Diversity Lioness misfire?

Yes, let's talk about this example specifically! I'm going to bang out a quick response before I fall asleep, so sorry if I don't make any sense.

If Maud belongs to this matriarchal society, why is she framing the nakedness of a female religious figure as a temptation to men? That's a profoundly male-centered sentiment, and something that has to be reconsidered if you really want to treat this culture with depth. Sure, Jurgis might find it brazen and titillating, but wouldn't Maud just see it as matter-of-fact, or a symbol of female virtue, or something like that?

Show us other wisewomen (with lines, preferably) and then you can turn this wisewoman into an antagonist. Don't, for goodness' sake, generalize all wisewoman as being bitchy. Maybe don't make this character the reader's introduction to wisewomen.

I think that part of your problem may be that you want specific characters, so you've created cultures to explain these characters, instead of making the character seem like genuine products of their culture. Note that them being a product of their culture does not mean that they are the average person of their culture. (Main characters usually aren't average people, if you've not noticed!) Want Maud to be a badass horny warrior lady? You don't need to say that every woman in her culture is a badass horny warrior. Want a wisewoman antagonist? All wisewomen don't need to be terrible, tempting people. Societies don't work like that. You can absolutely also have gentle weavers and headstrong musicians and meek rule-following soldiers. If you paint with these broad, generalizing strokes, you run the risk of creating negative stereotypes because these characteristics apparently apply to entire racial and gender-based demographics.

Also, you end up with the unfortunate implication that Maud could not be a badass if this "unnatural" gender-flip in society hadn't happened. How could there be a confident female warrior in a male-dominated society? Well, ask history, why dontcha. There are scads of examples.

(And what's the message intended to be about this unnatural magic-caused gender-flip? Is it a bad thing that women are strong and sexual? Or is it a good thing, and then you run into a weird "idealized" fantasy land where women sexually dominate men and we're getting into 1970s pulp fiction territory (I've no problem with this as a kink, but if this isn't intended to be erotica, I don't think "it's sexy" is a good reason to create a culture like this). In short, what's the statement you're trying to make about gender? Because this reads like some kind of garbled statement about gender.)

 

Equality may have been your intention, but based on the extract and the world building notes you've presented, I'm afraid I don't think you've really succeeded.

The thing is, if you're trying to argue for equality of the sexes, why is your novel presenting an inherently unequal society? If anything, it's probably more likely to be read as an anti-feminist work, the kind of sentiment expressed by all those neckbeard fedora-wearers who think the feminist movement is about female supremacy rather than equality.

If you wanted to argue for equality, then you should probably have created a society that was, well, equal. All you've done here is just swap the status of men and women.

Now, that's not to say your book can't have the message you intend presented within the story itself rather than the world building, but how many people do you think you're going to turn off before they actually get to that bit? First impressions are vital.

 

I'll read the snippet in a moment when I have more time, but I'm glad some of this is making sense now. If you have other specific concerns, we'd be happy to take a look at them.

A quick point about the gender-equality gender-flip, and some suggestions. The fact that it was the Kells, the only black culture in this world, that needed to be taught about gender equality, is kind of unfortunate. Because if the starting point was "the men are too sexually and physically aggressive", well... there are some really horrible stereotypes about black men being more violent, more prone to rape, and more animalistic that was used to justify the treatment of slaves and still results in increased incarceration today. On the flip side, there's also stereotypes about black men being irresponsible and leaving all the work to black women, and that black families are single-parent and matriarchal because of that. Yeah, it's hard to escape negative tropes about black people no matter which way you turn...says a lot.

If it's necessary for this cultural plot to happen, and it sounds like it is, I have a few suggestions about how to treat it more carefully. Frankly, I would not have there be any transfer of “innate characteristics” between the genders, or downplay that. It makes the men sound naturally brutish, and then the women get naturally butch. Bleh. What would be less problematic to transfer is magic and societal power. While physical strength might not be, sexual dominance and aggressive personality traits are the kind of thing that could be created by socialization. If there was a magical coup and women were suddenly the political heads of society, that would change how girls are raised and taught. Their personalities and behavior would change, much as if you compared a woman from the 1800s to a woman from today.

Another thing that could rescue this is if you show that the initial problems with men and shamanism weren't caused by a culture-wide character flaw, but by a political or religious movement--something that can happen to any culture, given the right time and place. Bonus points if it's led by a charismatic individual and has (male) dissenters.

Lastly, you know what would help diffuse all of the issues of race? If you had another black (Sub-Saharan African-analogue, specifically) culture in your world, and they were doing just fine, thank you very much. The key to not falling into stereotypes or tokenism is showing the reader a spectrum of character portrayals, positive and negative.

...Ok, that wasn't very quick.

 

Hey guys. Just checking in to say that I've been having a particularly unproductive week and haven't been able to do as much reading or writing as I would prefer. But I plan to start on Graylorne's book after I get off work on Friday and hopefully finish it and my comments over the weekend. Many good points have been made during my absence however. Nimue has highlighted something I did not pick up on until now: namely that the Kells being the only black culture in the entire world magnifies the inherent problems considerably. And I don't think having "brown" people that exist without these social issues really lessens the problem because colorism is also a thing.

Also, what's the deal with the sexuality thing? Because after reading Nimue's comments on it, it sounds kind of... messed up to be honest. Like the creepy bondage elements that were part of early Wonder Woman comics. But I'll reserve judgment until I see it in context.

 

I'm not saying he isn't. But it's just head-scratching how he could unintentionally hit so many wrong notes.

That's no one's dilemma but his. If harsh, stinging criticisms make him want to quit the field, it was bound to happen regardless. You can't say 'reviews aren't meant for the author' only to turn around and ask for the author's feelings to be considered. Reviewing or not, any reader's only concern is what's in front of them- and there's only one person responsible for that. How's it perfectly fine to give gushing 5-star reviews or tepid 3-stars but not blistering 1-stars?

 

You're discounting the ability of human beings to rationalize anything. I've had more than a few encounters with non-Black people who use certain words with regularity, only to come back with "but so-and-so says it/it's on that record/it was in that movie" to justify it when challenged. I'm sure we all know all kinds of words we'd never use around certain types of company- race, gender, sexuality- because we know better. If you know people will find them objectionable, why're you using them?

Again, this isn't saying Paul did this deliberately. But when you claim to be seeking enlightenment and understanding for what went wrong, don't dig in your heels and resist it.

 

This brings me back to my post about worldbuilding, and it may seem as nitpicking, but in light of Paul's responses I don't think so. Wemawee is our introduction to a Kell Wisewoman, and it's not a good one. This is a diplomatic mission, representing their country and it's leadership... and this is who they send? As the author, you're telling us that this is how Kell wants everyone to see them? Since Hala was sent to help guide Maud along in dealing with other cultures, why is this uncouth, crass individual sent out alone as an emissary? It's your story, and you're telling us no one else was available? Why not introduce us to a more mature person to give a better idea of what they're about?

Worldbuilding isn't just creating a society, but also its counter-culture(s) and sub-culture(s). Not everyone agrees with the way things are (which is how the Wisewomen rose to power) and they're willing to fight against it. There's also layers to every level of a civilization and when designing one as the author you really need to detail these and how they came about and function, since they're probably the most important aspects of it.

 

She is flaunting it; she openly and deliberately displaying herself. I've already addressed this in my previous post: how's she not aware of how she'll be viewed and what everyone's reactions will be? If she's that clueless or pig-headed, what's she doing on this assignment in the first place?

 

Since this portrayal of Black women in the book is a staple American stereotype, intentional or not, what's your point?

And not once did anyone call Paul a racist or a terrible human being. I don't know how you're injecting that into the discussion.

 

The excerpts came from the promotional kit. In other words, they're the teasers to give us an idea what to expect and try to generate interest. Who else but the author chose them to represent what the book's about? I can post the others if you'd like to read them.