On Writing Women. Looking for honesty...

[Annoyingkid]

The thing about romance/sex - and this applies to any gender by the way.

If you have a relationship between two people that is a friendship. The question is, inevitably, why are these people friends?

Maybe they have the same ideals.
They like who they are on the inside. They see fundamental goodness in each other.
Their personalities are compatible, they get along, which in itself all carries alot of subtext.
They go through alot together and/or develop together.

etc.

But then if you make it romantic, then lust for each other's bodies becomes part of the equation.

So one is left asking, at least I am, just how much of the equation is it? Would things have went down the same way if there wasn't sexual feelings in the air? How much does having a hidden agenda change the morality of the character. It seems as if the non sexual things I listed above becomes more incidental to whether they would have been close or not. It's loses power when hormones becomes part of the reason or interpreted as the underlying reason they're drawn to each other. Do close feelings cause the romance or does the romance cause the close feelings?

 

[FifthView]

I'm coming late to this and haven't read much further than the first few posts....but wasn't Lady Jessica in Dune far more than a wilting flower needing protecting in a cave somewhere? Irulan also plays more of a role, albeit mostly as historian in the extra matter.

But perhaps a little more on-topic...it's an interesting issue. I tend to gravitate more toward male-dominated stories. But I'm a male. Gay, yes, but male. Perhaps I myself simply identify a little better with male characters? I don't know; I only know that, historically, I've tended to favor male protagonists over female protagonists in my reading. Even so, I'd call it a tendency, only. I've enjoyed female protagonists also.

I will say however that when I read blurbs on Amazon and instantly discover that the main protag is female, and the whole story basically circles her story, I almost always pass on it. This is different than reading a blurb that mentions both male and female characters; i.e., a story involving main characters, receiving equal weight*, of both sexes, which might interest me more. But if I read a blurb that focuses on a single male protag, I'm more likely to be interested than a blurb focusing on a single female protag's story.

But I think this is something personal for me, my own tastes.

*Edit: Forgot to continue that thought, heh. It's not always possible to know how much weight, exactly, every character will receive when reading a mere blurb.

And I also think I've only skimmed the topic, because I focused my comments on protags and not whole casts, so there's that.

 

[Chessie2]

Hmmmmmm, yes. I think this is it.

I think it's the lack of variety that bugs me. I'd love to see more individual humans (*cough cough* women) in speculative fiction.

Believe it or not this has a lot to do with reader expectations. When it comes to genre and tone, readers expect a certain type of person as their hero.

I think this is why Y.A. tends to sell really well in the fantasy genre. The heroines are active, in UF often sassy, possessing grit and sex appeal alike. I don't read Y.A. but I know many writers who write it/read it and this seems to be the consensus. From the little Y.A. I have read, too.

Far as adult women goes...don't kill me BUT this is probably the main reason why I dislike Game Of Thrones. I don't feel like arguing about it but I think Martin does a disservice to women by making us all look like whores. We went from one extreme to the next. (Gotta eat lunch so cutting myself off)

 

[FifthView]

Yeah. I mean it is everywhere still. Look at Stranger Things. A group of five normal boys try to stop an evil force. The only two girls in the show are either super crazy good at video games (better than the boys), or have crazy telepathy skills. The only normal woman is the mom... but there is the old "mom" trope again. lol.

There has to be a reason why it wasn't five average girls trying to stop an evil force... why? What is that reason? Why can't girls be average? Why is the go-to always boys?

Could an average Hobbit woman have set off to Mordor? Would it have changed the story? Was Tolkien worried the Dwarves wouldn't be able to control themselves?

So....flipping through some of the pages of this thread, I came to this, and it's peculiarly serendipitous for me because I've been listening to a recent Mythcreant podcast dedicated to a discussion about Stranger Things: 147 – Stranger Things

The thing about the Mythcreant podcasters, for me, is....they become somewhat socio-political in some of their commentary on various issues, and the podcast on Stranger Things is no different. For instance, there's some discussion about how the "macho" man, Hopper, is portrayed as a "bad father" in Season Two—which is, according to them, stereotypical. There is also lots of discussion of the male-dominated cast.

And I'm of two minds about this.

First, I'm more and more aware of the fact that I just don't look at the movies, television, and books that way, and I've a suspicion that maybe I'm just missing out on something. Others feel very strongly about these things, and when you get a group of them together discussing the topic, and they all mostly agree or at least understand exactly the issue being discussed (even if not in full agreement), I feel like I'm paleolithic. It's a weird feeling.

It's not a social issue for me (in my normal mode of operation) but it can be a personal issue when I encounter characters in a book that are so obviously, boringly stereotypical, male, female, hero, villain, whatever. I can groan (metaphorically or literally) when I encounter those characters. But I don't have a built-in, automatic reaction to these things—or long-developed awakening, which might be the case—and don't think/speak in those terms.

So for instance, take the macho-man-who-is-obviously-going-to-be-a-bad-father. Yes, I can see how that may well be a stereotype; but by golly, there really are macho men who are bad fathers, heh. I guess I don't recognize how including a particular character, who may well be realistic, means that I'm automatically "teaching" the wrong things or automatically ignoring all the other macho men who are great fathers. That sort of thing.

 

[Dark Squiggle]

So for instance, take the macho-man-who-is-obviously-going-to-be-a-bad-father. Yes, I can see how that may well be a stereotype; but by golly, there really are macho men who are bad fathers, heh. I guess I don't recognize how including a particular character, who may well be realistic, means that I'm automatically "teaching" the wrong things or automatically ignoring all the other macho men who are great fathers. That sort of thing.

Off topic, I know, but I don't know what you mean by "macho". My understanding is that it means almost the same thing as "b*tch". It is not possible to constantly demand all the attention and the best of everything and insist that you are the best at everything all the time and expect to be a good person.
About the "readers expectations" bit, you may be right, but I don't think I feel the same way, and my opinion *should* be more skewed than yours, because not only am I male, but I am straight as well.

 

[FifthView]

Off topic, I know, but I don't know what you mean by "macho". My understanding is that it means almost the same thing as "b*tch". It is not possible to constantly demand all the attention and the best of everything and insist that you are the best at everything all the time and expect to be a good person.

I think the term "macho" was used by the podcasters. Basically, they set up a comparison of Hopper and Bob in the second season. I don't think we need to define macho, necessarily, hah, but maybe just look at some of what was meant generally.

 

[Heliotrope]

there really are macho men who are bad fathers

Yes!!!! This is it though. There really are macho men who are bad fathers. My issue is that often times in speculative fiction the women would NOT exist in real life. They are not given the same flaws and "humanism" that the men are given.

wasn't Lady Jessica in Dune far more than a wilting flower needing protecting in a cave somewhere? Irulan also plays more of a role, albeit mostly as historian in the extra matter.

Yes, my issue is not with Lady Jessica being a wilting flower, it is with her perfectionism. She is no different than the women in Tolkien. Perfect, almost angelic, supernatural creatures. The princess Irulan is the same. We can argue that Princess Buttercup was no wilting flower either, but she was still inhumanly beautiful and a princess.

This is my beef. Chessie is right, women in fantasy went from being inhuman, angelic type creatures, all sparkle and brilliance and perfection, down to all whores and ruthless fighters.

Men get characters like Hopper, who could be real. Who could, though stereotypical, exist in real life with his beer gut and bad hair. Women don't get the same treatment. Make her ruthless, but then make her beautiful. Make her ugly, but then make sure she has a super brain or another super skill. I feel like we are getting WAY better in regards to representing women in a realistic way, but we still have a long way to go.

My issue really just started with asking if other women struggled with LOTR like I did, and has exploded to cover speculative fiction in general, which was not my intent... but whatever, the conversation grew, lol.

But my issue is not with women being portrayed as wilting flowers, it is with women not being portrayed in realistic ways.

And I'm NOT ragging on Stranger Things. I loved it. Seriously. Joyce was a fantastic, real woman.

 

[FifthView]

But my issue is not with women being portrayed as wilting flowers, it is with women not being portrayed in realistic ways.

I think this is one of those areas I may have more difficulty seeing, heh. I'm not saying I think there is no issue, but only that my own brain may be a little biased. It's like having blind spots in my perception and appreciation of stories. I'd like to say that it's because, well, spec fic. If a character in some fantasy world is X, what makes X unrealistic?

Yes, my issue is not with Lady Jessica being a wilting flower, it is with her perfectionism. She is no different than the women in Tolkien. Perfect, almost angelic, supernatural creatures.

Like Lady Jessica. I've never met a Bene Gesserit, let alone one who has defied her order and produced a mega-powerful son, or who can use the weirding way. (But there are some aspects of her personality, from what I vaguely remember, that remind me of my mother, so...? ) She loved her husband, was blind to the existence of a family betrayer, was sometimes frightened of her son and of what she herself had done in giving birth to her daughter. She took the step to become a Reverend Mother even knowing that she shouldn't while pregnant. I didn't experience her as being some kind of perfect.

But I suspect this is an issue of "male gaze" although not the sort that hypersexualizes women. I mean, my own brain didn't experience the lack of a spectrum of....being? Actions, reactions, feelings, thoughts? Other things that would be common for a female experience? (Although I'm extremely hesitant when it comes to trying to label some common "female experience" shared by women. I don't know how I, myself, can ever resolve that question on my own.)

Was Paul more realistic than Jessica? I don't know, hah.

Edit: I just want to add that I recognize that others don't experience Dune or other books as I've experienced them. It is an odd thing that I don't understand—because I love Dune! So I'm not trying to argue a point so much as being honest (re: title of this thread) about my own experience.

 

[Devor]

The thing about the Mythcreant podcasters, for me, is....they become somewhat socio-political in some of their commentary on various issues, and the podcast on Stranger Things is no different. For instance, there's some discussion about how the "macho" man, Hopper, is portrayed as a "bad father" in Season Two—which is, according to them, stereotypical. There is also lots of discussion of the male-dominated cast.

I disagree that he even is a bad father in Stranger Things 2.

So for instance, take the macho-man-who-is-obviously-going-to-be-a-bad-father. Yes, I can see how that may well be a stereotype; but by golly, there really are macho men who are bad fathers, heh. I guess I don't recognize how including a particular character, who may well be realistic, means that I'm automatically "teaching" the wrong things or automatically ignoring all the other macho men who are great fathers. That sort of thing.

I'm going to switch examples to Order of the Stick because the artist in this case has actually talked about why he changed the way he was portraying female characters in the comics. And some of your comments go into it.

In particular, the issue was the trash talk between female characters who ended up fighting each other. I think the punchline at one point was, "I've missed saying three little words.... sneak attack bit**." In another scene the character mocked the other's hair and wardrobe during the fight. Since the party was three male characters, one female character, and Vaarsuvius (deliberately gender ambiguous), trash talk was a good percentage of the ways women talked to each other in the comic. There were some other issues - this is the one that stands out to me now.

The artist, in talking about the trash talk, said that he was just trying to be realistic and think about the ways people he knew might talk in those situations. Those people deserve to be represented in fiction, too, right? But Order of the Stick got to be kind of a big deal - the first Kickstarter to break a million dollars, for example - and it became more important to him to represent characters who weren't just realistic but could be rolemodels, who said something positive about the way women respected each other.

A more recent fight between some of the same female characters featured very little trash talk, another woman helping out the hero, and an ending with the characters talking like adults (sort of).


((edit)) I fixed a little language and the second link, which was accidentally the same as the first.

 

[pmmg]

My issue is that often times in speculative fiction the women would NOT exist in real life. They are not given the same flaws and "humanism" that the men are given.

It would seem to me that many writers actually quite enjoy their characters flaws more than their virtues, and such things give them a good place to work at in making them more human. I am not sure why that would be different for any particular author when writing any particular gender. I think part of the goal is to write believable characters and that would go along with it. Though, I will say I do see a lot of women portrayed in ways that has me thinking 'only in fiction' (Pakksenarion was one of these for me, I saw her come up a bit earlier). But that is also true for the men. Many men are portrayed in ways that men don't exactly live up to. Conan is a bit idealized. I just started watching Punisher last night (see our current article about), I think he is a little idealized as well, in spite of the many flaws they try to put upon him, he does not quite seem functionally effected by them. I think the thing is, we have to just accept that some stuff is kind of in the realm of only fiction, and some hits on the real human condition of people. If you are not seeing enough of it in what you are reading, then it would seem to me that there is an opportunity to be had.

The current trend, IMO, is kick ass women, but they are not real. Perhaps it is on writers like us the evolve the trend and bring to where we would like it to be. I don't mind Conan, I think he had some great adventures, but he is not real either. I think there is room for him though, and many many others, and they can rest on the whole scale of pinnacle to just a big mess. Thing is, characters like Conan, they do not serve as something I can be, but they help me see goal posts of things I might like to become. Why should there not be idealized women characters who can do the same?

But we all have a great gift. We can write them anyway we like. Write them, and then they will be there. And maybe someday a bunch of writers in a future hence will say why are all the women full so many flaws in these stories, cant we have more like supergirl and wonderwoman? Galadriel or Lady Jessica?

 

[TheCrystallineEntity]

<The current trend, IMO, is kick ass women, but they are not real.>

Tell that to my sempai. She'd prove you wrong in 2 seconds.

After that, Samus Aran, Tifa Lockheart, Laura Croft, and many more want to have a chat with you.

 

[TheCrystallineEntity]

I disagree that he even is a bad father in Stranger Things 2.




I'm going to switch examples to Order of the Stick because the artist in this case has actually talked about why he changed the way he was portraying female characters in the comics. And some of your comments go into it.

In particular, the issue was the trash talk between female characters who ended up fighting each other. I think the punchline at one point was, "I've missed saying three little words.... sneak attack bit**." In another scene the character mocked the other's hair and wardrobe during the fight. Since the party was three male characters, one female character, and Vaarsuvius (deliberately gender ambiguous), trash talk was a good percentage of the ways women talked to each other in the comic. There were some other issues - this is the one that stands out to me now.

The artist, in talking about the trash talk, said that he was just trying to be realistic and think about the ways people he knew might talk in those situations. Those people deserve to be represented in fiction, too, right? But Order of the Stick got to be kind of a big deal - the first Kickstarter to break a million dollars, for example - and it became more important to him to represent characters who weren't just realistic but could be rolemodels, who said something positive about the way women respected each other.

A more recent fight between some of the same female characters featured very little trash talk, another woman helping out the hero, and an ending with the characters talking like adults (sort of).

((edit)) I fixed a little language and the second link, which was accidentally the same as the first.

I agree with you on this; the way most of the female characters acted made me rather irritated. But, as at least one of them [Haley] started showing some character development, she grew on me a little.

 

[TheCrystallineEntity]

<But then if you make it romantic, then lust for each other's bodies becomes part of the equation.>

Is that all romance really is? Not every couple wants sex, or has those kinds of desires.

 

[Annoyingkid]

I don't like it where the men have to be incompetent to make the female character look good because that's a strawman.

I'm not a fan of her belittling or embarrassing other characters unnecessarily. Aka when the reaction is disproportionately hostile. Unless there's a higher thematic point being made.

I don't like it when they're more qualified but have to play second fiddle to the male MC for vague or non existent reasons.
On the other hand I don't like it when there are people more qualified, who should be given the role over the SFC. For instance, in the Inheritance Cycle, Arya was given the dauthdaert over an older, more experienced elf for no reason.

It's eyerolling when SFC's hold female companionship in disdain and avoiding other females completely. Especially if they have no problem interacting with males.

If she's defeating many men in combat hell even two men at once, and she;s only human, at least tell me why that is in a way that makes sense. In a way that's believable.

Having a chip on her shoulder about men. That keeps men as the centre of her worldview and makes her insecure. Insecurity isn't a bad thing per se, but it's just not fun for her to be angrily lecturing nay sayers both in and out of the story about how she can fight as well as any man and not like other girls. As if fighting like a man is her gold standard.

Keeping her humourless is done to keep her mysterious, unfathomable, exotic, and above all else, silent. A SFC often says very little because pin ups are not heard, they are seen. This is why the quiet, cold SFC's body is always described in extensive, detail, with great beauty emphasized.

 

[Annoyingkid]

<But then if you make it romantic, then lust for each other's bodies becomes part of the equation.>

Is that all romance really is? Not every couple wants sex, or has those kinds of desires.

It's very rare that a romantic couple is sexless in fiction. They at least kiss.

 

[TheCrystallineEntity]

Oh. I guess I've been reading different books than most people.

 

[Annoyingkid]

Oh. I guess I've been reading different books than most people.

Yeah. You're talking about romantic asexual relationships. I'm specifically talking about the implications of turning a relationship sexual because the topic creator was asking about why alot of female characters are portrayed without sex lives.

 

[DragonOfTheAerie]

<The current trend, IMO, is kick ass women, but they are not real.>

Tell that to my sempai. She'd prove you wrong in 2 seconds.

After that, Samus Aran, Tifa Lockheart, Laura Croft, and many more want to have a chat with you.

Not real??? Dragon who trains Krav Maga three times a week over here hopes that is far from the truth.

(and if it is the truth she will take care of that)

 

[DragonOfTheAerie]

btw, i think y'all would like my current WIP. Lots of varying, complex women dealing with their pasts and traumas in different ways.

A character can be deeply flawed, be sympathetic, be kick-ass, and have realistic emotions and desires all at the same time.

 

[Chessie2]

Given that I write romances, my approach to writing characters is going to be different than another author catering to a mostly male audience. Let's face it: that's just the way it is.

I write mostly to a female audience, and I have to be very careful as to what issues and insecurities these characters deal with. They tend to be heavy because it's what I love exploring. My heroines usually have deep issues that stand in the way of their emotional fulfillment (the last one had daddy issues). But given that it's romance, this sort of character exploration is expected. Is it in an epic fantasy? Like, the kind some of our members write? I'm thinking of Skip who writes his historical fantasy novels with goblins. Would a young woman with daddy issues be a character male epic fantasy readers would want to read? Uh...probably not. They'd call her a whiner and be over it. Now, put that same character in front of a romance reader who wants to see this heroine's daddy issues NOT keep her from love with the man of her dreams. It turns into a conflict that drives the story. It wouldn't be so if Lila were a character in Skip's book. See where I'm going with this?

I think Helio's main concern can be explained by this: you were not the target audience for those books. Since you like your female characters a certain way, and like to learn things when you read, then those books won't satisfy you as a reader. They don't satisfy me much either. I do love Tolkien, but he's about the one exception besides C.S. Lewis.