Questions: Females and PoV's

[Anne Lyle]

Should I simply switch genders of some characters and sacrifice a little bit of characterization just to have more female characters? And how would one go about writing a female PoV when they have only ever been able to observe from the outside. I know many, many male writers suffer from falling into stereotypes and simply end up boxing their characters in.

Whatever you do, don't sacrifice characterisation in the name of political correctness - it will show!

Some tips on writing women:

1. They're just people, as varied in their personalities as men - give them complex emotions and motivations and you're halfway there. Some women are very stereotypically feminine, some of us are much less so - but that doesn't mean we're butch either! I'm a total computer geek and rarely wear a skirt, but I also like to paint my toenails and wear pretty jewellery

2. It's a generalisation, but men tend to want to solve problems whereas women often just want to talk about a problem to get it off their chests (no pun intended!)

3. When writing dialogue, use more qualifiers in female speech - women are less direct, less confrontational. In some women, this can lead to manipulative behaviour, but mostly it's just the way we naturally interact, seeking consensus rather than "alpha male" domination.

4. Faced with a problematic situation, a woman is likely to think first about how it will affect people emotionally, whereas a man will probably think of the practical issues.

5. Feel free to use more internal monologue when in a female PoV - women tend to be much more aware of their own and others' emotions, more self-analytical, and better at guessing other people's moods from their facial expressions

6. Pay close attention next time you watch some TV drama (not soaps, which tend to be melodramatic) - good writers of both sexes can portray women convincingly! Also, I would like to add Terry Pratchett to the list of male authors who write women well.

You might also find this wikipedia article a useful starting point.

My second question is more straightforward. Is it better to write a PoV to completion, or write the chapters in chronological order?

That really depends on your writing style. I prefer to write chronologically, because my plots are quite complex and I need to have cause-and-effect running in sequence or I'd go crazy! Of course you might find it best to write everything in chronological order and then revise one PoV at a time for consistency of voice.

 

[Ursa major]

...not simply from the societal roles imposed on them in the book, but by the societal prejudices my hoped-for readers have and therefore their reaction to the characters.

But what if one's characters are not actually human but might be confused for them (i.e. they aren't, say, dragons or intelligent rocks)? How much does one have to work with the hoped-for readers' prejudices?

It strikes me that many "humans" in SFF fall into this category - for instance, all those Fantasy human-like creatures living on not-Earths, where the reader simply assumes the characters will act just like real humans - which is perhaps where my question's coming from, because I tend to see (am intended to see) them as human and ecpect them to act accordingly.

 

[GreenKidx]

Well, I've read plenty male characters written by women that just made me cringe. Particularly teenage male characters. I think part of the issue is that people simply FOCUS o. female characterization way more. Most people could care less about how men are portrayed. Personally the woman who gets the most "screentime" in my WIP is a horribly unrealistic character/woman and I have no intention of altering the way she's presented. And no I don't think it takes away from her or the story.

Back to original post, if they're are no women in your tale screaming to be seen/heard... then don't force it. Just write whats neeeded to move the story forward not to be politically correct...

 

[Boneman]

I have two threads in my story, one is based around a male and the other around a female. I cannot recall having to think that I should approach anything differently, but I do agree that my female is much more caring of others around her, thinks more about consequences (even though she can be hot-headed when necessary). Like Karn, I had a lot of female influence (four older sisters) and an absent father, so maybe I'm just more in touch with my female side...?

If you perceive it's a problem, then read how it's been done by others -
that should help more than anything IMHO. Joe Abercrombie in the First Law trilogy does it quite well, (even though one female is a hellcat only bent on killing men of a certain race, so she's kind of stereotyped...) but I'd recommend Trudi Canavan and Fiona McIntosh - female writers doing good female leads, which should help you see into the female psyche.

I'd say just write it, and see how it turns out. You may be surprised...

 

[Mouse]

my female is much more caring of others around her, thinks more about consequences (even though she can be hot-headed when necessary).

Interestingly (or not) this sounds more like the lead male in my book, rather than the lead female. Although the lead female is a teen, so age could be a factor too.

 

[MistingWolf]

I agree with mouse; I don't think there would be any sacrifice of character, but then, I'd have to read the story. Women can be just as aggressive as men, and men can be just as mushy and loving as a woman. There's no problems

I also agree with J-Wo. If this story doesn't have any female main characters, you don't have to change it; yes, as he said, maybe your next project could be one for you to use mostly female main characters and get in some time with them.

Really, we aren't so different Though women do tend to think differently about relationships; as I listened to the radio the other day, I had to agree with them when they said that women are better at socializing than men; but that's not true for everyone; it's a generalization that you can happily ignore; men can build rock-solid relationships with anyone.

 

[J Riff]

Maybe you could start out with...female bikers? Wrestlers, cops... more stereotypical male roles. Then you have the struggle between the inner sensitive, intelligent female and the brute knucklehead male.
Her's a character from a street near where I live.
Cynthia crouched in the doorway, waiting. He was always late.
Finally, Armand walked up quickly.
"Where ya been, ya $$!#!"
"I missed the bus."
"%%!%! you. You %!%!$ ^!^%!%. I've been here an hour."
"Yea, well I gotta go."
"!!!$. Here's twenty it's all I have."
"The &!&!&!. You said thirty. No %!%!5 way am I %!%!% that ^!^!^"
"You $!$!$! You ##!#!ing !$!#!
So there's quite a range there. * )

 

[Anne Lyle]

Maybe you could start out with...female bikers? Wrestlers, cops... more stereotypical male roles. Then you have the struggle between the inner sensitive, intelligent female and the brute knucklehead male.

Unfortunately they're the ones that tend to come across as men with boobs

I tend to avoid writers who suck at writing women, but there's a lot of fantasy in which women are either an amalgam of all the worst stereotypically female qualities (whiny, manipulative, over-emotional) or sexy kick-ass warrior women. The latter are just cringe-worthy adolescent fantasies, and the former make one wonder if the writer is working out some personal issues through his fiction.

Just make your women as varied and three-dimensional as your men, and you're already doing better than average

 

[Toby Frost]

I think a lot of writers don't realise how easy it is to spot a character the author fancies or would like to be. It's not so much having attractive people in a story as not allowing them to ever do anything unattractive. I think the two female characters I've written about are both pretty attractive, but they do spend a lot of time looking foolish. Hopefully that avoids the problem.

To my mind there's nothing inherent wrong with having women who can fight, run battles etc (not that anyone said there was), but a writer who doesn't try to take into account what that would entail is dodging the hard work. A female soldier would probably look a lot like a male one, to be honest: I'm no expert on the female mind, but wearing high heels or some sort of space-wetsuit (you know what I mean) doesn't seem sensible when combat gear is on offer.

Then there's the psychological aspect, especially in fantasy worlds where the very concept of equal rights doesn't exist and might well seem to both men and women to be a violation of the edicts of God. The experience of doing something outside the usual roles could have a very odd effect on a person's outlook over time. I wonder what those women who pretended to be men in the Napoleonic wars must have been like.

(That said, I've read books where the author has waded deep into Mary Sue territory and established the Mystical Order of Spanking Leather Nuns or the like as a vital plot device. But don't expect me not to laugh).

 

[HareBrain]

or sexy kick-ass warrior women. The latter are just cringe-worthy adolescent fantasies

Unfortunately, some writers seem to think "strong female character" = "ninja with boobs".

It's an interesting problem to try to reflect modern (or even better-than-modern) ideas about gender equality when writing about a pre-modern setting. Some people seem to just ignore the idea that there's any conflict at all. Steven Erikson's Malazan books depict a Medieval-type society where a good proportion of the soldiers seem to be female, despite him never mentioning why those women aren't expected to stay at home and raise children, nor why their frequent sexual relationships with male soldiers never seem to result in pregnancy. It's almost as though he wants us to believe his culture includes shared childcare, equal career opportunities and failsafe contraception, but without ever mentioning them, nor how they arose. Had he taken the trouble to work those more modern ideas credibly into his world, it would have made it a lot more real.

 

[Anne Lyle]

Then there's the psychological aspect, especially in fantasy worlds where the very concept of equal rights doesn't exist and might well seem to both men and women to be a violation of the edicts of God. The experience of doing something outside the usual roles could have a very odd effect on a person's outlook over time. I wonder what those women who pretended to be men in the Napoleonic wars must have been like.

I have a young female character who has spent her entire adolescence pretending to be a boy. Sometimes she does worry that her behaviour is a bit too masculine (even though that's a good thing in terms of maintaining her cover), but I try not to dwell on it too much because it's not the main plot of the book. Since she's doing it to avoid poverty and a slide into prostitution, she doesn't really have a huge moral dilemma with it - though of course she wishes it wasn't necessary.

It will be interesting to see how she develops in future books, because sooner or later I'm going to have to put her back into a frock, just to see the look on the hero's face

(That said, I've read books where the author has waded deep into Mary Sue territory and established the Mystical Order of Spanking Leather Nuns or the like as a vital plot device. But don't expect me not to laugh).

Women writers can be just as bad, if not worse. I give you all those sexy brooding vampires, from Louis de Pointe du Lac onwards

(As an aside, why is there no "la" in his surname - de la Pointe du Lac? Is this a "New Orleans French" thing?)

 

[digs]

I actually much prefer writing female characters, but that probably has a lot to do with my personality and background. I don't know if I'm any good at it, but there you go!

As others have mentioned, I don't think females will necessarily act too differently to male characters in certain situations. If you've got a good grasp of the character's personality, environment and motivation I reckon you can get into their head and figure out how you would respond in their position. It might help to base some personality traits on people you know, too.

 

[HareBrain]

(As an aside, why is there no "la" in his surname - de la Pointe du Lac? Is this a "New Orleans French" thing?)

I guess because "Pointe du Lac" is a place-name, rather than a description of a bit of landscape, so it's complete of itself.

 

[Ursa major]

Then there's the psychological aspect, especially in fantasy worlds where the very concept of equal rights doesn't exist and might well seem to both men and women to be a violation of the edicts of God. The experience of doing something outside the usual roles could have a very odd effect on a person's outlook over time.

A character from the far future (or of another species** ***, for that matter) is no more likely to act according to our mores than someone from Medieval Europe (or Ancient Greece, or a fictional society based on either) is.


My question, heavily rephrased from its earlier appearance, could perhaps be broken up into the following:

• How does one ensure that the reader gets this - and so can't shout, "Men/women don't behave like that!" - without hitting them over the head with all of the fact upfront?
• Does one simply ignore the issue, instead relying on the readers to take things in their stride? (My preference.)
• What if women in one's imagined society really do behave like men with breasts?
• What if one's principal (or only) POV characters aren't really mammals and have never encountered any mammals, so that they don't even have recourse to envy or disgust or whatever to explain why they might mention this aspect of their body plan in the narrative?
• Will such POV characters come to be considered unreliable narrators, even though none of them intend to deceive, or know that they are misleading the reader, on this matter, once the reader realises the truth (if they ever do)?

** - Which means that any arguments over nature or nurture may be thought to be irrelevant.


*** - At this point, I'd rather ignore AIs, as their true nature may be a more upfront part of the story.

 

[Anne Lyle]

Ursa, I think if you as the writer are thinking of all these things, you probably aren't going to be writing stereotypical characters in the first place

 

[Toby Frost]

Quick and rough thoughts on Ursa's points:

1. As mentioned earlier, probably by making it clear from the outset that the rules of this society are different and that it's not just Time and Place X with some bits strapped on. Lengthy explanations are probably not immediately required, just the realisation from the reader that things may not be as they might expect.
2. I'd be inclined to. Readers can soak up a lot. Dune seems a good example of this: although never explicitly stated, I've got a good idea how its society runs.
3. By never leaving the house?
4. Then you've got an interesting but difficult situation. I'm wary of books that include no humans or equivalent (why don't they?) but it could be done provided it becomes clear that things are different fairly early on. Avoid dropping huge surprises on the reader.
5. If you pull the "actually, they're highly-evolved earthworms - surprise!" option, some people will be annoyed, especially if it's done just to startle. It's not so much unreliable narrators as the annoyance of having a big trick pulled on you. I once read a detective novel where the big twist was that the narrator was a woman and not a man. It was really irritating because to the writer it seemed very clever and to the reader it just looked like a trick.

Changing one variable can have huge effects. Would a species that reproduces asexually ever express physical affection? Suddenly you're dealing with a totally different way of seeing the world.

 

[Anne Lyle]

Changing one variable can have huge effects. Would a species that reproduces asexually ever express physical affection? Suddenly you're dealing with a totally different way of seeing the world.

My non-humans are seasonal breeders and don't mate for life. They find the human custom of couples living together very weird, and don't really have a concept of romantic love. Same-sex friendship/loyalty/lust, yes, but without the fluffy bits, because they just don't have the same pair-bonding circuitry in their brains

 

[SPendleton]

My second question is more straightforward. Is it better to write a PoV to completion, or write the chapters in chronological order?

In regards to this, I would simply say to write what comes. Don't force it, if you do - it won't be as good. That's what editing is for!

In the same regard, I think you could apply it to your original question too. If the story feels weak because it needs that supporting female character, then add one. If not then adding one isn't necessary.

 

[Jude]

I agree with most of what has already been said. Particularly don't add females because you think you should. And if you do want to then think about your female friends/relatives/colleagues and look at their characters to maybe get some ideas. Don't even ask: 'Is it better to do it this way or that way?' because the best way to write (in my opinion) is to do it the way it comes most naturally to you. I think the more you write the more you know what works for you. Good luck!

 

[R M Tobias]

Female or male is just another box to tick when designing a character. The only restrictions or benefits a character has by nature of their gender (besides the obvious anatomical and physiological ones) are the ones available in the construction of your world.

So as others have said, stick to what is natural to you, but when you do want to write a female character, don't focus on her being female. Focus on her traits, personality, and where she fits in your world, just as you would any other male character.