idea that I should force changes into my narrative in order to appeal to every demographic/not offend anyone.

 

[Devor]

Among other things gender would affect the relationships you form, which is a big part in defining how your personality develops.

There's also another thing to consider: It's a psychological concept called share of thought. I don't think or talk a whole lot about what being a guy means to me. I know people for whom it has meant quite a bit more. But in any society women are going to give their gender a bigger share of their identity because it affects their life a lot more regularly, for both biological and cultural reasons. That is, gender is something around which subcultures are prone to develop, and that's going to affect the character.

Lastly, simply saying "You can't write women as averages" doesn't help anyone write a woman at the "female end" of the spectrum. It only leads to male writers writing a spectrum of women who skew towards the male end of any paradigm.

 

[Steerpike]

If you want to write a character at the stereotypically female end of the spectrum, then do so. The problem rests with the certain percentage of people who think you have to write the female character at that end of the spectrum to have a real female character, which of course is bollocks.

All the other stuff regarding subcultures, etc. may or may not be true in any given fantasy society, depending on how you construct your world. You can create interesting approaches to such things, but they aren't an imperative.

 

[Gryphos]

The concern I have with this issue (as someone who's current WIP features 4 male leads and no significant female characters, for no other reason than that's how things worked out as I developed the characters), is that if I decide to make one character female because I'm worried about having an all-male cast, I now have a "token" female in my story, and I hate the idea of a "token" character of any sort, because it feels almost dishonest in some ways (in other words, I feel like my story suddenly has a female character solely so that people won't complain about my story not having a female character). Is my story better now because it's more diverse, or is it worse because I have a character who's only there to fill this diversity role?

Tokens are only tokens if they're stereotypes or poorly developed. If they're a fully realised, complex character, they're not a token. Basically, you can avoid your female character becoming a token simply by giving her the same amount of attention you would to a male one.

Lastly, simply saying "You can't write women as averages" doesn't help anyone write a woman at the "female end" of the spectrum. It only leads to male writers writing a spectrum of women who skew towards the male end of any paradigm.

What spectrum? Saying that there's a spectrum going from male to female qualities is something I find preposterous. It implies that being brave is somehow inherently masculine and caring inherently feminine. As I see it, there's no such thing as masculinity or femininity, there's only general qualities a person may or may not have.

 

[Trick]

Yes, you're right, it may very subtly change how other people react to him/her. But it would not change his/her or anyone else's personality.

Maybe not the fundamentals but having that different set of experiences over their entire lives would change their behavior. And because of others' differing behavior toward them, they may have been in different situations than they might have been had they been born the opposite sex. This could lead to a fundamental change.

Then there is the factor of biology. Men and women have different hormonal balances, usually very different. Babies' brains are affected by hormones in such a way that it determines many factors of personality and attraction later in life. There are plenty of exceptions but for the most part there are standard hormones in men and women that play a role in how they act.

My wife has to have her progesterone checked to make sure it is within a normal range (due to having some hormonal issues from pregnancy). If it's not, she feels ill for one thing, but her behavior changes. She gets more angry than any other time. She is more likely to cry over small things.

This is definitely not something I have to deal with for myself so, it is a feeling and experience that has never affected me. Regardless of outside influence, if we put humans (i.e. biologically the same) in our work, this is a factor.

 

[Gryphos]

Then there is the factor of biology. Men and women have different hormonal balances, usually very different. Babies' brains are affected by hormones in such a way that it determines many factors of personality and attraction later in life. There plenty of exceptions but for the most part there are standard hormones in men and women that play a role in how they act.

Again this links to averages. Men and women have different hormonal balances ON AVERAGE. Some men have high levels of oestrogen, and some women have high levels of testosterone.

 

[Devor]

If you want to write a character at the stereotypically female end of the spectrum, then do so. The problem rests with the certain percentage of people who think you have to write the female character at that end of the spectrum to have a real female character, which of course is bollocks.

I'll agree with that - but I don't think that's what people are necessarily saying.

What spectrum? Saying that there's a spectrum going from male to female qualities is something I find preposterous. It implies that being brave is somehow inherently masculine and caring inherently feminine. As I see it, there's no such thing as masculinity or femininity, there's only general qualities a person may or may not have.

Of course there's a spectrum - even baby monkeys in the zoo behave differently based on their gender.

 

[Gryphos]

Of course there's a spectrum - even baby monkeys in the zoo behave differently based on their gender.

Monkeys exist in a natural, Darwinian world. We humans don't. We don't need to even consider primal concepts of gender. Thus, should we treat it as though those restrictive concepts apply to us? I certainly don't think so. If we have the self awareness to break away from animalistic gender roles and ideals, then let's.

 

[Steerpike]

I think George R.R. Martin made a good point in talking about this. He said when you're dealing with characters different from yourself (it could be a female (if you're male), or a prince, or a dwarf, or whatever), you start with the basic knowledge that they're more like you than unlike you, and you use that as a foundation for building empathy. He said that character who has different genitalia than he has still has the same basic humanity.

One big problem beginning writers make, in my opinion, is that when they write characters of the opposite sex they forget that there are vastly more commonalities than differences, and they end up with some caricature or stereotype of gender that is quite unconvincing. As between the two, you're much better off relying solely on the commonalities than you are relying on stereotyped notions of what the extremes look like.

 

[Devor]

Monkeys exist in a natural, Darwinian world. We humans don't. We don't need to even consider primal concepts of gender. Thus, should we treat it as though those restrictive concepts apply to us? I certainly don't think so. If we have the self awareness to break away from animalistic gender roles and ideals, then let's.

None of that has to do with writing a woman, unless you're implying that there's something wrong with writing women who meet some kind of "primal concepts of gender," whatever that's supposed to mean.