Welcome to the Playpen, our space for ferrety banter and whimsical snippets of things that aren't quite long enough for articles (although they might be) but that caught your eye anyway.
My guess would be that because almost all the complex and interesting characters tend to be male while female characters are often tokenesque and under developed, that girls like to swap the genders around to see themselves better represented. In a sort of, "Why couldn't this character have been a girl" kind of way.
Awww - look gender-swapped Harry Potter! Part one and part 2. Hot sneering girl Draco is particularly delightful.
Wait...Rule 63 drawings that don't give you an overpowering need to bathe in Lysol? What madness is this?
Still, having encountered stuff like this in the past, it does leave me wondering. I can figure out the male motivations for creating/viewing this sort of material easy enough (curiosity, fetish, control, what have you), but I don't know what the appeal for women (mostly because the vast majority of this stuff seems to be male-to-female, rather than an equal split between the two).
Finally, on a tangentially related note, I thought this picture of a dragonified Isaac Clarke from Dead Space was pretty sweet. It's a dragon in an EVA suit; what more could you want?
Juneau wrote something about rape.
Ow. My eyes.
This looked like just another unpublished-author-gives-advice-to-other-unpublished-authors-on-how-to-stay-unpublished blog, but... this...? :-/
Am not going to waste breath on 'im. Not worth it.
Sometimes, I really wish the Catholic Church had decided to call the person responsible for calling a prospective Saint's claims to saintliness into question (before then grovelling and apologising to the Saint should they be canonised) as the Pretentious and Aggravating Arsehole Who Should Be Fucking Ignored Forever. Then people would stop claiming to do that.
Juneau wrote something about rape.
It is rock-bottom horrific and this man has a daughter. Extreme trigger warnings.
Having said that, I wouldn't be happy with hearing those things from women either, like "I think 99.9% of all women are bitchy-some more so than others of course" or "Females are nurturers. Men are fixers [...] When a woman lays out a problem, often she is not asking for it to be fixed, but is asking for sympathy" or "One last thing: women have a tendency to be passive aggressive." Indeed, were I interacting with women who say such things--again, assuming these women exist--I'd have told them to fuck right off, because these are stated as absolutes and reek of internalized misogyny. That's not even getting started on the repulsive heteronormativity in several of them.
On the other hand, things like this strike me as an anecdote about men being sexist fucks than a "this is how to write women":
I once told a male friend that while some men may have a constant sex drive, for women who are tuned in to their bodies and their husbands, ovulation can be like mating season. I swear I could see the mental wheels turning as he plotted to go home and figure out how to track his wife's cycle and take advantage of it.
My final point is that women are extremely sensitive, insecure about their looks, and slow to forgive and forget when someone makes us feel unattractive, stupid, masculine, or any other undesirable thing. I was a late bloomer and I still remember every person that teased me about my flat chest. I remember when I hit a growth spurt and a man told me I was getting "big". (I was 15...wrong word!) I remember the male coworker that told me I had big hands, and the boy in high school who told me my butt was getting jiggly after the end of basketball season (and I wasn't exercising enough, apparently).
...and interpreting it as "this is how women are, so write women like so" speaks of obliviousness whose level cannot be measured in either words or numbers.
The first part read to me like a guy with a fairly reasonable outlook and a fairly immature grasp of feminist issues which might conceivably improve with guidance (aside from the occasional tasteless joke, I could imagine my younger self writing something quite similar).
... and then the bullet list. After about point three, I'm sitting their with my mouth hanging open thinking 'Are you SHITTING me?' And the it gets worse. So much worse.
Girls are stupid, women are smart. Teenage girls think about boys and sex a lot.
Okay, you know what, fuck you. That's my sisters you're talking about right there; and most of my best friends, not too long ago. I think I just threw up a little in my mouth.
James D: You know who I'd take advice on writing female chararacters from? A fucking female author. I hear those exist now.
I see nothing wrong in taking some advice on writing female characters from a male author. Taking most-to-all of your advice from a male author? That's another story.
I'm not sure when he posted it, but Juneau has added an update clarifying that 1) it's Farland's list, not his (so why the fuck are you hosting it unless you endorse it?), and 2) Farland "is directly quoting other women."
The post Juneau "condensed and simplified" most of his bullet points from is available here. To me, the fact that the context of these women's remarks makes a huge difference in interpretation. (Contrast: "I am told by older female friends that menopause is very freeing, because they don't experience the emotional ups and downs that younger women do" from the original with Juneau's "condensed and simplified": "Menopause can be very freeing, because they won't have the emotional ups and downs.") I haven't been through all of Farland's post yet, but what I'm seeing so far strikes me as much less problematic. Do other folks here agree, or is there something I'm still missing?
Re: David Farland
Axiomatic: He's one of the worst fantasy authors I know. He doesn't even have the benefit of sucking due to being exceptionally offensive, he is just REALLY, REALLY bad at writing.
Oh, huh. It's been a while since I read Courtship of Princess Leia but I remember quite enjoying it, despite all the dodgy gender stuff. Hmm.
He's one of the worst fantasy authors I know. He doesn't even have the beneift of sucking due to being exceptionally offensive, he is just REALLY, REALLY bad at writing.
No wonder I bought his "something something Runelords" for 2.99 euros. I don't mean used, or having it marked down by the store, this book was published with "ONLY 2.99!!!" on the FRONT COVER.
Anyway the whole notion of a "how to write a non-straight/white/cismale character" article is flawed at the outset, unless the thrust of it is "how to write about people whose life experiences are very, very different from yours can't be summed up in a brief blog post, read books written by them and ask people you know who belong to these groups (and take them out to dinner to make your incessant stupid questions worth their while)."
A friend's speculated that perhaps Juneau will embark on a "how to write people of color" guide next. It could begin with "first I start off with a white person, and layer a thin veneer of brown, black or yellow on top..."
And those bullet points, ugh. You know who I'd take advice on writing female chararacters from? A fucking female author. I hear those exist now.
By the way valse de la lune, I just finished Scar Night, and the second half of the book made me more or less agree with your estimation. The setup was good but it utterly failed to make me care about any of the characters before just throwing a lot of plot at me, so all of it was happening to people whose motivations weren't properly built up and whose continued existence was utterly irrelevant. They make this Ulcis guy seem like a real threat and then he's dead within like 2 pages of meeting him. It was a big mistake to try to stuff *six* POV characters into a book that wasn't even 600 pages long. I did appreciate his staying away from cliche fantasy characters (no big strong manly hero types at all, surprisingly), but it's like they were all just outlines of characters rather than real people. Also fuck Dill. The book should've been about Mr. Nettle and Rachael and focused way more on them as people, rather than just launching right into a subpar plot. Perdido Street Station, for all its faults, was very good at making the characters feel like real people and making you care about what happened to them.
Then I layer a thin sheet of woman on it -- a little more emotional intensity, a little more nurturing, more connectivity with people. She's not aggressive and violent, she's not a linear thinker, not a constant crier, not so goal-focused (though goals are important and necessary, they are less tangible). A Barb Wire, high-heeled, cold warrior bitch is not a woman. It is a woman doing an impression of a man doing an impression of a woman. It's a fantasy -- unrealistic and implausible.
This is why sometimes I'm obliged to tell "feminist" men that I'd like to put on an iron-toed boot and kick them in the cock.
It's stupid to think that woman are there just to make laundry or sandwiches. As much as I'd like a personal slave, marriage doesn't work that way.
We're meant to give him a standing ovation here, I think. Such a nice guy!
Then I realised there was an article and it kept getting worse. D:
(This is probably terrible of me but when he says "Then I layer a thin sheet of woman on it" I start hearing Goodbye Horses - you know, the Buffalo Bill song from The Silence of the Lambs.)
I guess the big difference there is that the market as a whole probably isn't desperate for yet another FPS - it's hardly a genre abandoned by publishers like point and click adventures and isometric RPGs. Granted, the project's supposed to address gripes people have with the general tendency away from realism of current FPS games, but I guess that isn't a widespread enough gripe for people to put their hands in their pockets.
Or maybe it will be Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance 3!
It's an 'enhanced edition' of Baldur's Gate, apparently. Sounds interesting, especially if it's on Steam.