Must be a group member before inviting friends
The Raging Debate - Gender Bias
Is it me going cross-eyed, or has there been a whiteout fit-blizzard of blogs/posts/outbreaks of commentary aimed at gender in SF/Fantasy lately? In stories, in characters, in behavior at conventions, and also, with regard to who reads books written by whichever sex, and the skew toward avoiding female authors.
Before the storm brews, and the ahead of the battle (over whatever hated prejudice or abuse jams all thumbs at hand on the keyboard hot button) I am NOT saying there is no bias. Been there, done that, lived it, lived with it, done my share of kicking all four tires of the issue - and watched the amazing points raised as the (tired) controversy continues to rear up and unfold.
This post is not another RANT, but angled toward (perhaps) opening up a fresh angle that may be constructive.
One significant POINT I haven't yet seen addressed: the singular UNBIASED data left by the cumulative records of readers. This breadcrumb trail is dead easy to track, on any site page where a book is rated and reviewed, by title.
Does nobody ever examine the collective readership of a book, before they form an opinion? I would argue: if the collective READERS of a book are gender biased toward mars or venus, it is a book preferred by that audience, no matter what biological equipment the author was born with.
Yet many books, weighed on the basis of readership DISPLAY NO GENDER BIAS AT ALL.
No need to hang up on the content of the reviews or risk the hackles of scathing opinion (unless one is looking to Avoid certain plot lines) - yet in cases there is a fairly even split between males and females who have rated the title, (their names or handles or pictures often reveal this) and if the ratings of both genders fall evenly across the spectrum of like and dislike, I suggest that such a book has passed the test of a more balanced outlook.
Some books are written for the preferences of a women's market, and some for the men's, this has always been true.
But many titles encompass a split audience, as the time tested accumulation of readership clearly will demonstrate.
Has the thoughtful approach never considered this index when selecting a title to try? Amidst the flurry of outcry, the blind surveys, and the prominent posts and pledges I've seen, aimed to 'topple' the gender bias - why not view the readership and compile a list of books that already reflect a degree of balance?
Amid the pie charts of statistics and the noisy furor, might the composite view of a title's readership offer another way to lessen the bias of prejudice, at least with regard to the sex (or in the case of bylines with initials, the hidden sex) of the author?
At risk of stirring up hackles, I'm curious enough to examine the question.
Before the storm brews, and the ahead of the battle (over whatever hated prejudice or abuse jams all thumbs at hand on the keyboard hot button) I am NOT saying there is no bias. Been there, done that, lived it, lived with it, done my share of kicking all four tires of the issue - and watched the amazing points raised as the (tired) controversy continues to rear up and unfold.
This post is not another RANT, but angled toward (perhaps) opening up a fresh angle that may be constructive.
One significant POINT I haven't yet seen addressed: the singular UNBIASED data left by the cumulative records of readers. This breadcrumb trail is dead easy to track, on any site page where a book is rated and reviewed, by title.
Does nobody ever examine the collective readership of a book, before they form an opinion? I would argue: if the collective READERS of a book are gender biased toward mars or venus, it is a book preferred by that audience, no matter what biological equipment the author was born with.
Yet many books, weighed on the basis of readership DISPLAY NO GENDER BIAS AT ALL.
No need to hang up on the content of the reviews or risk the hackles of scathing opinion (unless one is looking to Avoid certain plot lines) - yet in cases there is a fairly even split between males and females who have rated the title, (their names or handles or pictures often reveal this) and if the ratings of both genders fall evenly across the spectrum of like and dislike, I suggest that such a book has passed the test of a more balanced outlook.
Some books are written for the preferences of a women's market, and some for the men's, this has always been true.
But many titles encompass a split audience, as the time tested accumulation of readership clearly will demonstrate.
Has the thoughtful approach never considered this index when selecting a title to try? Amidst the flurry of outcry, the blind surveys, and the prominent posts and pledges I've seen, aimed to 'topple' the gender bias - why not view the readership and compile a list of books that already reflect a degree of balance?
Amid the pie charts of statistics and the noisy furor, might the composite view of a title's readership offer another way to lessen the bias of prejudice, at least with regard to the sex (or in the case of bylines with initials, the hidden sex) of the author?
At risk of stirring up hackles, I'm curious enough to examine the question.
date
newest »
newest »
I hadn't realized there was any debate on this issue any more at all. It's a nice rock I live under.;-)
I've never paid much attention to sexual equality. I never really felt that it existed in my world, but I'm a guy & my role model never paid much attention to it, either.
For the most part, I don't want to know much about an author, only what they write. A fiction book is a composite of many people's efforts. The author often releases their inner fantasies & demons in a swirl of ideas then rewrites the result into a cohesive whole. Editors suggest additions, change, & delete. Other pre-raders put in their 2 cents for more changes. It's a long process & the result might not resemble what the author originally envisioned. In any case, it's a far cry from the reality of the author.
I'm reading these works for entertainment, not enlightenment. I may pick one author's book over another if I've read their work before & know what I'm in the mood for, but their personal life isn't part of the decision unless it's become a blatant part of their writing. Some push their politics or religious beliefs as they get better known. I enjoy their early books, but don't read them once they start preaching because they're no longer entertaining.
I agree with Susan's statement, "To me it seems yet another symptom of over-political correctness."
I don't think when I pick up my pen that I am writing this *only* for a particular audience. I know there are authors who do and who have a niche audience. But why on earth would you avoid buying a book because it was written by a man or a woman? Or concentrated more on women than men?
If I have a particular bias toward female authors it is simply that often, but not always, I enjoy their writing more, but that certainly doesn't stop me buying novels written by men. And who knows, when many Harlequin romances are written by men using a pseudonym. And why not? If a book is written by a gay person of color, I am still there to enjoy the WRITING not to judge who wrote it unless it is being deliberately controversial. I could be judged for writing white handsome males, but if I am stereo-typically white, er, why shouldn't I? Then it depends on WHAT I am writing. If, as a female, I am writing from a male persepctive I do so because I had three sons and therefore feel I have a wee bit of knowledge on the subject of manly behaviour. I've had equally good reviews from men and women.
Purely as a reader I can honestly say I don't stop to think about gender bias when I pick up a book from the shelf. Because no one can tell ME what I will enjoy. I won't say that men and women don't write differently because it can be noticeably different, but not always.
To me, this all sounds like more trite, fashionable phrases because, you know, it is IN to think like this. Personally I think there are far more important issues to worry about than this. But that's my two pennyworth and I am sure there will those who disagree, and good for them!