Perceptions of equity in sff

[thaddeus6th]

Jo, also worth noting her Galbraith sales were modest at best.

I think the real lesson here is that I should entitle my next book Lord of the Thrones, and change my name to George RR Tolkien.

 

[hopewrites]

I would suspect that any gender bias based on names, (stupid imo) would stem from masculine names having harder sounds which subconsciously aid a perspective (along with cover art and title) that it would be a hard edged book -lots of daring do, cliffhangers, sharp turns of plot...

Whereas a nice soft feminine name evokes a feeling of chiffon, and whipped cream.

Not something people activity think about any more than they consider the visceral reactions they have to the cover art.


Upon further consideration I realize I do have a gender bias in one genre. If I see a hard edged masculine sort of name on the cover of a romance novel, I put it back and look for something else. I think this is a result of my personal experience with the romanticism of the masculinity I've encountered in my life. Without disbelieving that a masculine person is capable of Romantic gestures, it's something I hope to be true rather than know from personal experience to be true.
(My ex's idea of romance was to treat me like a hooker. One of the many many reasons he's my ex.)

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Jo, also worth noting her Galbraith sales were modest at best.

I think the real lesson here is that I should entitle my next book Lord of the Thrones, and change my name to George RR Tolkien.

Her sales were modest but the reviews very good and the book gaining some momentum in crime circles. We'll never know if that would have been enough to break the book, sadly. Having read them, though, I'd despair for any world where books like that don't succeed because they are bloody brilliant.

 

[Parson]

@Jo Zebedee ... I'm a bit of a crime novel lover. .... What made them brilliant? And why do you think she used a man's name? Was it merely a dodge? or perhaps she thought a male name was better accepted in the world of detective novels?

 

[Jo Zebedee]

@Jo Zebedee ... I'm a bit of a crime novel lover. .... What made them brilliant? And why do you think she used a man's name? Was it merely a dodge? or perhaps she thought a male name was better accepted in the world of detective novels?

The first - great main character, Parson, with a nice dose of humour, and a good central mystery.

As to the second - I'm not sure to be honest.

 

[Brian G Turner]

@Jo Zebedeeor perhaps she thought a male name was better accepted in the world of detective novels?

IMO it would probably have been to hide her identity - there are plenty of very successful women writing as women in the thriller genre.

 

[RX-79G]

IMO it would probably have been to hide her identity - there are plenty of very successful women writing as women in the thriller genre.

Just like women do really well in YA fantasy. I don't think either genre is inequitable to women authors that will illuminate the SFF general question.

 

[SilentRoamer]

@Jo Zebedee ... I'm a bit of a crime novel lover. .... What made them brilliant? And why do you think she used a man's name? Was it merely a dodge? or perhaps she thought a male name was better accepted in the world of detective novels?

I was sure I read somewhere that the reaosn JK wanted to write under a new pen name is she knew she would succeed writing as J.K. Rowling regardless of the quality of the novel.

Another pen name was her way of having a fresh crack at the market without riding on the coat tails and success of Harry Potter (without meaning to put Harry Potter down but a huge amound of the acclaim and international recognition undoubtedly comes through because of the films).

I think it's a fairly honest and noble reason.

 

[HareBrain]

I was sure I read somewhere that the reaosn JK wanted to write under a new pen name is she knew she would succeed writing as J.K. Rowling regardless of the quality of the novel.

Another pen name was her way of having a fresh crack at the market without riding on the coat tails and success of Harry Potter (without meaning to put Harry Potter down but a huge amound of the acclaim and international recognition undoubtedly comes through because of the films).

I think it's a fairly honest and noble reason.

That might be why she chose a pen-name. It doesn't shed any light on why it was male.

Given the success of female writers in crime fiction, I wonder if it was simply to make it less likely that anyone would guess (from writing style etc) who she was.

 

[RX-79G]

Or maybe she just liked the name, and there was no calculated gender arithmetic at all?

 

[Jo Zebedee]

That might be why she chose a pen-name. It doesn't shed any light on why it was male.

Given the success of female writers in crime fiction, I wonder if it was simply to make it less likely that anyone would guess (from writing style etc) who she was.

This seems the closest. From Robert Galbraith'a website:

'I certainly wanted to take my writing persona as far away as possible from me, so a male pseudonym seemed a good idea. I am proud to say, though, that when i ‘unmasked’ myself to my editor David Shelley who had read and enjoyed The Cuckoo’s Calling without realising I wrote it, one of the first things he said was ‘I never would have thought a woman wrote that.’ Apparently I had successfully channeled my inner bloke!'

 

[Stephen Palmer]

I expect she wanted to escape JK Rowling.

 

[Carolyn Hill]

I just thought of something. When I joined this board, my username was Brown Rat -- not because of any consideration of gender but simply because I love rats -- and I don't know how many members knew or cared that I'm a woman. Recently I changed my username to my real name, Carolyn Hill, which is clearly gender marked. I wonder if that makes a difference in the way my posts are read?

 

[Parson]

As someone with enough history here to have known you as both Brown Rat and Carolyn Hill I can say that for me there is no difference. But in fairness I must add that I knew early on you were of the female persuasion.

 

[hopewrites]

I had a friend on another board who preferred to be thought of and treated as a female. Her posting style was androgynous enough that without her insistence I wouldn't have read her posts one way or the other. When it came out years later that her physical gender didn't match up with the gender she preferred to be thought of as, several people were shocked (mostly the males who felt all females should be hit on and felt there personal rules had betrayed them into hitting on someone of a gender not personally preferable as a sex partner...)

So it can happen.

---

My partner and I were watching an audio commentary the other night and he was confused by something the director commented on, turned to me and said "I don't get what she's saying. Is that sexist?"

To which I replied "yeah. But she doesn't know she is. Watch enough of the movies she written and or directed and you'll note that she's secretly sexist."

I'm positive if someone asked this director point blank "are you sexist?" Or "would you say you've done thus-and-so in your films to promote a sexist view against men?" She would be shocked and offended, vehemently deny the accusations and have a hard week reexamining her body of work to find how someone could think something so wide of the mark.

 

[RX-79G]

I just thought of something. When I joined this board, my username was Brown Rat -- not because of any consideration of gender but simply because I love rats -- and I don't know how many members knew or cared that I'm a woman. Recently I changed my username to my real name, Carolyn Hill, which is clearly gender marked. I wonder if that makes a difference in the way my posts are read?

Not having been here at that time, I would have been interested to see if your posts, despite the androgynous handle, were read as female anyway.

 

[Old_Man_Steve2016]

Do you believe sff is equitable* in terms of

Its access to publication
The work you read
The reviews you leave
The reviews you read
Any other relevant parameter.

I voted No, BUT... because there are many more factors in play today than there were in the past.
For example, there are more places to publish than there were in the past. So a story with non-white/non-straight characters might not get into Asimov one day, but instead of vanishing, it could be published elsewhere. The problem is opacity- are the editors rejecting stories because they're biased against the writer? Or are they rejecting stories because they ran out of space for the month/publishing term? If the editor doesn't say, then how would a writer know?

These days there's less gatekeepers overall to block a person from publication.

It can be really annoying if you get 50 reviews and 48 of them are neo-nazi comments. Dunno if this actually happens anymore (do they even read?).

 

[Foxbat]

Perhaps the Fantasy and Science Fiction genres need something like this to showcase women writers.
About | Women in Horror Month

 

[Nick B]

Women dominate urban fantasy pretty heavily too apparently. Now, I'm never too sure about the sub-genres, but is urban fantasy mostly YA?

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Interesting blog post by Juliet McKenna on the subject today (and a link to her further writings on the subject - she's very interesting and enlightening to read, I find)

Brief thoughts on women writers being erased from SFF – again