Gender essentialism: You're doing it wrong

[sabotabby]

By now, I'm sure, you have seen the amusing New York Times review of Game of Thrones. If you haven't, do go check it out. It has, I am afraid, quite confused my tiny, fragile ladybrain.

You see, Tool of the Patriarchy Ginia Bellafante makes a number of interesting claims that, while appallingly sexist, run counter to the predominant sexist narratives. Case in point:

While I do not doubt that there are women in the world who read books like Mr. Martin’s, I can honestly say that I have never met a single woman who has stood up in indignation at her book club and refused to read the latest from Lorrie Moore unless everyone agreed to “The Hobbit” first. “Game of Thrones” is boy fiction patronizingly turned out to reach the population’s other half.

Now, while I have not read A Song of Ice and Fire*, I am pretty sure that it's fantasy. Everybody knows that girls like fantasy and boys like sci-fi. Right? I suppose Bellafante is making an argument that girls do not like any sort of genre fiction at all and should perhaps stick to chick-lit with pink covers and illustrations of shoes.


This is the only genre for me!

I am also, it seems, a literary philistine, as I had never heard of Lorrie Moore and had to look her up. She's mainly a short story writer, apparently.** Do book clubs allow short stories? At any rate, it sounds like Bellafante belongs to a really dull book club. Also, didn't we all read The Hobbit in grade school, or was that just me?

This is deeply confusing to my evolutionarily stunted mind, but it's nowhere near as odd as the claim Bellafante makes right before it:

The imagined historical universe of “Game of Thrones” gives license for unhindered bed-jumping — here sibling intimacy is hardly confined to emotional exchange.

The true perversion, though, is the sense you get that all of this illicitness has been tossed in as a little something for the ladies, out of a justifiable fear, perhaps, that no woman alive would watch otherwise.

If I'm reading this correctly, she is suggesting several things. One also runs counter to the cultural narrative that men are obsessed with sex, visual creatures who must consume pornography by the bucketload, whereas women are only interested in romance novels and, perhaps, written erotica. Very tame written erotica. Well, okay. We only watch telly for the naked men, it seems. This is an odd claim to make when there are far more interesting things to watch online, if you know what I mean. But perhaps the lady is old-fashioned.

The other, even odder suggestion, is that women are really turned on by depictions of incest. I don't find that to be the case, myself, but I suppose that explains the success of Supernatural.†

I take this review as a good sign that traditional constructs of masculinity and femininity are, if not disappearing, then reversing poles. I am expected, it seems, to leave behind my traditional womanly domain of fantasy stories with magical lands and ponies in favour of whatever HBO allows in terms of hardcore porn. Neither are actually my thing, but one does inevitably get sick of existing stereotypes and it is refreshing to see a new one emerge.

While we're talking about geek things, io9.com's list of the 10 greatest libertarian sci-fi stories is also quite bollocks. William Morris: one of the great minds of socialism. Ursula K. LeGuin: anarchist all the way through. Robert Anton Wilson: also anarchist if I'm not mistaken. Did everyone just smoke a lot of crack today?

* Go ahead, geeks. Scream at me. I have this aversion to high fantasy that can be overcome only through really engrossing works. You are entirely free to argue that Martin's series is one of those works, but you must support your argument with evidence from the text.

** Members of really dull book clubs: You are entirely free to argue that Moore's books are worth reading. You must, like the geeks above, support your argument with evidence from the text.

† Go on, tell me that I should watch Supernatural. I won't listen to you, but you can certainly try.

Comments

[radiumhead.livejournal.com]

Has this woman ever read Gor???? Oh my god. The women are all sex slaves, and the writer says IN REAL LIFE, deep down, thats what all women want.

I havent seen Game Of Thrones yet, but its probably a feminist manifesto in comparison.

[sabotabby]

I haven't had the stomach to read Gor.

I haven't actually heard any complaints, by people who have read the books, of any significant sexism in Martin's stuff. I also think I know more women than men who are into him, though I haven't done a statistical breakdown or anything.

[radiumhead.livejournal.com]

Here's another thing I always wonder about: There are lots of sci fi-fantasy books that have societies with different sexual or moral values.

If its something the reviewer doesnt like, he or she says that the writer has some kind of problem or issues.

But here's the thing-if its another world, in another dimension, or time, whatever, WHY WOULD YOU ASSUME THEIR VALUES ARE THE SAME??

Like me-incest creeps me out because I was raised ON EARTH. In a society that has lots of reasons for keep incest taboo.

maybe on an alien world, people fuck their sisters and its fine. ITS ANOTHER WORLD. IN A PIECE OF SPECULATIVE FICTION.

Maybe some writers are just sick, and it shows in their works.

But in other books, I dont think these people are insane-theyre playing WHAT IF. "What if there was a world where cannibalism/incest/dog fighting/whatever was ok?"

[sabotabby]

It can. I mean, it's something that a discerning reader can pick out. You can, say, read Dust by Elizabeth Bear and not come away with the sense that she thinks incest is really hot. It's worldbuilding. Whereas one reads Heinlein or Morris or LeGuin and sees a more direct link between their writing and worldviews.

[marnanel.livejournal.com]

Libertarians co-opting anarchism? Who'd have thought it.

[sabotabby]

I know. I bet you're really shocked!

But Morris is a strange one to co-opt.

[geneticallydead.livejournal.com]

Without giving too much away, the incest is a crucial plot element. And yes, considered icky in Westeros society too, although incest amongst royals had once been the norm, as with the Egyptians. Keeping the bloodline pure.

The incest that's primarily dealt with in Game of Thrones has to do with the royal succession... which is um, what the whole freaking series is about. So 'just thrown in there'? Not even slightly.

I wish I had've known I should just stick to chick lit before I read all these books and a whole bunch of other fantasy books too. Clearly I've just been wasting my life here.

[geneticallydead.livejournal.com]

Oh, and just to add... the previous royal line, that practised incest, were murderous crazy people (what with them being products of incest and all), so the whole point is that they have learned from this, and incest is bad in the royal line, therefore a product of incest shouldn't be taking the throne, and every single thing that happens in the books can pretty much be traced back to this.

So um. Yes. Sometimes, a writer puts in something icky because they clearly find it salacious. Not so here. So far away from what's happening. This reviewer is a moron.

[lokilokust.livejournal.com]

'And yes, considered icky in Westeros society too, although incest amongst royals had once been the norm, as with the entire history of europe.'
fixed.

[corwin77.livejournal.com]

You should totally watch Supernatural. At least the first four seasons or so. There are sexy people fighting monsters! What's not to love?

[sabotabby]

For some reason, it sounds very silly. I mean, not that I don't watch a shit-ton of silly shows, but it sounds worse than most.

[xturtle.livejournal.com]

The only people I know (in Real Life, anyway) who have read Martin and enjoyed him are women.

[sabotabby]

I know a few guys who are into him, but easily as many women.

[curgoth]

The first few books in the Song of Fire and Ice were great. The last one published (five years ago?) was a bit of a mess. He wrote himself into a corner. The next book coming out this summer (supposedly) may or may not be a return to amazing.

If you decided to wait until he actually finished the series, I wouldn't blame you.

Analogously, I waited to watch Lost until it ended. Knowing how it ended I feel I lost nothing by skipping it. The Martin books may be the same.

[sabotabby]

This makes sense. I was totally convinced by people's rational arguments that I should watch Lost, but I never got around to it, and the ending sounded dumbassed. So I never watched it.

Apparently I misread

[nichtsda.livejournal.com]

The ones who walk away from Omelas aren't unable to accept that one must suffer greatly for others to be happy -- they're miffed that the nanny state government of Omelas doesn't capitalize on the concept further by getting a thousand suffering children. Imagine how much more utopia that'd create!

Re: Apparently I misread

[sabotabby]

PFFFT.

[sabotabby]

The Dispossessed suffers from an epidemic of really awful covers. I've never seen one I've approved of, which is unfortunate, as it's quite a fantastic book. Fortunately, its reputation ensures that a lot of people read it anyway.

[fluffworld.livejournal.com]

I hang out with gamers - I'm a RPG gamer who used to manage a games and books-store, so I'm coming from the perspective of someone who purchased these things for sale and sold them to customers in person - and GoT was really popular with both genders. I know more guys that love it, but that is because I know more guys full stop.

I would argue that fantasy and sci-fi are both fields that tend to have more male readers, but fantasy is less so compared to sci-fi where you really start to notice it. "Classics" tend to have more of a gender-divide too, with a lot of the modern stuff, they are clearly shilling for both.

GoT differs from a lot of the big names fantasy in that it has completely kick-ass characterisation as well as world-building and history. I can't stand Tolkien as his characters bore me, but Martin sucks you right in and keeps you there with a great backstory as well as characters that develop. The society that the books is set in is sexist - it's pretty much feudal, jousting, women as consorts who plot for power - but he gives air time to lots of female characters and they kick ass in different ways and with different perspectives.

I'd also argue you can read whatever the hell you want, whatever gender you are, and many people I know do. Basically, Ginia Bellafante needs to meet more women.

[sabotabby]

See, "I can't stand Tolkien but I like Martin," to me, is a good argument for reading it. I mean, I like Tolkien, but my allergy to high fantasy is directly related. You don't see every hard sci-fi author in the world copying Asimov's worldbuilding, but for some reason it's cool to rip off Tolkien's worldbuilding and his (not-all-that-exciting) characters.

I am pleased to say that, despite stereotypes, there is pretty much gender parity in the RPG gamers I know. Including the kids.

[quietprofanity.livejournal.com]

i09 are pretty much dopes when it comes to politics. Their "liberal dystopia" list was so much nonsense. ("1984 is a liberal dystopia! It's all about political correctness!" Uh, no.)

Members of really dull book clubs: You are entirely free to argue that Moore's books are worth reading. You must, like the geeks above, support your argument with evidence from the text.

Phooey. The books of hers I've read are in another state. :( I do like her, though, she has a distinctive style that feels fresh compared to most of the dull short stories in US/Canada about people having affairs or bad marriages and the way she structures her stories are usually unique. (There's one that covers a woman's relationship with her mother through small paragraphs describing one year and presented in reverse.) But, like I said in my blog post about this the only reason I wouldn't demand to read The Hobbit over Moore is because I'd assume all my friends already read The Hobbit.

[sabotabby]

I actually would like to see a liberal dystopic novel. I can't think of one offhand.

I would be surprised if I had many friends who had not read The Hobbit.

[iclysdale.livejournal.com]

In fairness, RAW - like Chomsky - has often described himself as a libertarian. And occasionally taken some kind of crazy libertarian positions that don't even fall in the left-libertarian arena, like calling for "voluntary taxation: you pay for government programs you want; you don't pay a penny for any programs you don't want."

Of course, RAW says a lot of shit just to say shit.

[sabotabby]

Yeah, I got the impression that he's political in the way that, say, Alan Moore is political. By which I mean politics + a massive quantity of LSD.

[icecreamempress.livejournal.com]

Libertarians are always co-opting people who were clearly not libertarians. Kipling is another.

Also, some of Moore's short stories are great. They are often about things I have feared happening to myself, like dropping a baby and killing it, or tweezing a stray hair at a party and then obliviously wandering around with blood on my face. She gets a certain kind of middle-class white educated cis female angst very well.

The novels don't work for me.

[sabotabby]

I don't think I'd want to claim Kipling regardless of my political stripe.

That does sound a bit good.

[human-loser.livejournal.com]

After watching the premiere, a (female) friend of mine renamed Game of Thrones (the TV series)"Game of Nearly Naked Women Being Taken From Behind". I don't think she was praising it.

[sabotabby]

That depends. Are they cute?

[lokilokust.livejournal.com]

i've liked quite a bit of martin's short work and 'fevre dream' and 'armageddon rag.'
that being said, i just haven't found the inclination to start with 'a song of fire and ice' at all.

[sabotabby]

It seems one of those things that I would need a good reason to commit to. I never want to read series because I have to either buy them or wait for them to come in at the library, and my local library is notorious for having just one book in the series but not the others.

[sadwizardscrypt.livejournal.com]

Hurray for using the world libertarian in its older, more inclusive sense? I don't mind the word choice so much as the notion that, say, Le Guin and Heinlein's imagined societies have much in common.

[sabotabby]

Hurray for using the world libertarian in its older, more inclusive sense?

We should be so lucky.

[sabotabby]

I love the idea of series, as the theoretical antidote to the problem I have with some books where I get pissed off that there's no more book. But I also have this problem where I go a bit mad trying to track down ALL THE BOOK and then get frustrated.

[threeliesforone.livejournal.com]

Read that io9 post and was all "WTF?" about it as well.

Better post on A Game of Thrones:
http://www.racialicious.com/2011/04/19/can-i-just-watch-a-game-of-thrones-in-peace-brown-feminist-fan-rant/

Haven't read the books myself, but I think I'll continue to watch the series.

[seanmonster.livejournal.com]

2. Men Like Gods by H.G. Wells

Wait, wasn't Wells socialist too?