Questions: Females and PoV's

[ML Hamilton]

What an interesting question. I have read male authors who try to write from a female POV and it doesn't seem right. I often write from a male POV and I worry that I may miss the mark sometimes. This is a hard thing. I agree with some of the later posts that if it's forced, people will know. I'll bet a female character will come along and you'll be able to get into her head and write from her POV, you just haven't found her yet.

Regarding the second question, I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. Are you saying should you write from chapter 1 to the end? I do exactly what you said and outline my whole plot, then honestly, I write both the beginning chapter and the end chapter. From there I usually write the rest of the chapters in between chronologically, but I often go back and forth to make sure I've built in enough foreshadowing and the plot hangs together.

I hope this helps.

 

[MeriPie]

I know it sounds silly, but the things male writers seem to forget most often when writing female characters are boobs. Oh sure, they remember that there ARE boobs. They mention the enormity of said boobs. But then they don't react in any way to how said boobs would affect your life/get in the way while you're slaughtering baddies. I think Brent Weeks is one of the few writers who actually mentions someone getting punched in the boob and being in agony. Also quite often women are dressed as men for disguise or similar and no one says, 'Gosh what enormous boobs you have for a slim, effeminate young man.'

So there lies an important lesson: boobs are present constantly, not just when you want to describe them lovingly.

Otherwise I think that character-wise it really shouldn't make a difference. If your character is emotional, cowardly, bad-tempered and insecure, he or she will still have some very similar characteristics regardless of gender. It's just how these things manifest themselves - what the insecurities are about, what makes this character emotional and so on.

But on the subject of not having any women POVs, I can't see why it matters. Your characters are what they are, and if they're male then that's that really. I'm a girl and all my important characters are male, just because they are. The next idea I've got involves a few girls, because they fit in there.

 

[Anne Lyle]

Also quite often women are dressed as men for disguise or similar and no one says, 'Gosh what enormous boobs you have for a slim, effeminate young man.'

Which is why my permanently cross-dressed heroine is specifically described as tall and skinny for a girl, with impressive arm muscles from all the physical work she does (maybe not as huge as a guy's, but not weedy either). Plus she wears a corset, similar to modern-day FTM transsexuals, to reduce her already modest bosom, and, um, a falsie in her codpiece

OTOH, the strong social prohibitions against cross-dressing means there would have been less reason to suspect someone of doing it and just assume they were the gender of their costume, unless their anatomy was too pronounced for effective disguise. One thinks of all those photos of "disguised" women in the 19th-century army, etc, who wouldn't pass for more than a second these days, except in very low light!

So there lies an important lesson: boobs are present constantly, not just when you want to describe them lovingly.

*rotflmao*

 

[HoopyFrood]

Holy thread revive, Batman!

Actually, that's quite apt because I'm starting to become a follower of comics of late and the thing I stumbled across is comic related. This, which I thought would suit this thread very well:

“First and foremost? You’re writing character, not gender. […] As a writer, I’d argue that your job is to write — or serve — characters to the best of your ability[…] it’s not as hard as it sounds. You know women, presumably; you’ve talked with them before, you may even — gasp! — have women as your friends. Think. Engage. Consider. And don’t cop out. […]

Don’t mistake sexy for naked. Don’t mistake sexy for an image — sexy is an attitude, a manner, an action. Characters become sexy when they are seen to be desirable, and desire is only one-part physical attraction. The far more potent element is action — what your characters say and do is more crucial than what they’re wearing (or not wearing) when they do it.”

— Greg Rucka, co-creator of Batwoman (Kate Kane)

I especially love that first paragraph.

 

[hopewrites]

thanks for reviving this, I am one of those female writers who cant write females. I think I will try some of the suggestions in this thread to improve both genders.

 

[Phoenixthewriter]

Female characters are much easier to write than you think. I can think of three forms that they come in.

Brandon Sanderson is one of my most favorite authors. He writes women exceedingly well. Almost too well honestly. If you read his latest brick of novels called "The Stormlight Archives" he has powerful female characters. His first novel Elantris is a wonderful piece of fantasy with a very steadfast female lead.

The Codex Alera by Jim Butcher too has well detailed and compassionate female characters that are wildly different from one another. I can count 5 off the top of my head, and there are certainly more than that.

All of them can be easily written by simply playing up their strengths and the quirks that make them a woman. It's also good to give them an opinion about men too that sticks with them regardless of the situation.

It might also help to just read a few books with strong female characters. Sorry I couldn't help more, but I generally enjoy writing female parts over male parts. I've even changed the gender of some of my characters just because it would be far more interesting with a female in the role.

 

[Toby Frost]

This may be of interest:

http://fantasy-faction.com/2011/fantasy-gender-stereotypes

My own suspicion here is that you can't win. As with all writing, someone somewhere will always dislike what you've done. But so long as the character is individually credible, fine. There's nothing inherently wrong with a female character who collects shoes and is an expert mapreader. If that combination of stereotypical and non-stereotypical traits fits that particular character, then the character works.

It probably also helps not to write about people you find attractive, or at least to be careful when you do. You need to be able to say why character Y finds character X attractive, not why you, the author, do. I seem to be getting quite good at spotting Mary Sues - it certainly irritates me when I do see them.

I may have mentioned this before, but some while ago I asked a female friend about writing women characters. Her advice was to write the character as an individual who happened to be a woman, and not to go on about That Time of the Month. I have followed this advice closely, and haven't had (many) complaints.

 

[Ashcroft]

I think where a lot of writers (sadly, of both genders) go wrong is where they've decided to put a character into a book just to seem like they're not being sexist/racist/latestfauxliberalbuzzwordist. This should go without saying: if you're forcing a character into a novel or short story that doesn't have any internally consistent reason to be in that prose, then you've made a mistake. For the love of God, don't force any character into the prose for a reason that was generated externally to the prose (e.g. 'my friend liked an idea', or 'I don't want to put off x'); place characters into the prose only if they have a good reason for being there, and you're able to understand their character as well as all the other characters.

Something I'm sure we've all encountered is the Independent Woman cliche. It's universally ham-fisted in its application. It's always irritatingly distracting for the reader ("Oh look, here's the Independent Woman..."), and it always comes across as contrived. It's frankly worse, in my opinion, than the Damsel in Distress cliche, because it's so horrendously ubiquitous in modern writing. If your character is both female and independent (see Saoirse, in Mouse's writing for a good example) because it makes sense for her to have those qualities, then great! If your character is female, but not independent (Sansa or Catelyn in GRRM's Song of Ice and Fire), then great! In both cases, the thing that's relevant is that she's well written and makes sense; if you don't think you're going to be able to write her convincingly then just axe her right now, because it's better to have no female characters than painfully cliched/unconvincing female characters.

In my opinion, Daenerys from Song of Ice and Fire is an example of a badly written female character; the characters around her have to act unconvincingly to permit her to fill the Independent Woman cliche (a good example being -- spoiler for End of book one --


SPOILER --- SPOILER --- SPOILER

when male warriors from a fiercely patriarchal society take up arms for her and think "She's a pretty tough girl!" after witnessing her fire affinity, rather than just executing her for witchcraft, as they've already shown a propensity to do).

END OF SPOILER --- END OF SPOILER --- END OF SPOILER

With that proviso issued, my biggest tip for writing female characters is the following three point plan (yeah, I know that I overuse three point plans):

1) What's her background like? What's her society like? How much power are women typically permitted in her society? How much power did her parents permit her? -- By the end of this you should have a rough idea of what women in her society are typically like. Don't use women from modern society as a rolemodel and then just figure that it's job done: modern women have equal power to men, and most people expect them to express a high level of responsibility. Modern women are, for the first time in Western history, likely to have been raised as equals and will thus behave vastly differently to women from even one hundred years ago. So can you use modern women as a guideline if you're writing SF? Nope! Think of the massive amount of changes in the female and male gender roles that have occurred in the last fifty years alone: will a women in fifty years time have a similar upbringing to one from today? Maybe, if that's what you decide, but it's got to be internally consistent with the novel's society.

2) How do her personality traits interact with her upbringing? Has she bucked the trend, and become more or less independent? If so why? -- Society's socialisation doesn't act in a vacuum, rather it interacts with our own personality dimensions to create an individual that falls closer or farther from society's norm.

3) How do other people interact with this individual produced by 1 and 2? Are they flabberghasted by her behaviour, do they consider it refreshingly courageous? Why? -- Here's the absolute most important bit of the plan: understanding how your fictitious society will react to the character you've just made; it can be the most original, interesting, and downright refreshing character anyone's ever written, but if it's being reacted to by other characters in a way one wouldn't expect, then it's worthless (see Daenerys' problems above, if you don't mind the spoiler).

By the end of my magical three point plan, you should be able to create a character -- regardless of gender -- that's convincing.

Hope this helps!

 

[Anne Lyle]

Female characters are much easier to write than you think.

I think male writers and what I would call "tomboy" writers (like myself) face different challenges in writing women.

For the former, it's the little details they've never experienced directly; for the latter, it's more that we know the small stuff but, having spent years not fitting into the gender mould of our culture, we feel uncomfortable trying to squeeze back in!

 

[Mouse]

If your character is both female and independent (see Saoirse, in Mouse's writing for a good example) because it makes sense for her to have those qualities, then great!

I like you very much.

 

[Ashcroft]

I like you very much.

Ha, just telling it like I see it. I'd want to see more of that character, because she's interesting and obviously not two dimensional.

 

[sabolich]

I think where a lot of writers (sadly, of both genders) go wrong is where they've decided to put a character into a book just to seem like they're not being sexist/racist/latestfauxliberalbuzzwordist. This should go without saying: if you're forcing a character into a novel or short story that doesn't have any internally consistent reason to be in that prose, then you've made a mistake. For the love of God, don't force any character into the prose for a reason that was generated externally to the prose (e.g. 'my friend liked an idea', or 'I don't want to put off x'); place characters into the prose only if they have a good reason for being there, and you're able to understand their character as well as all the other characters.

Yes, yes, yes! You took the words right out of my mouth. If there is no reason for a woman to be in the story, then don't bother. Same as if there is no reason for a man to be in a story, don't bother. What does she contribute by being a woman in that group? What talents/traits/abilities does she need to bring? Is she a softening influence? An object of envy to fight over? A matriarch? The mother of all 'dem boys? A little sister getting in the way? A big sister managing the bunch? The local witch queen or the good witch bailing them all out? Is she the peacemaker or the manipulative instigator? There are many, many roles for women to play that are essential in society without having to carry either a sword or a spoon.

1] What's her background like? What's her society like? How much power are women typically permitted in her society? How much power did her parents permit her?

Excellent foundational questions. Her society dictates her influence, but not her abilities to influence. Scarlett O'Hara, one of the great female characters of all time, was locked out of power positions in her society by dint of her gender, but it did not stop her manipulating every male around her to get her way--in ways perfectly recognized and accepted by the men. I recall that it was burqa-clad women in Egypt who saved the female reporter who was being gang-raped this spring. They shamed the men into letting her go, in a society where women are severely repressed. Women do have a sort of power in every society (ever read Lysistrata? ) Just because she is physically weaker doesn't mean she's helpless, so think about what role you NEED her to play in your story, and give her the wherewithal to do it--either brains, looks, physical abilities, magic, determination, or whatever. Then make her true to herself in her thoughts, words, and deeds. Is she allowed to go off and have a crying jag in private even if she's leading the group? Sure. But it has to be in her nature to do so. Just because she stiff-lipped in public doesn't mean she's not bleeding inside.

1]Here's the absolute most important bit of the plan: understanding how your fictitious society will react to the character you've just made; it can be the most original, interesting, and downright refreshing character anyone's ever written, but if it's being reacted to by other characters in a way one wouldn't expect, then it's worthless

This is true of every character. They have only as much power as society lets them have, which includes the Evil Overlord who has spent his life conquering everything around him. If he is still in power, it is because sufficient numbers of people have not grown courageous enough or angry enough to go after him, or made the effort to find weapons to use that will bring him down. How your society reacts to your characters must be consistent. If she is unconventional, then her peers will be shocked, perhaps unforgivingly so, or perhaps secretly envious of her daring. The men may be patronizing, or sourly incredulous that she can actually deliver on what she says. Some may worship her. Some may try to assassinate her for being different and "uppity". Some may despise her weaknesses and refuse to recognize her good points. In all cases, the reactions should be shaped by individual personality as well as by societal norms/variations.

Nice three-point list, by the way.

 

[Ashcroft]

Yes, yes, yes! You took the words right out of my mouth. If there is no reason for a woman to be in the story, then don't bother. Same as if there is no reason for a man to be in a story, don't bother.

Exactly. It is precisely as ridiculous to say "my story doesn't have any men, so it'll annoy male rights activists!" as it is to say "my story doesn't have any women, so it'll annoy feminists!"; just make sure your darn story is good, so the number of people who are annoyed by it will be overshadowed by those who loved it. QED, I don't remember Gemmell having many (if any) 'strong' female characters in most of his novels, and he was one of the best selling UK fantasy authors for some decades. Did a female friend of mine practically cry with boredom when I all but forced her to read Legend (his debut)? Yep. Did his, presumably, predominately male readership care? Nope.

Just write the book that you want to write, and write it well. If you do anything else then it'll go horribly wrong. I know that vampire and romance novels (and, worryingly, intersections of the two) currently outsell most other books, but I hate both those genres thus writing a book along those lines would lead to a really crummy book.

This is true of every character. They have only as much power as society lets them have, which includes the Evil Overlord who has spent his life conquering everything around him. If he is still in power, it is because sufficient numbers of people have not grown courageous enough or angry enough to go after him, or made the effort to find weapons to use that will bring him down. How your society reacts to your characters must be consistent. If she is unconventional, then her peers will be shocked, perhaps unforgivingly so, or perhaps secretly envious of her daring. The men may be patronizing, or sourly incredulous that she can actually deliver on what she says. Some may worship her. Some may try to assassinate her for being different and "uppity". Some may despise her weaknesses and refuse to recognize her good points. In all cases, the reactions should be shaped by individual personality as well as by societal norms/variations.

Nice three-point list, by the way.

Thanks! I do like you rather a lot, from what posts of yours I've read - you posted some wonderfully level-headed comments in the 'why aren't there many female fantasy protagonists' (it was called something along those lines) thread. In fact, you're getting a friend request. Lucky you.

As you rightly point out, the three point plan delineated above ought to be used for all characters. There's nothing more dull than a character who's totally unrealistically independent from their societal norms, or a character who's totally unrealistically governed solely by them; thinking about your character's society is of the utmost import.

 

[sabolich]

Thanks! I do like you rather a lot, from what posts of yours I've read - you posted some wonderfully level-headed comments in the 'why aren't there many female fantasy protagonists' (it was called something along those lines) thread. In fact, you're getting a friend request. Lucky you.

Why, thank you. Friendship happily accepted!

 

[Brian G Turner]

However I have stumbled across a problem.

I lack female characters.

That's not a problem at all. At worst it might reduce something of the accessibility of your writing to a wider readership.

But let's face it, Tolkien's major characters are predominately male in The Hobbit and LOTR, and that hasn't stopped generations of women enjoying his works!

In my work, I have 7 protagonists and they are all male. I have been tempted with the idea of changing one to female, but that would change the entire dyanmic of the story and I don't like that. It's more honest to the concept to keep them all male.

I think with character writing and POV use, it's believability of character that is more important than gender, really. I seem to recall threads elsewhere on chrons slamming Robert Jordan's female characters.

 

[Phoenixthewriter]

I always feel I need to include female characters. Every other character I build is female, I just can't help it. I suppose I just really enjoy the image of women in stories. I absolutely have to have a female power in order to be satisfied with my work.

I will be the first to admit however that I've only once ever developed a story idea with a female as a lead character, and that was only after much deliberation and an ultimate decision that a woman would better serve as the lead protagonist over a male.

 

[Brian G Turner]

The irony is, I think I can actually write good female characters, and I think I manage to keep well away from typical female fantasy stereotypes (half-naked warrior lasses, soppy priestesses, etc).

And yet, I'm coming up to a tavern scene in my editing where two women take control of a long conversation in the scene - I think they read really well, and they add a lot of character to this section of the piece.

And yet - the book is already far too long, and I can have a character simply reflect on their conversation in a half-page POV. It cuts the word count, helps stop the pace slowing, but loses some good if otherwise unessential female characters.

However, addressing issues of slashing length and trying to focus on pace means I can't be sentimental on cutting sections, even less so with concern to gender.

I think worrying about gender in primary or supporting characters is a red herring. Good characters need to work as good characters, full stop.

 

[Phoenixthewriter]

However, addressing issues of slashing length and trying to focus on pace means I can't be sentimental on cutting sections, even less so with concern to gender.

I think worrying about gender in primary or supporting characters is a red herring. Good characters need to work as good characters, full stop.

I don't disagree, really. I think if a story works better with male leads than without, or the characters were just destined to come out a certain way, than so be it. Right now I'm toying with a take on Van Helsing meets Judge Dredd, and I have not developed even one female character that sticks around for any period of time. Not really anyway. It's a first for me.

In all other instances though, I had half the female characters made before the first word hit the word processor. I have to plan ahead for this kind of thing though. My protagonist is always a male, and that means it's the first thing I think of when writing a story. Careful consideration goes into make sure I include a female. Most of the time it works. Sometimes though as you've pointed out Brian, it just doesn't fit.

 

[hopewrites]

Stories are about human interaction. Whether its inter-gender, inter-racial, inter-species, or inter-generation its all interaction. To say that gender doesn't matter is the same as saying hair or eye color doesn't matter. Its going to matter to some character or another somewhere along your story line. It might be a subtlety that can be flexible in some stories and it might be a hardened fact that is the crux of the story in others.
The art of communication is so full of subtleties that I could not say that anything about it can be counted as unimportant.

 

[Brian G Turner]

To say that gender doesn't matter is the same as saying hair or eye color doesn't matter. Its going to matter to some character or another somewhere along your story line.

I just mean it's not important to push on gender, just to be politically correct.

Some peripheral characters in a work of fiction could possible be either, but important figures have to stand their ground and be able to justify themselves IMO, as solid real and truthfully built characters - rather than shaped on a whimsy.

Of course, some incidental characters are important for what they represent - ie, I have a homosexual transvestite in a coming scene, who is incidental, but is an important symbollic figure to represent the cosmopolitan nature of the mediaeval city being experienced.

2c.