Multiple POV story - Lack of female leads

[Jabrosky]

If you think people here get hostile, please stay away from the rest of the internet. For your own safety. Passions may flare occasionally here, but Mythic Scribes is a veritable bastion of civility, a paragon even.

Not to mention the differences in opinion aren't even that stark here relative to other forums. Even our resident "conservatives", like Legendary Sidekick or Mythopoet, would seem positively progressive compared with the likes of Stormfront, Return of Kings, or Free Republic. And while I might come across as the insensitive Straight White Male here on MS, on many other message boards I'm one of the resident anti-racist liberals fighting against the white supremacists white nationalists valiant scholars of "human biodiversity" crusading against the Jewish conspiracy to destroy the white race PC multiculturalism. I've even been accused of espousing black supremacism through "turning ancient figures into n*ggas".

Point is, >90% of us here at Mythic Scribes agree that racism, sexism, homophobia, and other anti-egalitarian ideologies are morally reprehensible. The disagreements between us amount to little more than hair-splitting over precisely what is or isn't offensive (or "problematic" to use current jargon), or maybe perceptions of who is and isn't privileged and how to deal with it. The abundance of wacko that pervades the rest of the Internet is in short supply here, presumably because we fantasy writers have more imagination and intelligence than most Internet wackos.

 

[Legendary Sidekick]

our resident "conservatives", like Legendary Sidekick

And here I thought I earned all that feminist author creed with my Huntress MC.

Say… what's that in the sky? Is that a valkyrie in non-revealing armor?

[Escapes in pick up truck with NOBAMA sticker.]

 

[Jabrosky]

And here I thought I earned all that feminist author creed with my Huntress MC.

Say… what's that in the sky? Is that a valkyrie in non-revealing armor?

[Escapes in pick up truck with NOBAMA sticker.]

Sorry, I was merely recalling things you've said in another MS thread from a few years back.

 

[ascanius]

I understand your logic, but I think you're missing the point.

You write the character as an individual person with unique traits, abilities, ideas, and so on. Does gender have an effect on that character's make-up. Yes, of course it does. However, it's one aspect of many that make a person an individual. Are you totally defined by your gender? I hope not.

I got the point, I was simply commenting on the conflicting logic. What you call diverse T.Allen.Smith, I call good writing and that I uderstand.

From the standpoint I take that psychological differences between men and women are negligible or the result of social conditioning rather than genetics, diversity is still massively important, and I'll explain why.

This is what I was getting at. How can you have diversity without first acknowledging that men and women are different, think differently, act differently, and are biologically different. If a female character is written with the belief that male and female are not different how can it be diverse, it seems more like a skin game for marketing purposes. There are hundreds of things that make men and women different that make great things to write about.

It's all about social conditioning and subliminal influence. Imagine a young black girl, who grows up being exposed to fiction and media filled with white dudes. White dudes are always the hero who saves the day, white dudes are always the strong one who can fight the forces of evil, white dudes are always important people. This will have an effect on her. She'll grow up thinking, even just subconsciously, that she's not meant to be the hero, that she's not meant to be strong and powerful, that she's not important, all because of her sex and the colour of her skin. That is why diversity is important, to make people feel as though they actually matter in the world, because they do!

So I was going to ask my little sister (who is a young black girl in a rascist small town highschool) this very question after I read this post but no one is answereing the phone. I'll let you know what she says when I get ahold of her. Though I think I have a pretty good idea and I don't think she is going to agree with you. I'm also certain that when i ask her about adding so called 'diversity' for the sake of political correctness, or sales, or because it's not diverse enough she will tell me 'that's dumb.'

Part of the problem is that people like to speak from impressions which are coloured from their worldview that turn out to be factually wrong, and don't like being told that they are factually wrong.

I totally agree with this statment, sorta. I would like to add, the biggest problem about these converstations are how internet blog posts, essays, and op-eds are substituted for scientific empirical evidence. I'm not going to link to the great swaths of neurological and psychological research that support my points. Whats the point no one ever reads them or they link to a blog post as counter evidence. Thats the problem. Very few are willing to take empirical evidence, evaluate it and judge it on it's merrits with the belief that maybe, just maybe they don't know everything and someone else is right. In the end it's these mostly devolve to I'm right your wrong simply because I say so, like simply averring makes one right.

All that being said. I do know my sister would like more black female characters who are dealing with the things a young black girl is dealing with. I also know she would rather read about such characters who the author felt passionate about including into the story, not because they felt obligated too. Or characters who have enough depth that you cannot simply switch them from male to female by changing a few pronouns. Heck I would read those books even if I'm not a big fan of historical fiction, I'm still trying to convert her.

 

[Legendary Sidekick]

You're not wrong, and I'm not offended. Maybe a little flattered, especially given that I don't make political comments.

If anything concerned me, it was in my response. I was worried my sticker joke might backfire and there'd be a heated political discussion.

 

[Legendary Sidekick]

I also know she would rather read about such characters who the author felt passionate about including into the story

This^ comment makes up for that sad moment of embarrassment I felt when my little comment was ninja'd by your big one.

Yes, this is why I write female MCs. It's not because they're female or because the world needs or wants female characters. It's because I enjoy these particular characters I came up with, and I want to draw them and write them!

 

[Devor]

You're not wrong, and I'm not offended. Maybe a little flattered, especially given that I don't make political comments.

I was trying to decide if I should feel offended for not making the list.

 

[Mythopoet]

I'm not offended as long as you don't mean "conservative" in the political sense. I dislike all political groups and don't associate myself with any of them. No, I'm not really offended. I'm too much of a loud mouth about my beliefs and opinions to have any right to be offended.

 

[cupiscent]

Yes, this is why I write female MCs. It's not because they're female or because the world needs or wants female characters. It's because I enjoy these particular characters I came up with, and I want to draw them and write them!

Yes. So when I see people saying things like, "I just don't think of female characters", it's hard not to read that as "because women aren't interesting (to me)". Which is hard not to take personally.

 

[Devor]

Yes. So when I see people saying things like, "I just don't think of female characters", it's hard not to read that as "because women aren't interesting (to me)". Which is hard not to take personally.

Out of curiosity, has anybody said that here, or is that from another community?

 

[Mythopoet]

Yes. So when I see people saying things like, "I just don't think of female characters", it's hard not to read that as "because women aren't interesting (to me)". Which is hard not to take personally.

So you impute your own assumed meaning onto something someone else says and then you take offense to it? That's pretty messed up.

 

[cupiscent]

Out of curiosity, has anybody said that here, or is that from another community?

There have been comments in this thread and other discussions of this nature in this community where arguments are made that the characters "just show up" a certain way, and also that authors should follow their instincts and inclinations in making characters (and not change the genders to female, by which one assumes the characters are male to start with).

So you impute your own assumed meaning onto something someone else says and then you take offense to it? That's pretty messed up.

A) I laid out my logic, and it seems relatively straightforward to me. I am very open to hearing alternative explanations.
B) The question has been asked as to why people take this sort of issue personally, so I am explaining.
C) I am simply saying that this is how I feel. It's more dispiriting than offensive, to be honest.

 

[Tom]

So you impute your own assumed meaning onto something someone else says and then you take offense to it? That's pretty messed up.

That is not messed up, it's how we as thinking beings form opinions and associations with other ideas. That "messed up" idea is a big part of psychology. Inserting ideas--whether your own or implied by the speaker or writer themselves--into others' words is also called reading subtext.

This "messed up" psychological response can also be the result of social conditioning--"not thinking of female characters" translates to "not interested in female characters" because a lifetime of social interactions have reinforced the mentality behind it.

Mythopoet, honestly, if you're going to take personal offense at everything anyone says, why do you join these discussions?

 

[Devor]

There have been comments in this thread and other discussions of this nature in this community where arguments are made that the characters "just show up" a certain way, and also that authors should follow their instincts and inclinations in making characters (and not change the genders to female, by which one assumes the characters are male to start with).



A) I laid out my logic, and it seems relatively straightforward to me. I am very open to hearing alternative explanations.
B) The question has been asked as to why people take this sort of issue personally, so I am explaining.
C) I am simply saying that this is how I feel. It's more dispiriting than offensive, to be honest.

This seems very disingenuous to me. For instance, I know LS said that characters pop into his head fully formed, but he also writes with a lot of female characters and talks about it often. I'm not sure if I've said something close or not - I don't remember anymore - but I include a number of female characters.

If somebody says "This is how I make characters, they come to me straight away and I don't want to change them" and you're jumping to "I don't think of writing women" and still further to "I don't find women interesting," and then getting disgusted by that, then I think you have to really consider whether you're being fair to the real people you're talking to here.


((edit)) I haven't slept in two days and somehow read "dispiriting" as "disgusting." I'm not sure how else that mistake on my part may have played into this post. I apologize for that.

 

[Devor]

That is not messed up, it's how we as thinking beings form opinions and associations with other ideas. That "messed up" idea is a big part of psychology. Inserting ideas--whether your own or implied by the speaker or writer themselves--into others' words is also called reading subtext.

Err . . . . most evidence suggests that we're actually really, really bad at reading subtext, and that it's one of the ways that most of our biases - including stereotypes - come out in our behavior.

Case in point:

This "messed up" psychological response can also be the result of social conditioning--"not thinking of female characters" translates to "not interested in female characters" because a lifetime of social interactions have reinforced the mentality behind it.

You think she's responding that way because she's been socially conditioned? What?

((edit))

Where does it stop? Now we're projecting social conditioning onto people who didn't even say the supposed remark? The layers of "subtext" are getting ever deeper and murkier here.

Geesh, I should maybe call it a night already.

Mythopoet, honestly, if you're going to take personal offense at everything anyone says, why do you join these discussions?

Why do you feel compelled to push people who disagree with you out​ of the conversation?

 

[Legendary Sidekick]

There have been comments in this thread and other discussions of this nature in this community where arguments are made that the characters "just show up" a certain way, and also that authors should follow their instincts and inclinations in making characters (and not change the genders to female, by which one assumes the characters are male to start with).

The greatest misunderstanding on this thread is that the message on either side of the argument was to marginalize female characters, though it's understandable it may have come off that way.

I was originally of the mindset that gender-swapping isn't a good approach, and part of my reasoning was that one doing that is basically thinking of a male character and changing the pronoun as part of an afterthought.

But that was a misunderstanding too…

As I stated earlier, I think the difference of opinion there stems from the creative process. For some of us (like me), characters are dreamed up as vivid images, making it not impossible but certainly undesirable to change the gender. That's how I create characters, so to change the gender would be silly for me because of my process. My female characters are never male-turned-female; they're just female.

For one who creates a character another way, such as coming up with a role to be filled, "Sir Knight" could become "Lady Knight" or "Queen Ironfist" could become "King Ironfist." To someone who creates that way, it must seem very silly that others can't or won't change a character's gender.

 

[ascanius]

There have been comments in this thread and other discussions of this nature in this community where arguments are made that the characters "just show up" a certain way, and also that authors should follow their instincts and inclinations in making characters (and not change the genders to female, by which one assumes the characters are male to start with).



A) I laid out my logic, and it seems relatively straightforward to me. I am very open to hearing alternative explanations.

Yeah but your logic is a straight forward personal apeal to 'your' emotion. Your acting like others have an obligation to cater to your insecurities. We cannot control how you precieve what others say, thats all on you.

B) The question has been asked as to why people take this sort of issue personally, so I am explaining.

Yeah but your also taking it way out of context, so they didn't include a female character it doesn't mean they automatically think "women are not important' your making assumptions based off your, heck I don't know what, but it is not logic

C) I am simply saying that this is how I feel. It's more dispiriting than offensive, to be honest.

Ok but we don't have any control over how you feel, and expecting others to simply know and cater to how you feel is offensive. It's one thing to explain why, and ask questions it's another to simply extrapolate and be upset at the results.

That is not messed up, it's how we as thinking beings form opinions and associations with other ideas. That "messed up" idea is a big part of psychology. Inserting ideas--whether your own or implied by the speaker or writer themselves--into others' words is also called reading subtext.

Yeah it is messed up. How is inserting your extrapolations based off your emotional state and being upset by the implications not messed up. That talks more about serious psychological trust issues than anything else. I get the impression i'm walking into a trap by responding to this.

This "messed up" psychological response can also be the result of social conditioning--"not thinking of female characters" translates to "not interested in female characters" because a lifetime of social interactions have reinforced the mentality behind it.

thats not social conditioning thats... So does that mean if your friend doesn't call they don't like you or they are mad at you? Thats the logic being used, take a statment, extrapolate to have adverse affects on you and you are unappy with the implications.

Mythopoet, honestly, if you're going to take personal offense at everything anyone says, why do you join these discussions?

I'll be honest sometimes I can't tell if your joking or not. Mythopoet didn't take Personal offense to it. you two did.

 

[Mindfire]

Not to mention the differences in opinion aren't even that stark here relative to other forums. Even our resident "conservatives", like Legendary Sidekick or Mythopoet, would seem positively progressive compared with the likes of-

Oh for heaven's sake, why did you bring them up? Now this site is going to show up in Google searches for those keywords. And worse, you've given them free publicity! Do you understand the horror and madness you have unleashed by typing those demonic names? DO YOU?

 

[cupiscent]

I am not offended. I am not disgusted. I have never claimed to be either. I outlined a breed of remarks that I have some personal difficulty with, but I have never suggested anyone should stop making such remarks, cater to my insecurities (thank you), act or write in a particular way. How I feel is how I feel. How you feel about it is how you feel about it. Neither one invalidates the other one.

All I have ever suggested, in this or any other discussion of this nature, is that it would be great if people thought a little more about the decisions they were possibly unconsciously making in the creation of their characters. And all I really want to know is why there aren't equal numbers of significant male and female characters in media, specifically spec-fic media.

 

[ascanius]

I am not offended. I am not disgusted. I have never claimed to be either. I outlined a breed of remarks that I have some personal difficulty with, but I have never suggested anyone should stop making such remarks, cater to my insecurities (thank you), act or write in a particular way. How I feel is how I feel. How you feel about it is how you feel about it. Neither one invalidates the other one.

All I have ever suggested, in this or any other discussion of this nature, is that it would be great if people thought a little more about the decisions they were possibly unconsciously making in the creation of their characters. And all I really want to know is why there aren't equal numbers of significant male and female characters in media, specifically spec-fic media.

Some of us do think a good long bit, we each have are own ways of doing things. I've had characters pop into my head with no trouble, they are usually the ones I love, it's the ones I really have to think about that never feel right/ never get the good depth the others do. As to the other question, I don't have an answer.e