Cryptic Gender

[ysabetwordsmith]

Here's an interesting essay about characters whose gender is not revealed.

Now the fun part is, I have done all the things  here.  I've written male and female characters.  I've written around a dozen sex/gender identities.  Usually I specify them.  Occasionally I don't, and I have done that both deliberately and accidentally.  I've written non-binary genders.  I've even got one whose gender is explicitly identified as "I'm not telling."  All of those things matter.  But they don't matter to every story.  It's okay to get through one and realize that you haven't tagged the character's gender.  It's okay to specify something out of the ordinary, whether that affects the plot or is background parity.  Just know what you're doing.

Comments

Gender and social development

[dialecticdreamer]

I haven't written nearly as many gender identities as I know exist, in part because I haven't written fiction in around ten years. The mainstream culture in fiction has changed an awful lot (but with an equally long, or longer, road ahead).

But frankly, most of the time, I just didn't CARE. I mean, unless I set out a story where someone's gender identity was important to either the plot or the character interactions as they story progressed, it's a total non-issue for me. Sadly, it also means that I'm not going to hunt out stories specifically because they had this problem-- I ran into enough of that with teachers trying to be "helpful" by giving me books with "disabled main characters"-- some of which were okay, and some of which were horrible pap, and two or three of which should've been labeled "radioactive poison" on both covers, the spine, and every page in between.

Tell me an interesting story. If the person's gender identity matters for a /reason/, it'll work.

Just having spear-carriers who are transgender, non-gendered, multi-gendered, alien-gendered or whatever for the sake of "diversity" -- or worse, "controversy", is actively doing a disservice both to the readers who may identify with that gender, and to the entertainment industries. "Blank readers will take any crap we churn out," can be /proven/ by looking at the initial phases of other groups pushing into the mainstream. No matter how one fills in the blank, the story should be good enough to pull readers toward MORE of its type.

Re: Gender and social development

[ysabetwordsmith]

>> I haven't written nearly as many gender identities as I know exist, in part because I haven't written fiction in around ten years. The mainstream culture in fiction has changed an awful lot (but with an equally long, or longer, road ahead). <<

That's okay. I'd love to see what you could do with fiction, though. You're writing meta like a boss. Are you into F/F meta at all? Plunge is always looking for that.

>> But frankly, most of the time, I just didn't CARE. <<

Not everyone likes the same kind of stuff, and that's fine.

>> I ran into enough of that with teachers trying to be "helpful" by giving me books with "disabled main characters"-- some of which were okay, and some of which were horrible pap, and two or three of which should've been labeled "radioactive poison" on both covers, the spine, and every page in between. <<

Well, they were trying. Sometimes that works, and sometimes it doesn't. Maybe this is another piece of meta you could write:

Disabled Fiction
* Awesome
* Okay
* Toxic Waste

Because it's something that people may want to read, but finding it can be really difficult -- and as you discovered, recommendations sometimes suck.

Two of my favorites are Miles Vorkosigan and Dag Redwing Hickory, both written by Lois McMaster Bujold. Their disabilities define them, but don't stop them.

>> Tell me an interesting story. If the person's gender identity matters for a /reason/, it'll work. <<

Genderfic is writing "about" gender. Sometimes that is important, you get stuff that would never show up any other way. But diversity is important in stories that aren't about gender too.

>> Just having spear-carriers who are transgender, non-gendered, multi-gendered, alien-gendered or whatever for the sake of "diversity" -- or worse, "controversy", is actively doing a disservice both to the readers who may identify with that gender, and to the entertainment industries. <<

Background parity is a great thing, because it means you're just people, not so exotic that any mention necessarily steals the show. It's a later development. You're actually touching on several steps in the process here together.

>> "Blank readers will take any crap we churn out," can be /proven/ by looking at the initial phases of other groups pushing into the mainstream. <<

This is another phase of identity literature.

>> No matter how one fills in the blank, the story should be good enough to pull readers toward MORE of its type. <<

Ideally, yes, but it takes years for most people to learn that with a new motif. Me, I know the whole pattern. You tell me there's no X or it all sucks, fine, I can write you X heroes right off the bat. Most recently I've been doing this with asexual characters. I'd always written some, but over the last several years the ace movement online has jelled, so I'm chipping in what I can.

"not caring"

[dialecticdreamer]

For me "don't care" means that I can imagine Will Smith playing Harry Blackstone Coppefield Dresden, or Lois Lane who's polyamorous, a tiny Latina girl becoming the new Daredevil (possibly moving the main settings to high school, as is usual with Spiderman) or, in real life, my kids each settling down with a kewpie, a boyfriend, a girlfriend or alone without "breaking" my central wishes for their adult lives. Gender, race, orientation... I care more whether someone VOTES than those things.

As a reader, I want a story that is internally consistent, makes me THINK about something, even if it's just reminiscing about the months of ramen noodles and baked potatoes when dealing with underemployment and setting out into the world as an "adult". I'm willing to give the author space to tell their story with characters of color, of any gender, of any sexual orientation; I /very much/ like diversity, but I won't sacrifice the storytelling elements FOR that diversity.

I still have fellow geek friends who feel BETRAYED in some way by Samuel Jackson playing Nick Fury, as the "Nick Fury" of the comics they collected as kids was a middle-aged white guy. That's the other thing I don't get.

Re: "not caring"

[ysabetwordsmith]

>> For me "don't care" means that I can imagine Will Smith playing Harry Blackstone Coppefield Dresden, or Lois Lane who's polyamorous, a tiny Latina girl becoming the new Daredevil (possibly moving the main settings to high school, as is usual with Spiderman) or, in real life, my kids each settling down with a kewpie, a boyfriend, a girlfriend or alone without "breaking" my central wishes for their adult lives. Gender, race, orientation... I care more whether someone VOTES than those things. <<

Okay, that's useful to know. I don't care, in the sense that a person's race or gender etc. doesn't make me rule out certain things for them. But I do care, because I like diversity and in this culture it requires some digging to get. Homogeniety bores me.

>> I /very much/ like diversity, but I won't sacrifice the storytelling elements FOR that diversity. <<

That's fair.

>> I still have fellow geek friends who feel BETRAYED in some way by Samuel Jackson playing Nick Fury, as the "Nick Fury" of the comics they collected as kids was a middle-aged white guy. That's the other thing I don't get. <<

1) It can correlate with how people feel if someone reveals a personality trait such as being gay or trans. Most people feel like the rug was pulled out from under them, they hate it.

The closest I came was when a (both of us thought he was gay) friend came on to me. It was like the coffee table making a pass. WAT? But then I thought, "You ninny, you know that human sexuality is variable, you shouldn't have put it in the Always-So bin."

2) There's a big difference between singular characters and cyclic characters, and bridging that gap can lose people. Think about Robin Hood, he's been played a kajillion ways. But more recent characters, especially post-Mickey-Mouse, are more prone to one representation. People can get super attached to that.

Even if a character has multiple iterations, someone may lock on a specific version and dislike the others. I've enjoyed every version of Hulk, some more than others. But the latest Spiderman movies, I don't like those, I liked the previous ones. I like Miles Morales from the mixed-race description alone nevermind that I haven't gotten my hands on his comics yet.

3) Changing things matters. If you shift Nick Fury from white to black, that's a major character impact. It gets bupkis worth of attention throughout the arc, which is a bit dicey to me and probably maddening to people who know white!Nick. But then in The Winter Soldier they just totally nailed the racebending, with the traffic trap and the elevator scene with Nick telling Steve about his grandfather.

If you're going to do it, you should address it and do it right. Don't sling it around just because. It changes things that will destabilize the whole scenario in ways you can't even imagine but your audience will notice whether they can articulate it or not.

Consider just for one example, white people routinely get away with things that black people are jailed or executed for doing. A white guy could get away with being a vigilante superhero. A black guy doing the exact same things would get shot dead, so you have to account for that. He has to work a lot harder just to survive. If you make the change without considering the divergent experience of white and black men in America today, you'll get a million details wrong. People might not understand what you fucked up, but they'll know you rolled a 1 somewhere.

I love bending -- race, gender, orientation, religion, you name it -- but it is an advanced technique. It is easy to botch and very challenging to do well. If you get it right, the results can be epic. I bought Elementary just for the double-tap of Asian!Joan Watson. Haven't watched it yet, that's our next intended series. I heard good things about it so I'm hopeful. But I've also seen wretched disasters like one play done with all the actors dressed for different time periods. What the ever-living fuck. That does not make something look timeless, it makes it look like Wardrobe puked on the stage.

You have got to know what you are doing.

One use of fanfic is actually learning that. Go ahead, make your mistakes in an unpaid environment where you don't have to spend time building anything, you can just pick up premade props and practice your techniques. This is why I'm tolerant of fanfic that frankly sucks. It's all practice. No matter how good or bad your skills, they'll be better after 20,000 words than they were before.

Re: "not caring"

[dialecticdreamer]

Fair enough. I should probably say that while I enjoy the bending aspects of major changes, et cetera.

>>I like Miles Morales from the mixed-race description alone nevermind that I haven't gotten my hands on his comics yet.<<

Miles is the Ultimate Spiderman, and is an Avenger in that universe. YAAAY! I was worried he wouldn't last more than a few issues.

>> It is easy to botch and very challenging to do well. If you get it right, the results can be epic. I bought Elementary just for the double-tap of Asian!Joan Watson. Haven't watched it yet, that's our next intended series. <<

There are some mind-melting OTHER changes. Sherlock is a drug addict, and they do NOT sweep that under the rug. They're in New York instead of London, and the actor who plays SHerlock is not dark-haired, reserved, or skinny as a rail. He is, in fact, a major BERK to most people. I think you're going to love the series-- though they don't introduce Mrs. Hudson at ALL in season 1. (evil, merry giggling) SPOILERS!

Re: "not caring"

[ysabetwordsmith]

>> Miles is the Ultimate Spiderman, and is an Avenger in that universe. YAAAY! I was worried he wouldn't last more than a few issues. <<

That's pretty cool.

>> There are some mind-melting OTHER changes. Sherlock is a drug addict, and they do NOT sweep that under the rug. <<

That's promising. The drug use usually gets glossed over. I'd really like to see someone tackle it as a prescription addiction, because that's fairly close to the original, rather than Sherlock being a straight-up junkie.

>> They're in New York instead of London, and the actor who plays SHerlock is not dark-haired, reserved, or skinny as a rail. He is, in fact, a major BERK to most people. <<

Canon Sherlock was a berk to most people.

>> I think you're going to love the series-- though they don't introduce Mrs. Hudson at ALL in season 1. (evil, merry giggling) SPOILERS! <<

Thanks for the rec.

[catsittingstill.livejournal.com]

In my opinion it is okay to not tag a character's gender in a story--but you want to be aware how people will tend to fill that in. If you don't mind that a lot of your readers will assume the character is male, that's fine. But if you want people to perceive women, or ungendered characters, I think you're going to need to spell it out for a lot of readers.