[BOOK SPOILERS] Sex/Romance: What Fans Wanna See in Future Seasons [MEGA SPOILERS

[CryFenril]

Look, I'm not going to flame you, but I think you're definitely guilty of the same stereotyping that many of the other posters have said.

I was going for deliberate hyperbole there at the end, and mayhaps I ought to have been more open about it, heh.

As for woman-hate here... let's be honest, a great many of the female POVs aren't terribly flattering to the woman in question, at least in the beginning. From Sansa's incessant mooning and wishing, to Cersei's delusional scheming and vituperative, we are given their (admittedly skewed) take on what's going on around them.

It's not til Sansa gets over wanting the world to be a fairy tale that she becomes a mature, balanced point of view that can see the treachery happening around her.

Arya reeks of "cute" until she starts to harden.

Catelyn starts out pushing her husband to make a political move, immediately falls into "grieving lunatic" mode, and only afterward becomes a more mellow, consistent force - and her devolution into Un-Cat is just... weird.

They all (with the exception of Cersei) become more interesting and balanced as time goes on - I like the fact that GRRM allows his women to become as strong as the men in the field of politics, and I think Brienne's fighting ability is a subtle nod to that fact. But many of them do, indeed, start out as "pieces", and watching their growth is part of what makes them realistic.

I don't consider this to be hateful or mysogynistic on GRRM's part, and I don't think acknowledging this pattern makes us mysogynists either. I'd almost call it the reverse - we are shown women who grow and evolve, overall, at a much faster clip then their accompanying menfolk. Catelyn learns some lessons along her journey - poor Ned never did.

[CryFenril]

I'm actually quite glad to see all the pushback here, heh - it means I'm not alone in thinking certain types of fandom are appropriate to this particular forum, and others are not. And I'm very reassured by the general consensus that the inappropriate ones won't be making an appearance (at least, not an overwhelming one).

Call me paranoid, I was just afraid that the amazing popularity of the show would bring in fans that would fundamentally alter the forums, and not necessarily in a good way. I seem to be alone (so far) in that worry, and that very fact is a comfort. I worry too much.

:read:

[Fate's Bitch]

As for woman-hate here... let's be honest, a great many of the female POVs aren't terribly flattering to the woman in question, at least in the beginning. From Sansa's incessant mooning and wishing, to Cersei's delusional scheming and vituperative, we are given their (admittedly skewed) take on what's going on around them.

It's not til Sansa gets over wanting the world to be a fairy tale that she becomes a mature, balanced point of view that can see the treachery happening around her.

Arya reeks of "cute" until she starts to harden.

Catelyn starts out pushing her husband to make a political move, immediately falls into "grieving lunatic" mode, and only afterward becomes a more mellow, consistent force - and her devolution into Un-Cat is just... weird.

They all (with the exception of Cersei) become more interesting and balanced as time goes on - I like the fact that GRRM allows his women to become as strong as the men in the field of politics, and I think Brienne's fighting ability is a subtle nod to that fact. But many of them do, indeed, start out as "pieces", and watching their growth is part of what makes them realistic.

I don't consider this to be hateful or mysogynistic on GRRM's part, and I don't think acknowledging this pattern makes us mysogynists either. I'd almost call it the reverse - we are shown women who grow and evolve, overall, at a much faster clip then their accompanying menfolk. Catelyn learns some lessons along her journey - poor Ned never did.

The same can be said for the male characters. Jon starts out as a self-obsessed and arrogant teenager. Jaime starts...well, I hardly need to get into him. Ned can be considered one-dimensional at the start. Theon is a dick from the time he kicks the head. Sam's a coward. It's not a pattern that applies solely to the female characters. One of GRRM's trademarks is to introduce what seems like a tired archetype and breathe life into it.

Now if there is a tendency as a community is just harp on the female characters' faults - and ignoring the nuance and growth of those characters - while barely acknowledging the same of the male characters, then is it any wonder that a popular perception arises of sexism among fans?

[Soapbubbles]

Don't have his exact link but he has mentioned it in a few posts on his Not A Blog

Edit: here you go

http://grrm.livejournal.com/151914.html

and

http://grrm.livejournal.com/152340.html

Thank you. :)

[CryFenril]

Now if there is a tendency as a community is just harp on the female characters' faults - and ignoring the nuance and growth of those characters - while barely acknowledging the same of the male characters, then is it any wonder that a popular perception arises of sexism among fans?

Maybe that's because we expect the male characters to be inefficient twits at first...?

Growth of the male protagonist(s) is a standard archetype of storywriting as a whole - but GRRM devotes equal time to showing the same with his female POVs, which is something of a departure.

Female leads are often depicted in fantasy as either being secondary support-structures to their male counterparts (Donaldson's Linden Avery, Tolkein's Arwen), or as heroic strong individuals who are battling against a male-dominated construction of some sort (McCaffrey's Moretta, Gabaldon's Claire).

GRRM avoids these archetypes, for the most part, Brienne again being a counterpoint. It's not often that women are given the same obstacle course as the men to go through, and even less often that they advance through it more quickly than the men do. I for one find it refreshing and like the fact that it stimulates conversation.

[MyDogIsNamedDanerys]

Maybe that's because we expect the male characters to be inefficient twits at first...?

That is a sexist assumption that readers bring in, though. Which is in fact the point being made. Readers bring in their sexist expectations and are then pissed when female characters don't fit the mold they expect and we get pages and pages about how Dany is an idiot who never did anything for herself.

[CryFenril]

That is a sexist assumption that readers bring in, though. Which is in fact the point being made. Readers bring in their sexist expectations and are then pissed when female characters don't fit the mold they expect and we get pages and pages about how Dany is an idiot who never did anything for herself.

So there's no way to win, is there? If we criticize the female characters, we're mysogynists. If we expect less of the male characters from the onset, we're making sexist assumptions.

Who are we allowed to criticize, then? Can we complain that Shaggydog smells bad after hanging out in the crypts for so long?

[Fate's Bitch]

Maybe that's because we expect the male characters to be inefficient twits at first...?

Growth of the male protagonist(s) is a standard archetype of storywriting as a whole - but GRRM devotes equal time to showing the same with his female POVs, which is something of a departure.

Female leads are often depicted in fantasy as either being secondary support-structures to their male counterparts (Donaldson's Linden Avery, Tolkein's Arwen), or as heroic strong individuals who are battling against a male-dominated construction of some sort (McCaffrey's Moretta, Gabaldon's Claire).

Certainly, and that where's I believe a lot of the negative reaction to certain female characters stem from. In fiction, we're used to bitchy stepmothers or noble mothers willing to do anything for their children. That one character has aspects of both is a departure. We're used to the shallow, ditzy teenager being the antagonist, not one of the protagonists who experience growth. On the other hand, scrappy tomboys or strong-willed exiled princesses are familiar tropes so the initial reaction towards those characters tends toward the positive. But at the end of the day, if the fandom is able to embrace and discuss the many other well-written aspects of the books with maturity and intelligence, why not the depiction of female characters?

GRRM avoids these archetypes, for the most part, Brienne again being a counterpoint. It's not often that women are given the same obstacle course as the men to go through, and even less often that they advance through it more quickly than the men do. I for one find it refreshing and like the fact that it stimulates conversation.

Conversation is great. The issue many of us have isn't that it stimulates conversation but the kind of conversation it stimulates - often knee-jerk hatred and casual sexist bashing rather than a frank examination of why such attitudes arise and the cultural expectations around them.

ETA: The way to "win" is not to approach the characters with different expectations based on their gender. It's being aware of one's cultural baggage when reading a text.

[CryFenril]

Conversation is great. The issue many of us have isn't that it stimulates conversation but the kind of conversation it stimulates - often knee-jerk hatred and casual sexist bashing rather than a frank examination of why such attitudes arise and the cultural expectations around them.

Actually, I think that's what we're doing right now - or at least, we're in the "questioning" stage... :thumbsup:

You'll have to pardon me, I took a long hiatus from the boards (was around for the LADL, if that tells you anything) and may have missed a ton of significant stuff - but when, precisely, did we indulge in knee-jerk hatred and casual sexist bashing?

I'm well aware of the Sansa hate threads and the Dany hate threads - but weren't those threads about a particular character, not mass calumny against women as a whole? Wasn't the point of the threads that people felt the characters didn't grow enough, as realistic women characters would? Doesn't that say that, as a whole, the "haters" actually admire women and felt that the characters they were targeting didn't meet their performance expectation?

Or am I missing your point entirely? I'm good at that sometimes, particularly when I haven't had my coffee...

[MyDogIsNamedDanerys]

ETA: The way to "win" is not to approach the characters with different expectations based on their gender. It's being aware of one's cultural baggage when reading a text.

*dingdingding* Aaaand we have a winner!!

So... now can all the people that hate 'shipping, romance, and sex please go get their own thread already?? In return, I vow to continue to stay out of the threads about who is the best fighter in Westeros.

[CryFenril]

I don't "hate 'shipping, romance, and sex". I like romance and sex just fine, and I think 'shipping has its place too. I simply expressed a concern about the 'shipping becoming inordinately popular here with the new show-recruits, and was roundly chastised for stereotyping.

So can I still paddle in your pool, or must I go shuffle off and find another one? I promise, I don't pee in them. I just make faces to make people think I did.

[CryFenril]

ETA: The way to "win" is not to approach the characters with different expectations based on their gender. It's being aware of one's cultural baggage when reading a text.

Consider that this story is set in a medieval time-frame, and gender expectations are by their very nature wildly different than they are now. My own cultural baggage tells me that women are better "round-the-corner" thinkers and conflict-reducing manipulators, and men are better "straight-shot" thinkers and are less afraid of conflict.

I view the books in that light, admittedly, and make judgments on the characters accordingly using that very baggage.

[Xray the Enforcer]

I'm well aware of the Sansa hate threads and the Dany hate threads - but weren't those threads about a particular character, not mass calumny against women as a whole? Wasn't the point of the threads that people felt the characters didn't grow enough, as realistic women characters would? Doesn't that say that, as a whole, the "haters" actually admire women and felt that the characters they were targeting didn't meet their performance expectation?

No and no. After having read many, many hate threads, and deleted a fair few comments from them, I can safely say that the majority of hate for those characters falls squarely into the sexist bingo card. When female characters conform to or work within the strictures of a patriarchal world, they are called weak or deceitful (Sansa, Dany and Cersei). But when they subvert that, they're called uncaring or bitchy (Catelyn-sheshouldbeathometakingcareofRickonnotadvisinghersoninbattle!). Basically, women can never win with a sexist fan unless they belong to the only non-threatening female character type out there: the tomboy. Which is why Arya does not receive the hate that the others do. If you think that all women should be Arya, then you are sexist. (my favorite double-standard is when people slam Sansa for not thinking before acting, but give Arya a free pass for the same flaw.)

Finally, I cannot tell you the number of posts I've personally deleted where someone expressed the opinion that a non-Arya female character should be raped to death because they deserve it. Admiration for women? Hardly.

So, no. Sexist assholes do not act like sexist assholes because they admire women.

[Brienne the Beauty]

My own cultural baggage tells me that women are better "round-the-corner" thinkers and conflict-reducing manipulators, and men are better "straight-shot" thinkers and are less afraid of conflict.

Arya and Brienne, Petyr and Doran, would all like to have a word with you...

[CryFenril]

No and no.

And thus I stand corrected, heh. I guess I missed a heck of a lot of vituperative posts that, in retrospect, I am glad I didn't see.

Genuine thanks, Xray, for letting me know that my stance is made somewhat awkward based on what I wasn't here to witness. I guess I remember the intelligent, well-thought-out arguments and "tuned out" the few blathering idiotic ones that I did come across. I am trying to make my argument based on incomplete information, and I should've known better.

Damn that whole three-year-plus gap thing... perhaps I need to read back a bit more. The thought of combing through thousands of old posts is daunting, to say the least. Eep.

:blushing:

[CryFenril]

Arya and Brienne, Petyr and Doran, would all like to have a word with you...

Don't forget Asha. She hates being left out. :ninja:

Can we include Varys, even though he's technically "altered"?

[TMWNN]

Thanks for this. An an ONTD poster, I'm gratified to read your explanation.

Hey, thanks for responding, and understanding that I am not a jerk (at least, not on this issue). I fear that the many there and on Tumblr who just read that single copy-and-pasted section of one of my posts and not the others I've made in this thread will never be convinced otherwise, though.

Although I would hesitate to put such a stark delineation between fangirls and the more serious fans. As others in this thread have demonstrated, there are several members of ONTD who are also members of Westeros. One can participate in both spheres of discussion. I don't think it's useful to differentiate between the fans who are interested in relationships (of whatever stripe) between characters and those that are interested in the politics because there is a significant overlap between the two.

"All generalizations are false," right? But, at the same time, all generalizations have a nugget of truth in them. Yes, there is an overlap, but nine times out of ten the shirtless-Jon's-abs GIF makers aren't going to be the ones posting in the XXIIIrd R + L = J thread, and vice versa. I am very, very definitely in neither group (23? Good lord), but as a fellow fan I acknowledge their equal right to be part of the fandom for ASoIAF and GoT. As a fan who wants more seasons of GoT, we need as many glittertexters and is-Arya-psychotic debaters on board as possible and giving their money to HBO and other television networks. (Not so much the "[female] is a is a bitch/whore" creeps, thank you, as Xray reminds us.)

[Fate's Bitch]

Actually, I think that's what we're doing right now - or at least, we're in the "questioning" stage... :thumbsup:

Definitely. All too often any posts about sexism, racism or any other incendiary topic are met with defensiveness or outright dismissiveness.

You'll have to pardon me, I took a long hiatus from the boards (was around for the LADL, if that tells you anything) and may have missed a ton of significant stuff - but when, precisely, did we indulge in knee-jerk hatred and casual sexist bashing?

It's more of a persistent undercurrent than anything else. The size and ferocity of some of the hate threads, and the lack of any notable counterpart for significant male characters. It's the level of vitriol some have towards those characters while lionising male characters whose actions are far worse. It's the emphasis some place on an actress's looks while acting condescending about "fangirls" and their gifs of shirtless guys. In short, it's a bunch of little things that add up and might make a female fan uncomfortable, while escaping the notice of most male fans. It's not just a Westeros thing - it's a common feature of pretty much any male-dominated ASOIAF forum or thread, I've found.

I'm well aware of the Sansa hate threads and the Dany hate threads - but weren't those threads about a particular character, not mass calumny against women as a whole? Wasn't the point of the threads that people felt the characters didn't grow enough, as realistic women characters would? Doesn't that say that, as a whole, the "haters" actually admire women and felt that the characters they were targeting didn't meet their performance expectation?

I'm sure the point for some in those threads was that they didn't grow enough. Then there are the posts who act as if the actions of a naive pre-teen girl are the worst sin in the book. There are the regular posts about how Catelyn started the war all on her own and declare her the equivalent of Cersei. There are the posts which gleefully declare how much they hope Euron or Aeron make Dany into a saltwife (nice euphemism for rape there).

To be clear, I'm not claiming any dislike of Dany, Sansa or Cat is sexist, but there are a lot of hatred which raises red flags.

Sexism isn't necessarily about a mass calumny against all women. It can be far more subtle than that. If someone loves all the other characters yet hates Catelyn for, say, not staying in her place at Winterfell like a good wife should, then the reasoning behind it is still sexist. That's the root of it - unrealistic expectations of what a woman is supposed to be. Putting certain kinds of women on a pedestal can be as much a sexist tendency as expecting less of them than men.

[smidget25]

Hey, thanks for responding, and understanding that I am not a jerk (at least, not on this issue). I fear that the many there and on Tumblr who just read that single copy-and-pasted section of one of my posts and not the others I've made in this thread will never be convinced otherwise, though.

"All generalizations are false," right? But, at the same time, all generalizations have a nugget of truth in them. Yes, there is an overlap, but nine times out of ten the shirtless-Jon's-abs GIF makers aren't going to be the ones posting in the XXIIIrd R + L = J thread, and vice versa. I am very, very definitely in neither group (23? Good lord), but as a fellow fan I acknowledge their equal right to be part of the fandom for ASoIAF and GoT. As a fan who wants more seasons of GoT, we need as many glittertexters and is-Arya-psychotic debaters on board as possible and giving their money to HBO and other television networks. (Not so much the "[female] is a is a bitch/whore" creeps, thank you, as Xray reminds us.)

I'm not sure if this will get deleted, but as a direct reply to this poster, I cannot really avoid mentioning other sites and I feel it needs to be said. As an ONTD poster, I think you are wholly incorrect in your assumption that most people on there would not post in the R + L = J thread. From the numerous posts we have had on GOT, the Jon theory has been mentioned a number of times, and a lot posters are in fact aware of it. Just because we use sparkly text sometimes and post memes that we in fact created (aka Stupid Ned Stark), does not mean we cannot debate about the finer points of the series, and have no interest in theories or plot points. I have had a lot of intelligent conversations on there, and quite frankly it's insulting that you don't think we can have fun and intellectual debate as well.

Although I thank you for clarifying your points more, I don't think you should make such vast generalizations on posts you obviously don't know a great deal about.

[Xray the Enforcer]

And thus I stand corrected, heh. I guess I missed a heck of a lot of vituperative posts that, in retrospect, I am glad I didn't see.

Genuine thanks, Xray, for letting me know that my stance is made somewhat awkward based on what I wasn't here to witness. I guess I remember the intelligent, well-thought-out arguments and "tuned out" the few blathering idiotic ones that I did come across. I am trying to make my argument based on incomplete information, and I should've known better.

Damn that whole three-year-plus gap thing... perhaps I need to read back a bit more. The thought of combing through thousands of old posts is daunting, to say the least. Eep.

:blushing:

No worries. Since my job is to crawl through the boards looking for aberrant fuckery, I tend to run across it more often than most other boarders. :lol:

I don't think sifting through the last few years will be very fruitful. In fact, on that path lies madness! :eek: