"Ah what is woman, that you forsake her..."

[thanate]

The world is not living up to my egalitarian upbringing.

This morning's disappointment, part maybe six or seven in an ongoing series, was brought to my attention by this post, from Jim C Hines, who writes light fantasy and interesting journal entries. (er, see also: LOL SF/F bookcovers, although he has actual content as well) The main point is that the Hugo awards are still pretty much a boy's game, even if they haven't posted the "No Girls Allowed" sign, and so a few slip in from time to time. Blah, blah, blah, controversy, extenuating circumstances, whine. Ok, now that we've got that out of our systems...

I think I've mentioned before that I'm not a feminist; in a very real way, my parents were feminists so that I didn't have to be. I just think that people who feel women are in some way not up to whatever standards you're holding people as a whole to are morons. Pick a standard, any standard, and you'll find some people of any gender, race, or other definable group (last name beginning with P...) who aren't up to it, and some who are. Unless of course you're looking for something completely irrelevant, like computer skills among illiterate yak herders, or yak herding skills among IT professionals. One of the more important skills in life is knowing what you are good at and what you aren't, and recognizing when other people are better so you can learn from them or let them get on with it, and none of this has to do with gender or race or eye color or any of the standard identifying factors. You know all this. I know all this. People still make stereotype jokes and talk about things being "gay" all the time.

This is why the real world, including some of my own behavior, comes as a disappointment to me. belfebe mentioned after the Democrats finally sorted out their nominations last year (was it only last year?) that the campaign process showed that while it was no longer ok to be seen as racist, it was still ok to be sexist. I didn't quite sort out the wording to say so at the time, but I think the main problem there is that the former is built on a cultural difference, while the latter is misconstruing actual genetic tendencies. As long as it's still ok to say things like "boys will be boys," and "women are better organized than men," there will be people who can't tell the difference between that and "If you can't take the heat, stay in the kitchen." Add to that some of the recent studies that show that gender identification is one of the things most deeply hardwired into our brains, and that in stressful situations (think: combat...) we *do not hear* female voices... It's a hard problem.

Personally, most sorts of stereotype grouping make me deeply uncomfortable. I spent years believing cognitive gender differences were a cultural invention, and I'm still not entirely comfortable being proven (on average) wrong. But it has, finally, come to my attention that if I were giving awards for Great Fiction, about 90 percent of them would go to female authors. I'll get back to you if I ever finish the household library thing, but I'm guessing at least half of the books in the house are female-authored fantasy.

Comments

[dante-di-pietro.livejournal.com]

I'm hoping that we eventually come to the point where we have sufficient brain research to be able to say, conclusively:

Men tend to be better at XYZ, and tend to be ill-suited at RTY. Women tend to be better at ABC, and tend to be ill-suited at JKL. Sex is irrelevant in determining aptitude for GHJ.

I'm completely okay with women having better verbal skills and senses of smell. Women have better reflexes too; I want most pilots to be women. Screw equality; I just want my plane to land. The big mistake, I think, is when people try to claim that men and women are completely equal at all things (they aren't) or that one sex is universally superior because of one characteristic (neither is).

On a side note, looking at my bookshelf, most of the authors are male (many texts are pre-1900, which is a factor), but my very *favorite* fiction author is a woman.

[thanate.livejournal.com]

My problem is more that once you start saying what men are better at and what women are better at, the people who are extremely good at the something that "belongs" to the other gender have to swim upstream to get recognized. And never mind that I'm currently filling almost entirely female gender roles, if I discover a sudden talent for running electrical wiring, I don't want to prove to everyone I meet individually that I'd make a good electrician. I will continue to be disappointed so long as people can't judge others based on individual aptitudes, instead of assuming because I'm female I'll be good at all the female things and none of the male ones. I suspect I'm in for the long haul on that one, though.

The fact that we have a lot of pre-1900 and early 20th century authors is why I didn't put the percentage higher. They have to fight with all the girly YA and children's stuff I've been hoarding since the mid-80s, though; I'd say the nearly complete works of Diana Wynne Jones just about balances out the Harvard Classics.

So, who is your favorite fiction author?

[dante-di-pietro.livejournal.com]

I specifically used the word "tend", since it is also part of my dream that people understand that tendencies are not absolutes, thereby preventing the scenario you describe. The problem there would be the assumption: it would be safe to assume that a particular woman is probably better at the "female things" than she is at the "male things", and is probably better at an individual "female thing" than most men would be, but none of that would be guaranteed. It would be bad reasoning to assume that a woman couldn't be good at any/all male things, or vice versa. People would need to understand that part of what generalizations entail are exceptions.

My favorite fiction author is Melanie Rawn. I even read the semi-trashy romancish novel she did a few years back just because her prose is so delightful.

[thanate.livejournal.com]

Exactly.

Melanie Rawn is in that large amorphus category of people I've seen on the shelves but not ever actually read... I shall have to bump her up on the list. Thanks.

[dante-di-pietro.livejournal.com]

I read her Dragon Prince/Dragon Star series like 70 times. The first time I picked it up I was in 5th grade; the moment I finished it, I picked up the first book and started again... 15 times. She's actually a really good example of male characters who are people first and foremost, but can also be "manly", and female characters who are people first but can also be "womanly". I can probably credit her and James Cameron ( Aliens, Terminator 1 & 2) most for influencing what I find attractive in women.