Is it unfair to dislike characters because they are "strong" female characters?

[Nimue]

Not in so many words, but:

But it's not an excuse so much as a reality for those who like to write in a more down-to-earth or realistic vein.

Personally, I think a mother with young children would see no reward great enough to put those children into high risk situations willingly. When I think of creating an authentic mother for a story, making her an adventurer is likely to break the authenticity.

But taking them into danger? How motherly.

Not an excuse for someone writing realistically. No mother would do that. It'd break authenticity. How motherly--again, no good mother would do that!

I'm not sure if you had some other intention in mind when you wrote these statements, and I generally respect your opinion, but I think it may be worth it to reflect that you're arguing about what motherhood means and entails with a small gaggle of actual mothers...

 

[DragonOfTheAerie]

In any discussion about strong female characters, there are two things that need defining. First, strength, and second, femininity.

 

[FifthView]

Not in so many words, but:


>But it's not an excuse so much as a reality for those who like to write in a more down-to-earth or realistic vein.

>Personally, I think a mother with young children would see no reward great enough to put those children into high risk situations willingly. When I think of creating an authentic mother for a story, making her an adventurer is likely to break the authenticity.

>But taking them into danger? How motherly.

Exactly. Not in so many words.

To say it's a "reality" is to say it's a reality that should be dealt with in a down-to-earth or realistic setting. Dealt with. This doesn't mean "oh hell just ignore the possibility; it's impossible."

"Personally," in the second statement is me expressing my personal opinion and belief that it would break authenticity. This is not me saying NO ONE can do it. Has anyone in this thread said that there are, absolutely, only a small handful of roles women can play in fiction? Is anyone saying it's an absolute impossibility? Who, in this thread or anywhere in the world, is saying that? But look at this statement in context with what follows, which includes "how motherly":

But taking them into danger? How motherly. What you end up with, again, is that negative "Strong Female Trope" in which the pseudo-mother really just acquires an aspect of motherhood because someone's demanding that females with children should be able to rush into danger, kids in tow–to meet the quota, I presume. Even so, you could imagine a mother forced into doing so, for some reason.

I'm overemphasizing the type of the last sentence because it's been overlooked in selective reading. This is me saying it's possible to imagine a mother being forced to lead the kiddies into danger. I also, earlier, mentioned the ease I had of imagining the Weasley's taking their family on a quest. Also, working through the "reality" thing again, I mentioned later that, sure, one could imagine a selfish mother doing these things. So: Mother-going-on-adventure.

So nowhere have I said it's impossible, that it's ridiculous, and that writers should stick to the handful of portrayals of women that someone, somewhere (never got his name) had declared the only acceptable list of portrayals.

 

[Nimue]

Yes, I read that, and the "for some reason" really makes you sound like you're acknowledging the validity of the idea. And saying, oh, a bad and selfish mother might do that isn't exactly redemptive?

Regardless, I think this may be a good time to cool off and consider the numerous ways in which we agree, for the most part. And I'm going to go have that damn dark chocolate ice cream bar I've been thinking tenderly about all day...

 

[FifthView]

Yes, I read that, and the "for some reason" really makes you sound like you're acknowledging the validity of the idea. And saying, oh, a bad and selfish mother might do that isn't exactly redemptive?

What, we want to limit roles? So there can be no bad mothers portrayed? Weird.

Yeah, the "for some reason" was used because I didn't want to spend the next two days typing out possible motivations. That I can easily imagine. A mother forced into danger with kids in tow? Yes, of course it's possible. I didn't put "for some reason" in there for no reason.

 

[ascanius]

When I think of Strong Female Characters I dislike, I think of characters like in Graceling (ugh) and even Arya Stark (who along with Jon Snow is one of - IMHO - the more boring characters in Game of Thrones). I read a little Tamora Pierce and couldn't really connect with Alanna either. So there are a few examples.

I'm a mother of daughters, I'm not cool with the subtle message of so many of the books they will eventually pick up and read to be "boy stuff is cool and exciting, girl stuff is lame."

My little girls love their princess dresses. And they love playing ninja and dragon rider (I'm the dragon). And they love swords. Especially with princess dresses.

I remember being a little girl, and we got dirty and played in the woods and climbed trees AND liked to play dress up and with dolls and wear our mother's makeup. I really hate that so much YA and fantasy fiction puts a dichotomy between these things in the name of "Strong Female Characters" when for real life girls that dichotomy just isn't there - and putting it there sends an awful message to young female readers.

Because the message isn't "you can be whatever you want". The message is "girly stuff is stupid - female characters are only interesting if they do stereotypical boy and men stuff, and don't fall in any sort of committed love."

EW. NO.

In my experience most girls and women IRL don't think or live like this. They don't aspire to this. They are way more complex in their dreams and interests. Why are there so many fantasies that think this is "feminist" or somehow speaks broadly to the experience of women?

And it drives a lot of female readers away from fantasy, starting young, which I think is very sad. I think of so many friends of mine who used to love fantasy, are totally open to secondary worlds, magic, were Harry Potter fangirls, obsess over GOT (the show, not the books so much) but as adults read mostly "book club" fiction, lots of AS Byatt, and Outlander because they feel that - unless you dig deep - there is nothing in genre fantasy that is relevant to their experience.

The week before I left my old job, my coworkers and I (all who are GOT obsessed, and all who are women under 36 + one gay man) went out to happy hour. We got drunk and started assigning a character to everyone in our office. The plotter who was the "Littlefinger", the secret keeper who was "Varys", etc.

When they got to me, that said "AND YOU ARE SANSA! Because everyone thinks you are are so nice until…whoaaa… you let the dogs out!" "Yeah, you are badass, like Sansa." "Whenever we need to get someone to shut sh*t down with a smile, its like 'call A------!' Because you are our Sansa.'" "What are we going to do without our Sansa!"

To a group of 30 something women, Sansa was a badass.

Is that how Sansa usually gets labeled in fantasy Fandom? Is she considered a Strong Female Character?

FWIW, none of these women read fantasy books. And I don't think it is because they have something against secondary worlds or are literary snobs.

There are a lot of women who do read fantasy. There are women who do like Action Girls. Not denying that. And there are good fantasy books out there with real, complex female characters (as hard as they can be to find at the bookstore). There are good, complex, well written female characters who are "action women".

But there is also a disconnect between the fantasy genre and a lot of female readers. And the pervasiveness of the Strong Female Character - the sexy assassin in leather, the warrior chick, the Girl who Hates Marriage, etc. and the contempt for "girly" things is part of that disconnect.

I agree with this 100%. Somewhere along the way writers forgot that female characters are actually female and not men with breasts.

Aelisabet, I can see where you're coming from. The answer is undoubtedly that we need more variety--of complex, compelling female characters of every stripe but particularly underrepresented ones. Honestly makes for more interesting stories and perspectives. I think over the years, my bookshelf has expanded from a lot of those tomboy and/or fighting stories to women who are not only warriors but witches, seers, camp-followers, musicians, wives and mothers, queens, peacemakers, scholars, cinnamon-roll bakers... And for every one of those I wish there were more. (My library of beloveds is a small one. As an aside, I've never liked GOT enough to read it, and I also didn't like the Alanna series as a kid, not because of the swashbuckling but because of the...too much of everything, and the writing quality. You can definitely tell it was Pierce's first series.) I don't have much of an issue with that criticism of the trope.

I find this very funny, not that I don't agree with you but.... I had often pondered the idea of one of my female characters having no greater goal that simply having a family in a small out of the way village, she does. Otherwise I think characters need to be people first then everything else later.

I've more of a bone to pick with professed non- or anti-feminist folks who criticize the strong female character or the Mary Sue without giving the same excorciation to unrealistic action-jocks or male wish-fulfillment characters. Often from the same corners, Cersei is decried as a bitch, and Sansa as a boring pushover. It's the general hating-on central female characters that can sometimes seep into a discussion like this, and certainly has before on this forum.

First do you have a bone to pick with professed non/anit-feminists simply because they are criticizing the strong female character or because they are non/anit-fiminists. I can't stand anything to do with modern feminism, definitely a non-feminists. Why? because feminism gave us the stupid 'strong female character' among other things. They gave us the idea that men and women are interchangeable, that there are no differences. Yet, the strong female character doesn't really work. It's the differences that make us interesting and worth reading about.

Cersei is a bitch but that doesn't mean she is not someone to underestimate. I hate cersei, the same way I would hate a person like that if I met them in real life, but that doesn't mean that she isn't one of the best female characters in the whole series. I don't think anyone could say she doesn't lack depth, she has to be one of the most tormented characters in the books. Sansa... Sansa isn't a pushover she is nieve, I found her infuriating to read, I think because she reminded me a lot of my sister at that age. Thing is I don't really think they fall into the category of 'strong female character'. Other than that, the strong male character is one of the reasons i'm not a big fan of comic books, nor the Captain America movies. It's also why my favorite character in GOT is the imp, because he is most definitely is not a 'strong male character'.

 

[FifthView]

I mean, if we want to get into bad ass mom's, look at Sara Conners lol.

I've never watched the series, so I don't know all that happens, but based on T2, she didn't have a choice.

A scenario like the one you gave about your daughter also seems like a "no choice" situation or being forced into it. Like a zombie apocalypse: She's as safe, or safer, with you than by herself. This is one of those escape scenarios, or of fleeing a greater danger and attempting to find safety. Going into Mordor could be another "no choice" scenario, given the needs of your daughter. But you do raise up a good point when considering "goodness" vs "badness" —i.e., a person can act selfishly and still not be absolutely bad as a mother or father. But there are still extenuating circumstances, and this is different than having a character simply desire to go on an adventure for the fun of it or in the hopes of being the first to discover the long-hidden chest of gold, etc.

Even most male heroes are single, lacking families, and forced into situations. Not all, of course. And it's easily possible to imagine a mother who has a special talent—let's say it's magic—who is the only one capable of completing a necessary quest and decides to leave her children at home with dad or other relatives or with their older siblings. In fact, I'm sure I've read something like that before; I just don't remember what it was.

But in general one point remains for me: Just because someone doesn't choose to write such a story is not a sign of a lack of imagination. I can imagine a great deal that I don't have any desire to write. And sometimes the projects I have in mind already call my attentions; if these don't have a mother on such a quest, that doesn't mean that my stories suffer from a lack of imagination. I give other writers the same consideration.

Plus, let's be real. The fantasy genre can be fantastic. Absolute reality would be anathema, and writers have different goals, different ways of touching reality and veering from it. What's important to me, to you, to anyone is not somehow wrong simply because the output doesn't approach a subject, character, etc., in the way that someone else, somewhere else, believes it must.

 

[AElisabet]

But in general one point remains for me: Just because someone doesn't choose to write such a story is not a sign of a lack of imagination. I can imagine a great deal that I don't have any desire to write. And sometimes the projects I have in mind already call my attentions; if these don't have a mother on such a quest, that doesn't mean that my stories suffer from a lack of imagination. I give other writers the same consideration.

But no one said this, as was stated and clarified repeatedly above.

No one is telling you what to write, or saying you have a bad imagination because you don't want to write something *yourself*. All of us have limited imaginations and varying tastes.

Calling something "unrealistic" for other writers to write, particularly when those writers have first hand actual real life experience of the thing they are writing about, dismisses the stories, experiences, and voices of other writers. You don't have to like other people's stories, you don't have write stories they like, but to dismiss them as "unrealistic" especially to people who have real experience of them, without taking into account any of what women with these experiences have to offer, is what was meant by "failure of imagination."

And BTW, the "failure of imagination" was not aimed at you personally. It was more generally aimed at multiple people, in multiple places, who have said on the internet or in real life, that "fantasy stories about women who are mothers are unrealistic." And it is something I am so sick of hearing. If you agree with that, that such stories cannot be written "realistically" or truthfully by someone else, well, then yes, I would say that is a lack of imagination and dismissive of other voices.

If you, or anyone else, can't imagine that someone else could write such a story and make it "realistic", that - and that only - is the problem.

If that is not what you meant, I apologize for misunderstanding your words. I think I wrote some things that were also misconstrued, and I apologize for not being clearer (when mothers get together, we often say snarky things about motherhood. Call it our "locker room talk." Perhaps "pack the juice boxes for Mordor" does not translate as well to a fantasy forum as it would to Scary Mommy or the wine and swing set crowd).

But as I read your words about what is supposedly "realistic" and what is not, they were taken as very insulting to me as a mother, and to my ownership of my own experience, my ability to use it as a writer, and my desire to see it represented occasionally as a reader.

Again, if that is not how they were meant, I apologize.

All I was asking for in my original post was well thought out, VARIED, female characters, who have more than stock motivations, and who represent the complexity and variety of real women (all women, not just mommies and girly ladies), and to see this more often in imaginative fantasy settings as opposed to just realist book club fiction.

That shouldn't be controversial.

 

[fantastic]

There is no "but it's medieval" excuse for excluding women from having a variety of roles in fantasy. It's either a failure of will, or of imagination, or just a lack of fantasy writers who respect or know first hand what mothers, wives, and other Non-Action chicks do all day.

I don't understand what some of you are trying to say. Women do have a variety of roles in fantasy. There are plenty of "non-action chicks". There are plenty of girls who want to play princesses, dress up and things like that. There are plenty of mothers.

What makes you think women are somehow excluded from having a variety of roles?

As for mothers, there are plenty of mothers in different fantasy stories. They have a variety of roles and most of them are relevant to the story in one or another way.

In Game of Thrones alone, you have plenty of mothers. Cersei, Catelyn, Daenerys (she is a mother of dragons) and plenty of other mothers. If anything, there is a lack of well developed female characters that fight.

So, I don't really understand what kind of female characters you would like to see more of.

I guess you are right that there aren't many mother characters who are willing to go on an adventure and put their child into a great danger. But the reason there are few such stories is because that is unlikely and it is hard to make it a convincing story.

And most writers probably aren't interested in writing such stories.

Just because there are not many stories someone desires does not mean reason for that is the lack of imagination.

 

[FifthView]

Calling something "unrealistic" for other writers to write, particularly when those writers have first hand actual real life experience of the thing they are writing about, dismisses the stories, experiences, and voices of other writers. You don't have to like other people's stories, you don't have write stories they like, but to dismiss them as "unrealistic" especially to people who have real experience of them, without taking into account any of what women with these experiences have to offer, is what was meant by "failure of imagination."

You do NOT have personal experience of living in a medieval setting, of hunting dragons or traveling to Mt. Doom, etc.

I also don't have experience of traveling to Mt. Doom or slaying dragons; those are entirely imaginary things.

I also don't have personal experience of living in medieval settings. Nor am I really an expert in medieval history. But I do believe I have some understanding of the differences between now and then. Conditions were harder for many people, including women and consequently, mothers.

My initial comment was actually just a quick comment following some talk about mothers and why more mothers, strong mothers, aren't common in fantasy. A handful of names had been dropped. I left my comment as one reason. Not an excuse. And I do believe it is a good reason. When you replied by specifically referencing my comments and gave your description of how simple child-rearing is, including mention of juice boxes and the like, and utterly ignored consideration of the more difficult medieval setting while implying that anyone who could possibly entertain the thought of such difficulties is someone who lacks imagination and simply can't know anything about motherhood, I took it as the insult I'm fairly sure it was intended to be. It was demeaning.

Even now, the claim of some special privilege based on personal motherhood is insulting to me. Surely, I'll never experience birthing pains; but neither will mothers and fathers who have adopted or other caregivers. My own personal opinion, that I've stood on pedestals to proclaim often enough, is that a mother's love is the most powerful force in the universe. I have no desire to demean or overlook real mothers. But caregiving isn't something you can say I have no right to simply because I've not given birth. The realities of caregiving are not something beyond my ability to know. Besides, I have a very strong mother, had strong grandmothers, and have two sisters who are strong mothers, so I have great role models.

 

[FifthView]

All I was asking for in my original post was well thought out, VARIED, female characters, who have more than stock motivations, and who represent the complexity and variety of real women (all women, not just mommies and girly ladies), and to see this more often in imaginative fantasy settings as opposed to just realist book club fiction.

This is something I can value.

I do wonder, given my own experience and some of the experiences others have mentioned, whether those varied roles really are out there so, read more....?

But if not, then the simple solution would be to write those yourself. Fill the world with the stories and characters you want to see more of. That's always a great incentive to write, from my experience.

I don't believe the current situation is as bad as you make out? But if it is, then you have the power to correct things.

 

[AElisabet]

This is something I can value.

I do wonder, given my own experience and some of the experiences others have mentioned, whether those varied roles really are out there so, read more....?

But if not, then the simple solution would be to write those yourself. Fill the world with the stories and characters you want to see more of. That's always a great incentive to write, from my experience.

I don't believe the current situation is as bad as you make out? But if it is, then you have the power to correct things.

Well, reconciled?

::::extends hand of peace::::

Well rounded female characters are definitely out there - thinking of books like the Chalion series, or NK Jemison or the Robin Hobb's books (though she I find harder to get into, because she occasionally falls back on the Strong Female Trope) or Uprooted and anything by Neil Gaiman - but it does sometimes seem when searching for the next thing to read, what is out there is limited. More than a few times I've walked into a book store, hoped to find something good in the fantasy section, and walked out with something from "General Fiction" when I really, really would have preferred to read something more...fantastic.

So not so dire - but can be limited.

 

[AElisabet]

You do NOT have personal experience of living in a medieval setting, of hunting dragons or traveling to Mt. Doom, etc.

I also don't have experience of traveling to Mt. Doom or slaying dragons; those are entirely imaginary things.

I also don't have personal experience of living in medieval settings. Nor am I really an expert in medieval history. But I do believe I have some understanding of the differences between now and then. Conditions were harder for many people, including women and consequently, mothers.

My initial comment was actually just a quick comment following some talk about mothers and why more mothers, strong mothers, aren't common in fantasy. A handful of names had been dropped. I left my comment as one reason. Not an excuse. And I do believe it is a good reason. When you replied by specifically referencing my comments and gave your description of how simple child-rearing is, including mention of juice boxes and the like, and utterly ignored consideration of the more difficult medieval setting while implying that anyone who could possibly entertain the thought of such difficulties is someone who lacks imagination and simply can't know anything about motherhood, I took it as the insult I'm fairly sure it was intended to be. It was demeaning.

Even now, the claim of some special privilege based on personal motherhood is insulting to me. Surely, I'll never experience birthing pains; but neither will mothers and fathers who have adopted or other caregivers. My own personal opinion, that I've stood on pedestals to proclaim often enough, is that a mother's love is the most powerful force in the universe. I have no desire to demean or overlook real mothers. But caregiving isn't something you can say I have no right to simply because I've not given birth. The realities of caregiving are not something beyond my ability to know. Besides, I have a very strong mother, had strong grandmothers, and have two sisters who are strong mothers, so I have great role models.

No, I did not mean to insult - just to be allowed to own my own experience without having it be called unrealistic.

You absolutely have a right to imagine.

I didn't say child rearing was simple; I said it was not all consuming. I said women do other things while they raise children. The notion that having children utterly ties women down is one that IRL leads to a lot of women experiencing unfortunate limitations, imposed by themselves and by others, that can become very harmful and painful, and I've seen too many women get hurt from this assumption, as a mother, friend, and sister in law.

I have very much imagined what it is like to raise children in a pre-industrial setting; that the very women who have been most helpful to me with raising my own children - the Vovos and Tias and Primas - themselves grew up in a rural village living off the land without plumbing or grocery stores I think has given me a pretty strong appreciation for it.

And as someone who did graduate studies in Theology at a university with a huge Medieval studies department, has many colleagues and friends in Medieval Studies, and a sister who is a Medievalist, I wouldn't say I'm an *expert* in Medieval life, but I do think I have a generally pretty good grasp on it, or at least a better grasp the the average Jane.

You have a right to your experience, and your perception of it. But - to use another example, I, as a civilian, would never tell a soldier how to discuss or imagine their experience. The fact they have been to war, yes, would give them a special privilege to articulate that experience.

The fact that I am a mother, that I raise and am responsible for children, does give me - and any other woman in that position - a privilege to articulate that experience. That includes the privilege to be snarky about it, to joke about it, to disagree with other women about it. To be casual about it. To simplify, mock, and dismiss aspects of my experience it. To make light of it. To not fit my comments into preconceived notions of what is motherly.

That doesn't mean someone who is not a woman and has no experience of motherhood can't talk about it or imagine it. Of course not - that would be ridiculous. Especially in relation to fiction - good fiction comes from writers who can articulate experiences way outside their own.

But yes, the experience of women who actually do it every day is privileged, when speaking specifically on their own role.

And women might disagree with each other. That is fine; but at least we are disagreeing from a place of experiencing it and being responsible for it.

I - and I hope any one else - would never tell a soldier he or she had no privilege to their experience of war. I would never tell a gay or lesbian person, or a person of a different race, that they had no privilege to their experience of discrimination. Don't tell a mother she has no privilege to her experience of motherhood. That isn't insulting. That is just basic decency and common sense, and something that, in my day to day, IRL world, doesn't seem to be particularly controversial.

There is a very long history of men trying to articulate motherhood for women. It's an ugly, horrible history. It's one that still causes tremendous suffering in parts of the world. Until recently I was a graduate student in Theology, and boy is that ever an area where not letting mothers claim a privilege over their experience has resulted in horrific consequences. So it is something I am - maybe unreasonably, maybe not - sensitive to.

 

[Reaver]

But caregiving isn't something you can say I have no right to simply because I've not given birth. The realities of caregiving are not something beyond my ability to know. .

Preach FV, preach. This would make a great saying for one of those motivational posters you see in offices everywhere.

 

[Chessie]

Elisabet is right. Raising children isn't all that time consuming. It also depends on how many children a woman has (thus given her experience as a mother), how old the kids are, whether dad is in the pic, etc.

And just to give an idea...our friend's grandma, while heavily pregnant, hunted down a moose and dragged his body through a swamp. Ok, lol, she was also alone, without a 4 wheeler to help her carry the meat, carrying a shotgun, and she had small children at home. She did this so her family could eat (not sure where grandpa was he may have been in Vietnam at the time). Swamps in Alaska are NO joke. She risked being mauled by patroling bears, losing her child, moving through thick brush and marshlands that'll swallow up your entire legs. Women are capable of anything while pregnant or rearing children so long as they're healthy. I'll just leave that here.

 

[skip.knox]

The OP was this:
>Is it unfair to dislike characters because they are "strong" female characters?

The answer is: yes.

 

[glutton]

I could imagine a good scenario for a mother taking her child on a dangerous adventure - she is an extremely powerful warrior to the point of being vital for success, but doesn't trust anyone else to care for her child in case the bad guys decide they want to kidnap or harm the child to get to her. Maybe have some paranoia and/or hubris thrown in there... xd

Also maybe it's her second kid, and the first one was killed when she entrusted them to someone else's care.

'I'm the ONLY one I can trust...'

 

[FifthView]

And just to give an idea...our friend's grandma, while heavily pregnant, hunted down a moose and dragged his body through a swamp. Ok, lol, she was also alone, without a 4 wheeler to help her carry the meat, carrying a shotgun, and she had small children at home. She did this so her family could eat (not sure where grandpa was he may have been in Vietnam at the time). Swamps in Alaska are NO joke. She risked being mauled by patroling bears, losing her child, moving through thick brush and marshlands that'll swallow up your entire legs. Women are capable of anything while pregnant or rearing children so long as they're healthy. I'll just leave that here.

So it sounds like she exerted a lot of effort to do what many of our contemporary mothers can do with a short ride to the supermarket.

And, that so much energy was expended in rearing the children. (Providing for food is a part of raising children?) And that she didn't venture too far from home—and left the children at home while she did. (Bears are not orcs, bandits, reavers, dragons but still...wouldn't want to run into one, personally. I hope if that grandma was attacked by a group of bandits, she had a familiar sword at her side or a well-rehearsed spell.)

I do think a distinction should be made between ages of children, whether dad is around, and how many of the children she has. Heck, it's easier to see teens holding their own than the littlest ones. (Ex.: The Netflix show Stranger Things.)

 

[FifthView]

No, I did not mean to insult - just to be allowed to own my own experience without having it be called unrealistic.

I never said you couldn't. But your own experience does NOT include going on the sorts of adventures, in the sorts of worlds we find in many fantasy novels.

I do believe that for those–not you, understand–who write a type of fantasy novel modeled on medieval Europe and with a sense of realism may be less likely to write about mothers going on adventures because the activities necessary to raise children in such a world are extremely time consuming, themselves. To say "less likely" is not to say the effort to write such a novel would be utterly impossible.

I didn't say child rearing was simple; I said it was not all consuming. I said women do other things while they raise children. The notion that having children utterly ties women down is one that IRL leads to a lot of women experiencing unfortunate limitations, imposed by themselves and by others, that can become very harmful and painful, and I've seen too many women get hurt from this assumption, as a mother, friend, and sister in law.

But it is absolutely true that many mothers in our own world, with all our modern conveniences, do end up needing to sacrifice some things, some dreams, in order to provide for their children. I have met many who have worked two jobs just to accomplish that. My own mother often told me the story about how she gave up a full scholarship in order to be a mother and raise children–but that is not a mark against her!

The fact that it happens in our own world despite all the modern conveniences is, for me, a hint about what things might have been like 1000 years ago. These "limitations" you mention were greater in number then. Unfortunate? Maybe. But a way of life, and a time-consuming one as well. Not only for mothers but also for fathers and often for their children who helped with all those chores.

But as writers of fantasy, we can design worlds to fit our own purposes. Some writers might not design a world in which the average way of life is very time consuming. Heck, many fantasy novels feature characters who are nobility, royalty, or some type of elite class like mages, i.e., a type that doesn't need to spend so much of their waking day simply trying to keep food on the table and clothing mended and so forth. I never once said you couldn't design whatever world you want or choose the characters you want.

The fact that I am a mother, that I raise and am responsible for children, does give me - and any other woman in that position - a privilege to articulate that experience. That includes the privilege to be snarky about it, to joke about it, to disagree with other women about it. To be casual about it. To simplify, mock, and dismiss aspects of my experience it. To make light of it. To not fit my comments into preconceived notions of what is motherly.

That doesn't mean someone who is not a woman and has no experience of motherhood can't talk about it or imagine it. Of course not - that would be ridiculous. Especially in relation to fiction - good fiction comes from writers who can articulate experiences way outside their own.

But yes, the experience of women who actually do it every day is privileged, when speaking specifically on their own role.

Yes, specifically. That means what you actually, truly, really live today. Your life. It is yours.

But the role of mother in a medieval society is not your experience. That isn't your role. You have never been such a mother. Do you know what it's like to raise true heirs to the throne of a kingdom? Do you know what it's like to raise children who are born slaves? Well, maybe you can imagine these things. But being a mother to royal heirs or slaves is not in your experience. You have never had that role–I assume. (We really don't know each other IRL.)

I would hope that my reference to "special privilege" would have been taken in context with that paragraph in which I used it. (One of my reasons for writing a whole paragraph around it.) We've been talking about something other than your personal, private life, haven't we?

There is a very long history of men trying to articulate motherhood for women. It's an ugly, horrible history. It's one that still causes tremendous suffering in parts of the world. Until recently I was a graduate student in Theology, and boy is that ever an area where not letting mothers claim a privilege over their experience has resulted in horrific consequences. So it is something I am - maybe unreasonably, maybe not - sensitive to.

I would propose that "motherhood" as such is not defined by simply having given birth. The role of being mother also isn't defined by simply having given birth. There's more to it, and these other things are different in different times, cultures, and so forth.

So for example. Providing or preparing food might be one role of motherhood that is common through many cultures throughout time. But what providing or preparing food entails could be quite different. "Providing or preparing" is abstract, but the actual endeavors are the real thing. And these endeavors might not be the same throughout all cultures at all times.

I can understand that there is a long history of men defining women's roles for them, and that's something that has led to many injustices, many limitations placed on women throughout history. But I do not think that ignoring the historical limitations that were mundane, a fact of being mortals and being alive, is a case of unfairly defining the role of motherhood.

 

[FifthView]

Preach FV, preach. This would make a great saying for one of those motivational posters you see in offices everywhere.

I might have gone with a screen grab from Enemy Mine.