Comments on: The Things We Remember http://www.natashafondren.com/writing/musings/the-things-we-remember/ Adventures in Writing on the Road Tue, 16 Mar 2010 03:45:42 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Angie http://www.natashafondren.com/writing/musings/the-things-we-remember/comment-page-1/#comment-1875 Angie Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:22:11 +0000 http://www.natashafondren.com/writing/musings/the-things-we-remember/#comment-1875 I think it's a given that this message is still all over, and it's not only writers. Male artists are the serious ones, while women paint pretty pictures, except for a few who are willing to fight for recognition, and have to be ten times as good as a man to get half the credit. Men are sculptors, while women... well, I'm sure a lot of women sculpt too, but I can't name any of them. Men are chefs, women are cooks, with a few recent exceptions. The position of "secretary" used to be one with good upward mobility; a secretary was expected to be in training for his boss's position, or at least was expected to move upward in the organization. (Positions like Secretary of State are hold-overs from a time when secretary was an important, respected job.) Then women started to get jobs as secretaries and it became a dead end. Hanging the job title on women meant stripping that title of all respect. Even things like the "Best Actor" and "Best Actress" award assumes that there's some inherent difference. What would happen if everyone competed together? It'd be interesting to see how many British actors (writers, musicians, other artists) have been knighted versus actresses (etc.) I can name a few Dame actresses, but a lot more Sir actors. Several Sir musicians, but no Dames. Men have most of the high status, authority positions in every field which isn't feminine by long tradition; women do most of those jobs too now, but they're still the rara avis. And even in elementary education, overwhelmingly female, my experience growing up was that principals and vice principals were men. Things are improving, yes, but we have a long way to go before the cultural assumption is one of gender equality. And the problem with ignoring authorial gender when you read -- assuming that's even possible, and I have strong doubts except in cases where a woman author is using a masculine or neutral pseud -- is that men do tend to get more of the promotion, more of the high-status reviews, more of the prime bookstore real estate everywhere except the romance corner. If you read the books which fall naturally under your eye and hand, you'll probably end up reading more men than women. It's like claiming to be "colorblind" -- going with the flow means reading ninety-some percent white authors, because the authors of color get less promotion, less marketing, fewer reviews on mainstream sites, and in some cases (back to romance again -- the single largest genre) their books aren't even shelved with those of white authors. Ignoring the gender (or race) of authors means accepting the sexist (or racist) behavior of the industry. Angie, stepping off her soapbox I think it’s a given that this message is still all over, and it’s not only writers. Male artists are the serious ones, while women paint pretty pictures, except for a few who are willing to fight for recognition, and have to be ten times as good as a man to get half the credit. Men are sculptors, while women… well, I’m sure a lot of women sculpt too, but I can’t name any of them. Men are chefs, women are cooks, with a few recent exceptions.

The position of “secretary” used to be one with good upward mobility; a secretary was expected to be in training for his boss’s position, or at least was expected to move upward in the organization. (Positions like Secretary of State are hold-overs from a time when secretary was an important, respected job.) Then women started to get jobs as secretaries and it became a dead end. Hanging the job title on women meant stripping that title of all respect.

Even things like the “Best Actor” and “Best Actress” award assumes that there’s some inherent difference. What would happen if everyone competed together?

It’d be interesting to see how many British actors (writers, musicians, other artists) have been knighted versus actresses (etc.) I can name a few Dame actresses, but a lot more Sir actors. Several Sir musicians, but no Dames.

Men have most of the high status, authority positions in every field which isn’t feminine by long tradition; women do most of those jobs too now, but they’re still the rara avis. And even in elementary education, overwhelmingly female, my experience growing up was that principals and vice principals were men.

Things are improving, yes, but we have a long way to go before the cultural assumption is one of gender equality.

And the problem with ignoring authorial gender when you read — assuming that’s even possible, and I have strong doubts except in cases where a woman author is using a masculine or neutral pseud — is that men do tend to get more of the promotion, more of the high-status reviews, more of the prime bookstore real estate everywhere except the romance corner. If you read the books which fall naturally under your eye and hand, you’ll probably end up reading more men than women.

It’s like claiming to be “colorblind” — going with the flow means reading ninety-some percent white authors, because the authors of color get less promotion, less marketing, fewer reviews on mainstream sites, and in some cases (back to romance again — the single largest genre) their books aren’t even shelved with those of white authors. Ignoring the gender (or race) of authors means accepting the sexist (or racist) behavior of the industry.

Angie, stepping off her soapbox

]]> By: Natasha Fondren http://www.natashafondren.com/writing/musings/the-things-we-remember/comment-page-1/#comment-1874 Natasha Fondren Mon, 16 Nov 2009 03:33:01 +0000 http://www.natashafondren.com/writing/musings/the-things-we-remember/#comment-1874 Thanks for starting it, Moonrat! :-) Thanks for starting it, Moonrat! :-)

]]> By: Natasha Fondren http://www.natashafondren.com/writing/musings/the-things-we-remember/comment-page-1/#comment-1873 Natasha Fondren Mon, 16 Nov 2009 03:32:46 +0000 http://www.natashafondren.com/writing/musings/the-things-we-remember/#comment-1873 Paul, I hadn't either! It was news to me, too. Paul, I hadn’t either! It was news to me, too.

]]> By: Natasha Fondren http://www.natashafondren.com/writing/musings/the-things-we-remember/comment-page-1/#comment-1872 Natasha Fondren Mon, 16 Nov 2009 03:32:15 +0000 http://www.natashafondren.com/writing/musings/the-things-we-remember/#comment-1872 I was concerned that I read too many men, so I listed my auto-buy authors, and it was split 50/50 precisely, LOL. I was concerned that I read too many men, so I listed my auto-buy authors, and it was split 50/50 precisely, LOL.

]]> By: Susan Helene Gottfried http://www.natashafondren.com/writing/musings/the-things-we-remember/comment-page-1/#comment-1871 Susan Helene Gottfried Mon, 16 Nov 2009 00:48:59 +0000 http://www.natashafondren.com/writing/musings/the-things-we-remember/#comment-1871 Uhh, Wendy, I was only eight at the time I formed that opinion. That was my perception and it shaped how I viewed the world -- and who I could be. That's all. Uhh, Wendy, I was only eight at the time I formed that opinion. That was my perception and it shaped how I viewed the world — and who I could be. That’s all.

]]> By: moonrat http://www.natashafondren.com/writing/musings/the-things-we-remember/comment-page-1/#comment-1870 moonrat Mon, 16 Nov 2009 00:42:18 +0000 http://www.natashafondren.com/writing/musings/the-things-we-remember/#comment-1870 Thanks for continuing the conversation, Natasha :) Thanks for continuing the conversation, Natasha :)

]]> By: Paul http://www.natashafondren.com/writing/musings/the-things-we-remember/comment-page-1/#comment-1869 Paul Sun, 15 Nov 2009 21:18:31 +0000 http://www.natashafondren.com/writing/musings/the-things-we-remember/#comment-1869 Natasha, I haven't given this a lot of thought lately. I was surprised by the lists you mentioned and large number of men as opposed to women on them. I read a lot of YA and the majority of what I read is written by women. I'm going to pay more attention to the adult fiction. Thanks for the information. Natasha, I haven’t given this a lot of thought lately. I was surprised by the lists you mentioned and large number of men as opposed to women on them. I read a lot of YA and the majority of what I read is written by women. I’m going to pay more attention to the adult fiction. Thanks for the information.

]]> By: Melanie http://www.natashafondren.com/writing/musings/the-things-we-remember/comment-page-1/#comment-1868 Melanie Sun, 15 Nov 2009 19:29:04 +0000 http://www.natashafondren.com/writing/musings/the-things-we-remember/#comment-1868 When I first heard about this I got really pissed off, then I realized I don't pay much attention to the sex of the writers that I read. I think I have a fair balance between male and female - -and have probably read more female authors lately -- but I don't set out to choose one over the other. I love Moonrat's idea for the female list! When I first heard about this I got really pissed off, then I realized I don’t pay much attention to the sex of the writers that I read. I think I have a fair balance between male and female – -and have probably read more female authors lately — but I don’t set out to choose one over the other.

I love Moonrat’s idea for the female list!

]]> By: Natasha Fondren http://www.natashafondren.com/writing/musings/the-things-we-remember/comment-page-1/#comment-1867 Natasha Fondren Sun, 15 Nov 2009 18:21:37 +0000 http://www.natashafondren.com/writing/musings/the-things-we-remember/#comment-1867 Charles, I was thinking the exact same thing when I was looking at Moonrat's list. A whole lot of women put in romance or love, no matter the genre. Strangely, I don't often want to read it anymore. I used to gobble up romance at the rate of two or three books a day, but now it's two or three books a year. I don't know what happened to me. That's an interesting point. Charles, I was thinking the exact same thing when I was looking at Moonrat’s list. A whole lot of women put in romance or love, no matter the genre. Strangely, I don’t often want to read it anymore. I used to gobble up romance at the rate of two or three books a day, but now it’s two or three books a year. I don’t know what happened to me.

That’s an interesting point.

]]> By: Natasha Fondren http://www.natashafondren.com/writing/musings/the-things-we-remember/comment-page-1/#comment-1866 Natasha Fondren Sun, 15 Nov 2009 18:18:56 +0000 http://www.natashafondren.com/writing/musings/the-things-we-remember/#comment-1866 Edie, in general, I've been reading a lot of male authors lately, which disturbs me. I think you're right, though. Most book readers are women, most book buyers are women, most women by women authors... so why the problem on the lists? Puzzling. Edie, in general, I’ve been reading a lot of male authors lately, which disturbs me. I think you’re right, though. Most book readers are women, most book buyers are women, most women by women authors… so why the problem on the lists? Puzzling.

]]>