Why is it that not many girls like Fantasy?

[Grack21]

I'll be honest, I've wondered before if Weis and Hickman have done it.

Ok, now that was in poor taste.

[Sci-2]

Ok, now that was in poor taste.

Oh I like I'm the only one? Come on.

ETA: I'm not saying I'd long elaborate thoughts on the matter, just that it has crossed my mind. Admittedly being sick might have unhinged my filtering.

[Nukelavee]

You people are all trogs.

Not a single mention of CJ Cherryh? Really? PEOPLE!!!!!

I have 2 full shelves of her stuff, she's been a cornerstone of fantasy/sci-fi for decades...where's teh love, folks?

Janet Morris, Lynn Abbey? Mary Gentle?

I don't think any of you are allowed to discuss specific writers until you each read at least 1 book by a writer I've mentioned in this topic, that you haven't already.

So lucky somebody mentioned RA MacAvoy, or things were about to get ugly.

[Grack21]

Actually I have read Lynn Abbey. They were Forgotten Realms novels. I try not to bring those up.

I have 2 Cherryh books in the TBR pile.

No idea who Janet Morris is.

[Sci-2]

Actually I have read Lynn Abbey. They were Forgotten Realms novels. I try not to bring those up.

I have 2 Cherryh books in the TBR pile.

No idea who Janet Morris is.

Lynn Abbey's The Rise and Fall of a Sorcerer King is the best tie-in fiction every written.

ETA: It takes a serious look at the genocidal war that left the more common fantasy races either broken or erased. It also look as how someone young could end up getting caught up in this war and regret it later, and try to have good intentions but still be caught up in the sins of the past.

And I've read a LOT of D&D novels.

[Grack21]

Ohh yeah. Forgot about that one. The ending was kind of odd though.

Well I'm off to play boardgames with both MALES AND FEMALES OMG. No one post while I'm gone. :P

5 imaginary Internet dollars says this is locked when I get back.

[Seli]

You people are all trogs.

Not a single mention of CJ Cherryh? Really? PEOPLE!!!!!

I have 2 full shelves of her stuff, she's been a cornerstone of fantasy/sci-fi for decades...where's teh love, folks?

Janet Morris, Lynn Abbey? Mary Gentle?

I don't think any of you are allowed to discuss specific writers until you each read at least 1 book by a writer I've mentioned in this topic, that you haven't already.

So lucky somebody mentioned RA MacAvoy, or things were about to get ugly.

Only read a short story (Cherryh), doesn't ring a bell (Morris, Abbey), brilliant and/or dense (Gentle), didn't even know she was a she but enjoyed them (Macavoy). But I did read a lot of Tanith Lee, and love what I've read of McKillip.

On the plus side people are trying to collect reviews of the best of the more classical female fantasy authors: http://fantasymistressworks.wordpress.com/2012/04/09/fantasy-mistressworks/

[Sci-2]

5 imaginary Internet dollars says this is locked when I get back.

I'm working on it.

ETA: In that vein, continued warnings to girls about male fantasy fans:

He's into Mieville: Probably a cool guy, but double check is anime collection for hentai. Also, expect him to forward you LOTS of shit about capitalism and its ills.

He's into Richard Morgan: Fuck. As in, get used to hearing that word a lot.

He's into A.A. Attanasio: This guy is probably WAY too in touch with his feelings.

[polishgenius]

leaving aside their significance, popularity and contributions to the development of the genre - they're not top tier in terms of pure, across the board quality, the way GRRM or LeGuin are.

This is really a discussion for another topic entirely, but I do wonder if, in the fulness of time, once the dust has settled on the series and the darker, more risky personal storytelling that it made popular becomes fully embedded in the perception of the genre and all the killing people and sex seen in the same light of cliche as previously belonged to hidden princes and happy endings, aSoIaF will be regarded as 'top tier' fantasy or in a similar vein to the level Malazan is generally held at, except with the distinction of being a watershed of influence whereas Malazan is more a culmination of previous movements in the genre.

I mean, for me, although there are clearly things about aSoIaF that are better than Feist, including prose and rounding the 'good' characters, I like Magician as much as aGoT and more than any of the other books in the series. In terms of books riding on the wave of 'grown up' fantasy it's been the boost for, I certainly prefer Long Price as a whole and Abercrombie's work overall over aSoIaF, just for starters, and as for the overall top tier of fantasy he's nowhere close to your Tolkiens and Wolfes and Mievilles. That's personal preference of course but I just wonder if it'd be held in quite as high esteem if it wasn't seen as the first.

[David Selig]

I am not going to argue about Feist, for although I like his world and have read many of his books, I have never explored more about him or his series online, nor discussed them with friends.

But I would be unable to sleep tonight if I didn't step forward and defend RJ right here, right now. Yes, he has his problems, but so does any author. I did say that I place RJ very close to GRRM on my list, but I actually like completely different things about them. GRRM has always been my favourite because of his characters. But some aspects of the WoT story are better than similar aspects from ASoIaF*. GRRM still wins, and since he has more story left to tell I suspect that by the end of both series, GRRM would be much more ahead.

As for le Guin vs RJ - once again I've only read the Earthsea series, so I am not familiar with the entirety of the author's style. But based on Earthsea alone, I'd say le Guin isn't even in the same category as RJ and GRRM, when it comes to worldbuilding, vast timelines, character development and epic storytelling across many volumes.

Sure, Earthsea is not intended to be epic in the way ASOIF and WoT are - thousands of named characters, tens of major characters with PoVs, and of course many thousands of pages. It's intentionally small scope, each volume is self-contained and focuses on only a few characters. But this in itself doesn't make Le Guin a worse writer than Jordan and Martin. She certainly achieves much more per page in terms of worldbuilding and plot than Jordan - A Wizard of Earthsea is 150 pages, at this point in WoT the main characters were still in Two Rivers. And she's way better than Jordan in terms of prose quality.

Anyway, I personally have always read a high percentage of books written by female authors, but until the last few years it mostly well established big names of the genre like Le Guin and Bujold. Then I decided to make more of an effort to sample female authors who are new to me and have been pleasantly surprised time and time again by books of the likes Valente, Tricia Sullivan, Mary Gentle.

[emberling]

something about male culture that allows for deeper obsessions

Off the top of my head, there is at least one neurological condition (Asperger syndrome) that is more common in males than females and can manifest in obsessive geekery.

There's definitely something cultural, though. I'd look to (among other things) expectations put on girls vs. boys as they grow up regarding what they can spend their free time on. Not what they should spend their free time on, mind you, but what they can spend their free time on without triggering parental discipline or peer mockery. I have a completely unsupported feeling that unless the obsession is explicitly social or explicitly career/school-based, boys in general get a lot more leeway to spend lots of time on one thing.

[Nukelavee]

Umm.

Ok - for CJ, try "The Dreamstone", the "Morgaine" books, "Faded Sun", Merchanters luck...

Janet Morris was pretty big with the Thieve's World series, and partnered with David Drake on a number of projects.

I know it isn't fantasy, but, I love my big fat Dunnet collection.

[Solmyr]

Sure, Earthsea is not intended to be epic in the way ASOIF and WoT are - thousands of named characters, tens of major characters with PoVs, and of course many thousands of pages. It's intentionally small scope, each volume is self-contained and focuses on only a few characters. But this in itself doesn't make Le Guin a worse writer than Jordan and Martin. She certainly achieves much more per page in terms of worldbuilding and plot than Jordan - A Wizard of Earthsea is 150 pages, at this point in WoT the main characters were still in Two Rivers. And she's way better than Jordan in terms of prose quality.

See, thats where personal preference comes into play. For me it matters a great deal how long the book is, how large and detailed the world is, how long the journey of the character(s) is. I don't care about per-page merit. I know that many people are reluctant to start reading large books, especially series of large books (WoT, asoiaf, etc). For me it's the opposite - I hardly ever pick a short book.

[Sheep the Evicted]

My personal theory is that its because Epic Fantasy is by and large written for men/boys by men/boys.

In japan they quite unamshamedly split their comics by the target demographic they are going for, age factors into it (comics for 16 and under, comics for 16 and over, generally the only difference is portrayals of sex and more extreme voilence) but the MAIN factor is gender. Each group has its own tropes, tell me if you, as SFF readers, can recognize the parrallels between Epic Fantasy and Urban Fantasy;

Manga/Anime for Boys;

Focus on fights/battles or intense, overt competition (sports manga). Heroes always go on a quest or journey usually with the sole aim of being the strongest, most powerful person in the world or at the very least the very best at their field. Cast is predominantly male and strongly feature bromances and ubreakable bonds of comraderie formed in tough situations. Relationships (the romantic kind) are played for laughs or are prefunctory though they do tend to become (slightly) more realistic as the manga is aimed at older audiences.

Edit - I also personally think your much more likely to find elaborate, highly-detailed secondary worlds.

Manga for Girls (from tv tropes);

It tends to have female leads, romantic subplots and resolutions involving personal growth. This doesn't mean Shojo is devoid of action, though. In addition to more traditional romance stories, Shoujo can include tales of heroines who kick righteous butt — while pursuing romantic subplots and personal growth.

And that, IMO, is why girls much rather read Twilight then they would Lord of the Rings, because something about these tropes seems hardwired into us.

[Arthmail]

I really think that, especially for geeks, having a partner who is interested in the same things as you is important. We are involved in FANdom. A lot of us feel really strongly about things... like EVERYTHING we discuss on this messageboard. It only makes sense that you'd want to be with someone who understood what you were talking about, much less someone who could chime in and not just roll their eyes at how "geeky" you were being yet again. God, I'm glad that is over.

Cerys, do you consider Ilona Andrews' Kate Daniels books to be werepron? See, I don't. I really only think that way about the books I see at the bookstore like Charlaine Harris and Amanda Quick - what is that stuff? Or does she just write romance novels? I've never actually read it, but it looks terrible from the cover and the titles.

P.S. one of these days I'm going to meet Ilona Andrews - the husband and wife team moved to Austin at the end of last year :D

Alternatively, you can have different geek interests. My wife is a biologist...i bug her frequently about having biogasms, because she'll come home from work and tell me about some aquatic study that she is doing and just go over the deep end for it. It works because we don't have to be geeks from the same dimension.

And aside from my writing, she does not read fantasy.

[DocStrange]

Obsession - dunno, social legitimacy? men have a kind of legitimacy to have a closed off, personal sphere, becuase they're generally expected to be less social and emotional - traditional male stuff is like cars, sports, fishing, wresteling alligators naked, etc, whatever it is your proper 50's manly man is allowed as a hobby, and no acknowledgment that the guy meeting his friends to watch the game is there at least as much for the friends as the game. (3...2...1...Happy Ent shows up and explains that womens evolution on the neolithic savannah to gather nuts and berries meant a predisposition to looking lots of directions at once, while men-the-hunters had to remain focused on the giant sabretooth marmot thing. Seven posts later we're talking about Bakker again and then about The Bell Curve.)

Interesting point regarding social legitimacy although I would add that watching sport with friends can be solely about the social experience (quite a few guys I know don't actually like football but watch because that's where the social interaction is) but I feel this is true for the more casual fan. For the more obsessive sports fan (or the more obsessive fan in general) I would say it's more about sharing your obsession than spending time with friends.

Off the top of my head, there is at least one neurological condition (Asperger syndrome) that is more common in males than females and can manifest in obsessive geekery.

There's definitely something cultural, though. I'd look to (among other things) expectations put on girls vs. boys as they grow up regarding what they can spend their free time on. Not what they should spend their free time on, mind you, but what they can spend their free time on without triggering parental discipline or peer mockery. I have a completely unsupported feeling that unless the obsession is explicitly social or explicitly career/school-based, boys in general get a lot more leeway to spend lots of time on one thing.

The expectation issue is interesting to me. Obsession (at least the kind that doesn't make you money) is generally frowned upon because, well, it's obsessive. That said I'd be interested to know which obsessions were deemed to be acceptable and which weren't. For example; obsessing over fashion as a girl = acceptable? Obsessing over sports as a girl = unacceptable?

Also can you give an example of an explicitly social obsession? I'm trying to think of one but my mind is drawing a blank.

This discussion probably deserves a thread of its own.

[Solmyr]

Manga/Anime for Boys;

...

Manga for Girls (from tv tropes);

...

I'm curious where do you put Death Note. It's the only anime I've ever liked.

[Kalnestk Oblast]

So here's one shitty vaguely evopsych idea (though it is really about society) - I think that men from an early age are taught and encouraged to dominate something. To be the best at something. To win at something. And women, less so; women, I would bet, are encouraged to support something.

Which means that for men it is encouraged to have that monomaniacal focus on that one thing in order to rule it. Having the biggest collection, knowing the most rules, showing the most cheer, being the best American. I don't think that is pushed as much on women in the us. Which speaks somewhat to datepalm's idea of social legitimacy but also says a bit more about why.

[emberling]

Also can you give an example of an explicitly social obsession? I'm trying to think of one but my mind is drawing a blank.

The context is teen girls. The most stereotypical and obvious (and therefore expected) obsession for a teen girl to have is boys. The next would be fashion/shopping/clothes which seems to be treated basically as a social activity among girlfriends.

This is all popular-culture-inspired assumptions/stereotypes because my experience with teen girls approaches zero, but popular-culture-inspired assumptions/stereotypes are where we get many of the expectations we force on others, no?

[Kalnestk Oblast]

Actually, I just thought of an obvious fandom women are allowed to have - crushes on stars. Team Jacob or Justin bieber or whatever - these are allowed and pushed, even. So it looks like many women do do this - just not for those specific genres.

Which makes sense, since those are male dominated anyway (sports for instance). So never mind, I proved myself wrong.