Something that's really starting to bug me.

[qualapec]

The idea that it's perfectly okay to say "I'm just not interested in male characters" without being called misandrist, but "I'm just not interested in female characters" will bring accusations of misogyny almost definitely.

Something doesn't add up.

Ignoring the fact that misandry and misogyny are horribly overused and, I feel, misrepresented, either

Comments

[redbrunja]

First of all, I want to say that I understand your frustration at the baggage that saying "I'm just not interested in female characters" brings. But the fact is, that baggage exists because it's there. JK Rowling is JK Rowling and not Joanne Rowling because her publishes believe (imho, accurately) that boys would not read books from an author they knew right off the bat was female. I have lost track of the number of slash fans and articles about slash that talk about how girls/women have an easier time relating to male characters they do female. Think about that: being male is considered so normal, so default, that a large number of women and girls find female characters Other to a point that they're hard to relate to

[qualapec]

It's true that sexism exists and that we need to be able to recognize examples of it where it appears.

Think about that: being male is considered so normal, so default, that a large number of women and girls find female characters Other to a point that they're hard to relate to.You see, I just don't think that's true. At all. I think that the vast majority of female slash fans are, basically, unequipped to determine why they like it and like writing male characters. One crackpot posts an article like that, and a whole bunch of people glom onto it because "WOW, I finally have a reason and this person wrote several paragraphs on the topic so that must be the case

[qualapec]

Now, it can also be argued that I'm clearly NOT any more equipped to describe it than they are, since I've admitted to not knowing why I write slash or why the MC of my novel is male

[eldrfire]

Wow I agree with a lot of what you say here!

I don't think it's a bad thing to write stories that mostly have men in them. I'm not sure if you were saying that you really feel like it's bad that you write more about men or if you were just acknowledging that you do it and wishing other people wouldn't judge it as "non-feminist"... but if it's the former, don't worry about it!

[eldrfire]

I think you brought up something interesting

[qualapec]

That is a good point. I don't think it's necessarily the root of my issue, but that raises a significant point. Sexism does exist - there's no question about that, but the climate can be highly over reactive. However, it's hard to determine whether those are valid complaints or are, themselves, based in early-ingrained sexism

[eldrfire]

When you compare a Russian woman to an American woman, they've still both been socialized differently. The Russian woman was just socialized in a more gender-egalitarian way, but she is still shaped by her society.

For a character, being shaped by society includes rejecting what that society told you, but the fact that you had to react against it is part of your character.

If you switch a person's time periods, I think it would change them... I mean, as the writer you have control over that, but when dealing with real people things that seem normal at one time aren't at another... For example, an atheist character would have a lot harder time in 15th century Europe than in 21st century Europe. That shapes their beliefs and their character...

[eldrfire]

Wait sorry, that anonymous comment is mine; I forgot to log in