Women in SF&F Month Banner

It’s been a fantastic first week for Women in SF&F Month! Today I just want to round up some related links (including a new one on books reviewed/received by gender) and give away a book.

Week In Review

This week brought some wonderful posts from various guests. Here’s what happened this week in case you missed any posts:

Thanks to all of these week’s guests, who have gotten the month off to a great start!

There were a few links I saw this week that are related to the issue of gender and SFF. I wanted to share some of them because I think they’re worth reading and important to the topic.

This week Strange Horizons posted a breakdown of books and reviews by gender for several venues, including Locus and Asimov’s. They also used Locus as a general guideline for books received for review by gender. They discovered they received a fairly equal number of books by men and women from US publishers (47% by women and 53% by men). Only about a third of the books received from the UK were written by women, though. There were some caveats in place, such as the fact that they counted all individual books received and sometimes they had to assume the gender of the writer, but these are some rather interesting results. (I found this on Cheryl’s Mewsings.)

Catherynne M. Valente wrote about the recent brouhaha over Christopher Priest ripping apart the Clarke Award nominees and how different it would have been had a woman written the same post.

 

It’s that if a woman wrote it, she’d have been torn to pieces. No quarter, no mercy.

Seanan McGuire briefly talked about her experience with the type of situations Catherynne Valente was discussing in the above post and then went on to talk about a sign she saw at Emerald City that said, “Finally, a book for BOYS that the GIRLS will enjoy reading, too!” She concludes with:

 

Let’s all just read the books we want to read, regardless of covers or the gender of the main characters, okay? Because otherwise, we’re missing out on a lot of really great stories. And that would be a shame.

Yes, this! I am so tired of seeing references to “books for women” or “books for men.” Can’t we just have books for people who like to read instead of trying to tell each gender what types of books should appeal to them? I’ve had people tell me about books they want me to review and describe them this way and it makes me want to bang my head against my keyboard.

Giveaway

Today I am giving away one copy of Dragon Sword and Wind Child, a fantasy book written by Noriko Ogiwara and translated by Cathy Hirano. I very much enjoyed this book, as I said in my review of Dragon Sword and Wind Child earlier this year.

Dragon Sword and Wind Child, the first book in the Tales of the Magatama trilogy, was originally published in Japan in 1988. Noriko Ogiwara won the New Writer’s Award from the Japanese Association of Children’s Writers for this book, which was her first. This one and the second book in the trilogy, Mirror Sword and Shadow Prince, have been translated into English. I’m not sure if the third one will be or not, but don’t worry – Dragon Sword and Wind Child stands well on its own and the author actually never planned to write a sequel, according to the afterword from the second book.

The story behind this book and how it was received is quite interesting. In the afterword for the first book, Noriko Ogiwara explains that it is a sort of melding of Western and Japanese literature. She very much enjoyed both Japanese literature and Western fantasy books so she used the Kojiki as the basis for the mythology in her story the way a lot of British and American fantasy authors do with Celtic mythology. She also notes that fantasy was not really respected in Japan at the time she wrote this, and she expected her work to receive the same treatment. However, as mentioned on her bio, Dragon Sword and Wind Child is considered the ‘first truly “Japanese” fantasy’ and is ‘a young adult classic in Japan.’

About Dragon Sword and Wind Child:

Dragon Sword and Wind Child by Noriko Ogiwara

The God of Light and the Goddess of Darkness have waged a ruthless war across the land of Toyoashihara for generations. But for fifteen-year-old Saya, the war is far away—until the day she discovers that she is the reincarnation of the Water Maiden and a princess of the Children of the Dark.

Raised to love the Light and detest the Dark, Saya must come to terms with her heritage even as the Light and Dark both seek to claim her, for she is the only mortal who an awaken the legendary Dragon Sword, the weapon destined to bring an end to he war. Can Saya make the choice between the Light and Dark, or is she doomed—like all the Water Maidens who came before her…?

Read an Excerpt from Dragon Sword and Wind Child

Giveaway Rules: To be entered in the giveaway, fill out the form below. One entry per person and a winner will be randomly selected. This giveaway is open internationally, but to be eligible to win, you must live in a country that qualifies for free shipping from The Book Depository. The giveaway will be open until the end of the day on Saturday, April 14. The winner has 24 hours to respond once contacted via email, and if I don’t hear from them by then a new winner will be chosen (who will also have 24 hours to respond until someone gets back to me with a place to send the book).

Please note email addresses will only be used for the purpose of contacting the winner. Once the giveaway is over all the emails will be deleted.

Good luck!

[contact-form-7 id=”2340″ title=”Dragon Sword and Wind Child Entry Form”]

Women in SF&F Month Banner

Today I’m thrilled to have a wonderful message on how we can support women writing science fiction from the fantastic Elizabeth Bear! She is extremely prolific and has written a lot of books that fall under various categories of both science fiction and fantasy. I’ve enjoyed every single one I’ve read, and her Edda of Burdens trilogy is among my favorite series for its beautiful writing and handling of myths. Since I love Elizabeth Bear’s books so much that I keep seeking them out and reading them, she has the distinction of being the author whose books I’ve reviewed the most on this site. Range of Ghosts, her most recent novel and the first book in the Eternal Sky trilogy, will be my tenth by her when I find time to finish it (it’s wonderful, this month’s event has just been keeping me too busy to fit in much time for reading!).

Elizabeth Bear

I’ve got to assume that you’re here reading this because you care about science fiction, and you care about science fiction by women. And you may be wondering, “But what can I do to support female SF writers?”

The thing that boggles me most about the invisibility of women writing science fiction in so many panel and online discussions is the sheer number of us doing it–and receiving some high-level critical acclaim for doing it well! Just in the past few years, women SF writers who have been major genre award nominees include Mira Grant, Jean Johnson, Maureen F. McHugh, Sara Creasy, Rebecca Ore, C.L. Anderson, Nancy Kress, Kij Johnson, Nnedi Okorafor, Connie Willis, Lois McMaster Bujold–

–the problem is not that women are not writing science fiction, or that science fiction by women is not being published. It’s that a certain segment of fandom doesn’t pay enough attention to notice.

As you might imagine, I find this intensely frustrating. It’s as if one or two women in each generation of writers are anointed to become token representatives of our gender in the general critical discourse, and the rest–somehow never get talked about very much.

The good news is, this is easy to fix. And the power lies with fandom! And especially male fandom, because–sadly–too often the sort of male readers who don’t already make a point of reading widely and diversely also don’t read a lot of critical blogs and fan sites by women, or possibly ask their female friends for book recommendations.

So the answer to the question, “What can I do to support women SF writers?” is easy. Buy their books. Read them.

Talk about them. In public, on panels, on Goodreads, to friends. In convention bars. In internet forums. On blogs. Talk about the ones you love and the ones you hate. Be honest and incisive.

It’s not so hard.

About Elizabeth Bear:
Elizabeth Bear was born on the same day as Frodo and Bilbo Baggins, but in a different year. She is the Hugo and Sturgeon Award-winning author of over a dozen novels and nearly a hundred short stories. She lives in Massachusetts with a Giant Ridiculous Dog, but may frequently be found in Wisconsin keeping company with her partner, fantasist Scott Lynch.

Website | Blog | Twitter

Range of Ghosts by Elizabeth Bear Hammered by Elizabeth Bear Carnival by Elizabeth Bear

Women in SF&F Month Banner

Today’s guest is Kristin, who runs the wonderful blog My Bookish Ways! Kristin has an extraordinary amount of reviews, interviews, and giveaways of all kinds of different books, and I simultaneously envy and admire her sheer volume and quality of content (especially her awesome interview with Seanan McGuire). She covers books from a wide variety of genres, including urban fantasy, horror, science fiction, fantasy, suspense, and historical fiction. Right now she has a giveaway for a copy of the new YA fantasy Fair Coin by EC Myers along with a great interview with the author that I recommend checking out. You can also follow her on Twitter as mybookishways.

Please give a warm welcome to Kristin as she shares some of her favorite female authors of fantasy and science fiction!

My Bookish Ways Header

The lovely Kristen of Fantasy Café suggested I make a list of some of my favorite female fantasy/sci-fi authors and tell you a little bit of why I love them. This was not an easy thing to do. I tried to stick to mostly sci-fi (with a couple of exceptions), and I found it to be an absolutely heroic effort to keep it to a Top 5. So, here’s my list, and even though it says “Top 5”, it’s by no means all-inclusive, because there are so many talented ladies out there writing in these genres, and I encourage you to seek them out!

Here they are, in no particular order:

Elizabeth Bear: The wonderful Ms. Bear is a writing powerhouse, and she’s written books that fall under speculative fiction, fantasy, and sci-fi (like I said, powerhouse), but my favorite series by her is probably her Jenny Casey trilogy (Hammered, Scardown, and Worldwired). Jenny is the ultimate badass sci-fi chick, and I keep hoping for more in this series. Ms. Bear’s newest book, Range of Ghosts, just came out, so be sure to give that one a look as well!

Marianne de Pierres: I love Ms. De Pierres’  Parrish Plessis series (Nylon Angel, Code Noir, Crash Deluxe.) This series is a fast-paced, sci-fi, cyberpunk extravaganza and it’s not to be missed! I recently interviewed Marianne, so if you’d like more proof of her awesome, click here!

Jaye Wells: I’ve been following Jaye’s career since Red-Headed Stepchild, the first book in her superb Sabina Kane series.  Not only does the series kick some serious butt (the 5th and final book, Blue-Blooded Vamp, is out in June), but Jaye is a local author to me, and she’s always been gracious and sweet whenever I stalk the poor woman at signing events. If you haven’t discovered Jaye Wells, now’s the time!

Lucy A. Snyder:  Ms. Snyder is the author of one of my favorite series, the Spellbent series featuring Jessie Shimmer. I suppose, technically, that these books place in the urban fantasy category, but they’re not your typical UF fare. Lucy has a knack for horror, and the Spellbent series is woven through with classic horror elements. Jessie Shimmer and her friends are a ton of fun, and the world that the author has created in these books is rich and engaging (and sometimes chilling), so what are you waiting for?

Ann Aguirre: Ms. Aguirre’s Sirantha Jax series (Grimspace, Wanderlust, Doubleblind, Killbox, and Aftermath) is the cream of the crop, and it’s what opened me up to reading more science fiction, period. Rich worlds, fascinating characters, alien races, the coldness of space, and heartbreaking romance are at your fingertips with this series, and even if you think you’re not a sci-fi reader, check out this series and tell me what you think. You’ll be calling yourself a sci-fi fan in no time.

Women in SF&F Month Banner

Today I’m pleased to have a guest post from one of my very favorite fantasy authors, Carol Berg! Her Rai-kirah trilogy is among my favorite fantasy series, and I am a huge fan of her other books I’ve read as well (Song of the Beast and the Lighthouse Duet). The Daemon Prism, her most recent book and the final Novel of the Collegia Magia, was just released earlier this year.

While I love her stories and worlds, I think she is particularly wonderful at writing realistic characters – flawed people who come alive because they are not flat or one dimensional. So I am very excited that Carol is discussing her approach to characterization and how the characters in the Books of the Rai-kirah evolved. Reading her thoughts on characters made me realize just why her characters resonate with me so much. I just love the way she thinks about writing them, and I hope you enjoy reading her post as much as I did!

Carol Berg

Kristen asked me to talk a bit about how my epic fantasy series, The Books of the Rai-kirah (Transformation, Revelation, and Restoration) evolved, and in particular, how I approach creating characters.  How could I resist that invitation?  Character development, and how it intertwines with an unfolding story, is one of my favorite writing topics.

Transformation by Carol Berg Revelation by Carol Berg Restoration by Carol Berg

Epic fantasies are big stories, not just in the number of books it takes to tell the whole thing, but in the complexity, scope, and scale of events.  They are grand adventures that dabble about those fascinating borderlines between nature, magic, myth, and the divine.  But if the adventure gets too grand, the events too large scale, readers can get left back on the ground.  The reading experience can become more like reading mythology than reading a human story.  Experiencing epic events through the personal lens of vivid, compelling characters enables me, as a reader, to connect to a grand adventure – to feel that I’m right there.

My projects usually stem from an idea of an interesting person in an odd – usually uncomfortable! – situation: maybe broken visionary musician who has suffered a brutal imprisonment for 17 years and doesn’t know why (Aidan in Song of the Beast) or a tall renegade sorcerer lying prostrate on the floor of an abbey church as if he’s taking holy orders, while mumbling, “What the hell am I doing here?” (Valen in Flesh and Spirit.)

Transformation originated with the fleeting image of a young, arrogant, highborn man, riding his horse across the steppes of central Asia – an image of beauty and nobility and the energies of life.  He was the epitome of a confidant, arrogant young warrior whose future was laid out in front of him like the landscape.  I decided that he would make a great fantasy hero – different – but he would require some fundamental reorientation first.  And his destiny was certainly not going to be the one he expected.  I had no idea what that destiny might be, at that point, but I did know his name.  Aleksander.

So this was the shape of the story – the downfall and transformation of a cruel prince into someone worthy of confronting epic events.  But arrogant princes are not introspective.  I needed someone else to narrate the tale.  I wanted someone who had to be around Aleksander all the time so he could witness the change, and the journey would certainly be more fun if the two had every reason to dislike each other.  Ah, a slave, and someone who had been a slave long enough to have lost hope of escape and rebellion.  I wanted him to be able to focus on my hero!

The logical place for the story to begin was at the slave market.  I wanted it cold and miserable for my poor slave, so I decided that my opening locale was the summer capital of a desert empire – perhaps an empire that had grown beyond its boundaries.  Of course I had to come up with a reason for the prince to be buying a new slave at that time.

Literally from this point, knowing little more than I’ve written here, I started writing.  The opening paragraph goes like this:

 

Ezzarian prophets say that the gods fight their battles within the souls of men, and that if the deities mislike the battleground, they reshape it according to their will.  I believe it.  I have seen such a battle and such a reshaping as could only come about with the gods devising.  It was not my own soul involved – thank Verdonne and Valdis and any other god who might eavesdrop on this telling – but I did not remain unchanged.

Characters that grow and change in response to great events are more likely to feel real and compelling.  So as I worked on the story, I began to think carefully about my two principals.  Aleksander had to be a product of his upbringing.  As the heir to an empire founded on war and dominion, he had rarely been told no.  And he had never been forced to view the consequences of his actions through anyone else’s eyes.  I could not make him some kind of sensitive new-age guy!  So I had to walk the line between make him true and making him unredeemable.  That was a challenge.

Plus, I didn’t want to burden the story with too much of Seyonne’s past.  I wanted the focus on Aleksander.  And so I decided that Seyonne could not bear to remember a past he believed irrevocably lost. (I didn’t know what his past was at that point.)  And so I decided that the greatest lesson of his captivity had been to live in the moment.  No past.  No future.  Not an easy life.

But that first paragraph already on the page nagged at me.  When speaking of the battles fought within the souls of men, of course I meant the metaphorical battle that would have to occur within Aleksander’s soul before he could be worthy of true heroism.  But I got to thinking…what if such a battle was a physical battle, and could actually occur within the landscape of a human soul?  And thereby evolved Ezzarian magic, the clues to Seyonne’s past, and the central events of a standalone book that grew into three.  By the end of the first chapter, I realized that Seyonne the slave narrator was perhaps a more important character than the man who had inspired the story.  Such is the truest delight of storytelling.

But back to character: The simple impressions I had of these two men at the beginning were certainly not enough to carry the story.  There’s nothing more boring than a one-note character, someone who is defined by anger and can’t express anything else, or someone who is forever rebellious or forever snarky.  Epic fantasy heroes and heroines get involved in larger than life difficulties, and it usually takes some combination of larger than life strength, endurance, and power, whether magical, spiritual, or intellectual to get them through.  But that doesn’t mean every hero has to be godlike.  Flawed, human people, with likes and dislikes, prejudices, vulnerabilities, doubts, fears, vices, and every other trait that we see in real life, make great protagonists.  Sometimes they’re not even very nice people all the time.  Heroes who question, who vacillate, who change, are much more interesting than all-powerful, one-dimensional players.  Flaws, weaknesses, and vulnerabilities that have to be overcome add tension and conflict to the story, and help avoid the deus ex machina (instant magical solutions) that make readers throw a book across the room yelling “cheat!”  They also leave room for character growth and ultimately satisfying resolutions.

Of course, the cast of an epic adventure is not just two people.  In this case, Seyonne and Aleksander came first.  The people around them developed as they were needed and as I discovered what role they were to play in the story.  Secondary characters, those who carry speaking parts, but aren’t the main actors, and minor characters, those who have walk-on roles to fill out the untidy jobs in the world, are just as important to making the story seem real.

I like to think of every secondary and minor character as an individual who had a life before walking into the frame of the story and who will have a life when he or she (or it!) walks out again.  Which does not mean that every innkeeper must be fully fitted out with dysfunctional family, political secrets, and interesting hobbies, but only that he or she shouldn’t devolve into the “fat innkeeper in a white apron” so familiar in lists of fantasy cliches.

Good character development always comes down to treating any character, major or minor, male or female, as a real person, an individual who wants things, who has a particular view of the world, who makes choices based on personal history, instinct, and intellect. What drives them?  What do they value?  How does their environment affect their beliefs, their customs, their clothing, their religion?  I can’t make any of them do something just because I want them to.  So I throw events in their faces and think hard about how each particular person at that particular time would react.

I hope this gives a bit of insight into my development process.  Every one of my thirteen books has evolved in somewhat the same way.  Get enough to start with.  Get going, and let the ideas, the characters, and the events develop along the way.  Hard thinking.  Hard choices.  That’s what it’s all about.

About Carol Berg:
Former software engineer Carol Berg never expected to become an award-winning author.  But her thirteen epic fantasy novels have won national and international awards, including multiple Colorado Book Awards and the Mythopoeic Fantasy Award for Adult Literature. She’s taught writing in the US, Canada, Scotland, and Israel, and received reader mail from the slopes of Denali to beneath the Mediterranean.  All amazing for one who majored in math and computer science to avoid writing papers.  Her novels of the Collegia Magica have received starred reviews from Publishers Weekly and Kirkus Reviews, using words like compelling and superbly realized.

Website | Blog

The Daemon Prism by Carol Berg Song of the Beast by Carol Berg Flesh and Spirit by Carol Berg

Women in SF&F Month Banner

After yesterday’s great post by Jessica to launch Women in SF&F Month, today we get to hear from the first SF&F author up, Nancy Kress!  And, following a great deal of begging and groveling, I also have a guest to introduce her: my husband John, who will now take it away…

I cannot explain how wonderful Nancy Kress’s writing is to someone who hasn’t read it; suffice it to say that I have been an avid reader of science fiction and fantasy since I was in grade school, and I think of her as one of a very few authors who stand atop an impossibly tall (if rather narrow) pedestal.  As her bio below details, her stories have won numerous awards and for me are representative of the brilliant blending of hard science, sociological insight, and subtle humanity that are on display in the best modern science fiction.  Her Sleepless (aka Beggars) Trilogy is my favorite example–a set of books that I have now bought three times because paper and bindings will only hold up to so many re-readings–but her many other science fiction and fantasy works all maintain a stellar quality throughout.  I was thrilled when she accepted Kristen’s invitation to post this month and am happy to introduce her take on the issue of women in science fiction and fantasy!

Nancy Kress

Women in science fiction and fantasy – now there’s a loaded topic for you.  At various places on-line you can read that women are (1) under-represented, (2) over-represented, (3) more prominent in fantasy than SF, (4) discriminated against by publishers, (5) preferred by publishers, and (6) almost anything else you care to name.

Historically, of course, SF was a male preserve.  Look at the Tables of Contents of the early pulps, and there are vanishingly few female contributors.  But the influx of women into SF in the late 1960’s and throughout the ‘70’s changed that.  Not only were there more women writers, but there also came to be more female characters in SF besides the hero’s girlfriend or the scientist’s beautiful daughter.

But how many more?

A few years ago I decided to see if I could accumulate some actual data on this volatile topic.  So I went through every single name in the SFWA Directory, counting “male,” “female,” and “other.”  (The “other” presumably know which gender they belong to but I didn’t know because they are using initials or unisex names like “Pat” or “Terry” and I have not met them personally.)  The results were: About 40% of SFWA is female.

Next I went through the Nebula- and Hugo-award winners for the last thirty years.  I found that women have won about 40% of the awards, which argues against discrimination in the award-voting bases.  However, women are over-represented among the winners of Nebulas (voted on by other writers) and under-represented among Hugos (voted on by Worldcon attendees and supporters).  I’m not sure what that means.

As for discrimination by publishers: I have no hard data, but I don’t think it likely because so many editors are female.  These people look for books that will sell, and my impression is that they don’t care if the books were written by a man, a woman, or an aardvark.  On the other hand, it may be that more SF readers are male (as indicated by the Hugo voting?) and publishers naturally take that into account.

What about the oft-repeated idea that women write fantasy and men write SF?  Again, no hard data, because (among other difficulties), you would have to come up with neatly conclusive definitions of both sub-genres.  Whole panels at cons are regularly devoted to trying to create these definitions, and no two ever come to the same conclusions.  (Most come to no conclusions at all, but just carry the topic around in circles for an entertaining hour.)  But a quick look at two of the most successful series of the past few years certainly calls the idea into question.  Suzanne Collins’s HUNGER GAMES is SF, and George R.R. Martin’s GAME OF THRONES is fantasy.

One area where women are under-represented is hard SF, extrapolating in a real way from real science: astronomy, genetics, physics.  There are some of us who write hard SF at least some of the time (Joan Slonczewski, Catherine Asaro, Vonda McIntyre, me), but we are much out-numbered by our male colleagues (Brin, Benford, Bear, Landis, Flynn, Nordley, et. al.)  This may change as the new generation of female writers pursues science interests and degrees.  But I have to say I don’t see much sign of change yet.

But science fiction and fantasy are both still-evolving genres.  Once, someone famously remarked, “the golden age of science fiction is twelve.”  That’s no longer true.  As SF brings us more morally complex, emotionally deep, and intellectually stimulating stories, both writers and audience change.  It will be interesting to see where all that goes in the next decade, in terms of gender and otherwise.

Nancy Kress is the author of thirty books, including fantasy and SF novels, four collections of short stories, and three books on writing. For sixteen years she was also the “Fiction” columnist for WRITERS DIGEST magazine.  She is perhaps best known for the “Sleepless” trilogy that began with BEGGARS IN SPAIN.  Her work has won four Nebulas, two Hugos, a Sturgeon, and the John W. Campbell Award.  Most recent books are a collection, FOUNTAIN OF AGE AND OTHER STORIES (Small Beer Press, 2012),  a YA fantasy written under the name Anna Kendall, CROSSING OVER (Viking, 2010); and a short novel of eco-terror, BEFORE THE FALL, DURING THE FALL, AFTER THE FALL (Tachyon, 2012).  Kress lives in Seattle with her husband, SF writer Jack Skillingstead, and Cosette, the world’s most spoiled toy poodle.

Probability Moon by Nancy Kress Beggars in Spain by Nancy Kress After the Fall, Before the Fall, During the Fall by Nancy Kress

Women in SF&F Month Banner

Today I’m pleased to have a guest post from Jessica of Read React Review!  Although she doesn’t talk much about science fiction and fantasy on her blog, I have known her for many years and very much respect what she has to say on any number of issues, including ideas involving women and gender in fiction.  As such, she was one of the first people I thought to invite this month and now she is kicking things off with the first post!  She is a philosopher who specializes in gender theory, among other things, and I am very interested to hear what she thinks about the idea of women as a distinct group in fiction.

So, without further delay, here’s Jessica!

Read React Review header

When Kristen asked me to write a guest post for her Women in SF&F event, I panicked. I don’t read much SF&F, and when it comes to understanding the culture of SF&F reviewing, I’m pretty clueless. Luckily, or perhaps depressingly, the question of women and fiction can be raised in relation to any kind of fiction, and any review site. Just the other day, in the New York Times, literary fiction writer Meg Wolitzer discussed it:

“This is a tricky subject. Bringing up the women’s question — I mean the women’s fiction question — is not unlike mentioning the national debt at a dinner party. Some people will get annoyed and insist it’s been talked about too much and inaccurately, and some will think it really matters. When I refer to so-called women’s fiction … I’m referring to literature that happens to be written by women. But some people, especially some men, see most fiction by women as one soft, undifferentiated mass that has little to do with them.”

Wolitzer’s comments followed the 2010 dustup when “commercial fiction” authors Jennifer Weiner and Jodi Picoult complained about white male novelists getting all the mainstream reviewers’ attention and praise.  And you don’t have to use much Google-fu to find essays like Why Crime Novelists Don’t Get Women or The Spectre of Sexism Haunting Horror Fiction.

I’m especially glad that members of the SF&F blogging community are asking about gender bias in reviewing. The implicit assumption is that independent blog reviews matter, and that it is just as important that they be looked at for different kinds of problematic bias as mainstream media reviews.

As the month here at Fantasy Cafe gears up, I thought I’d just be a typical philosopher and suggest that it might be worth taking a step back and asking what we mean when we use the term “woman.”  On a common sense level, ‘woman’ refers to human females, and being a human female means having certain biological features (chromosomes, genitalia, etc.). But a second’s reflection suggests we use ‘woman’ in a lot of ways that don’t correspond to this sex-based definition (like when a female is admonished that she’s not “a real woman”, or when a young man is called a “woman” as an insult). And anyway, when we start asking about the representation of women in fiction, or in reviews of fiction, we’re undertaking a feminist project of some kind, and most feminists understand ‘woman’ as something other than a biological category.

One feminist tactic has been to separate the biological and social aspects of womanhood into “sex” and “gender.”  You’re probably familiar with Simone de Beauvoir’s claim in The Second Sex (1954) that “one is not born a woman, but becomes one.” The idea is to counter the notion that biology is destiny. I wish I could say that the threat of biological determinism is long past, but even today we have claims that women’s and men’s brains are “hardwired” to produce empathetic women and system-building men.

There are loads of different gender theories. Some say that gender is the result of socialization, both overt forms like not letting girls play football or telling boys not to cry, and more subtle cues like parents of hours-old babies unconsciously  describing them in gendered ways (the boy babies as “strong” and “alert”, the girls as “beautiful” and “sweet”).  Highlighting strong female protagonists or images of powerful women in book covers are examples of attempts to counter socialization.

A more radical approach says we can’t look at gender as two neutral sets of temperament, interests, status, gestures and expressions. Rather, we must always at the same time be looking at them in reference to the power one has over the other. That is, gender is by definition a matter of domination and subordination. To become a woman, to be gendered feminine, is to become subordinate, period. In particular, it is to become sexually objectified. So seeking “gender equality” is a folly. Because sexual dominance comes before gender difference, as long as there is gender, women will be sex objects, and they will be oppressed.

These two views are pretty different, but they actually share something in common: gender realism. Gender realism is the idea that women as a group are assumed to share something, a characteristic feature, an experience (mothering?), common condition (being oppressed by men?) or criterion that the possession of which makes some individuals women (as opposed to, say, men).  However gender is defined, a gender realist says all women differ from all men in some way.

The problem with gender realism is that it seems to assume that there’s a “gendered” part of woman that is separable from other parts, like her race, sexual orientation, class, etc.  The person who put this point best is Elizabeth Spelman, so I’ll quote her here:

“What makes it true that Angela and I are women is not some women’s substance that is the same in each of us and interchangeable between us. Selves are not made up of separable units of identity strung together to constitute a whole person. It is not as if there is a goddess somewhere who made lots of little identical ‘woman’ units and then, in order to spruce up the world a bit for herself, decided to put some of those units in black bodies, some in white bodies, some in the bodies of kitchen maids in seventeenth century France, some in the bodies of English, Israeli, and Indian prime ministers (1990, 158).”

Spelman goes on to say that this “golden nugget of womanness” all woman are supposed to share is actually a very specific version of womanness, the one most familiar to the majority of the women doing feminist theory: white, middle class, heterosexual woman. Feminist writer and poet Adrienne Rich, who died just last week, called this “white solipsism”, the tendency to act and speak as if whiteness described the world.

As a result of Spelman’s kind of arguments, it’s become much more common to understand gender as intersecting with other aspects of identity. To be a ‘woman’ means something different depending on how one is situated with respect to their race, class, etc.  To really do this, you have to forgo privileging one version of femininity. So, for example, if on my women’s studies syllabus I had all white women writing about white women, and then at the end threw in some women of color, or women with disabilities, or lesbians, for a “twist”, I’d still be basically asserting that the white, middle class, heterosexual experience of womanhood is the default, “regular” sense of ‘woman’, and these other things are, for lack of a better word, “flava.”

Maybe this point should be put in an even stronger way. For some feminists, like Judith Butler, trying to define ‘woman’ at all means setting up a kind of norm, such that anyone who doesn’t meet it, is somehow lacking.  If we say that being a ‘woman’ means being gendered feminine, and that femininity requires sexually desiring men, then lesbians, for example, aren’t doing their gender “right.”  Not to mention transgendered persons. But that’s not what feminism should be about. So, on this view, feminists should forget about the category of ‘woman’ and instead help us understand how power functions and shapes our understandings of womanhood not only in the society at large but also within the feminist movement.

Butler goes even further to say that we should forget completely about the distinction with which this all began: the sex/gender distinction. Sure, it’s easy to think of sex as natural, given.  And then gender as the social construction that gets layered over it. But feminists like Butler (as well as feminist philosophers of science) point out that biological sex has always been socially constructed: the minute a doctor says “it’s a girl”, a whole host of constructs are in place that make that a constituting speech act. A doctor could just as easily use size or hair/color to categorize newborns. We picked genitalia – we decided it mattered.

Asking “what is a woman?” is, as I’ve tried to suggest here, important from a feminist point of view, and interesting from a philosophical one. SF&F can be a vital source of imaginatively interrogating seemingly common sense concepts. Sometimes SF&F authors ask them in their writing. Sometimes readers, reviewers, and bloggers utilize SF&F to ask them. And I think it’s worth doing so even in the context of this event Kristen’s hosting. When you think about “Women in SF&F” who exactly are you thinking about? And why?