Girls: What in this series appeals to you?

[RhaenysBee]

You might want to check out this thread: http://asoiaf.wester...ew-these-books/

This guy or girl, I didn't check out who started the thread wasn't torn into pieces...

Well, I don't know why this poor fellow here deserved what he got...

Male readers men Boys, what in this series appeals to you?

[...]

That wasn't sarcastic or condescending or anything, was a quite genuine question. What do you like about he series?

Now well, repeating his post word by word only restructuring it for female version really doesn't seem any sarcastic or condescending indeed...

Ridiculous. :dunno:

[Lyanna Stark]

This was/would have been a fantastic answer to the question

*facepalm*

You do realise that was sarcastic right? Because you assume male readers only want to read about rapes, murder and violence while female readers want to read about romance, pretty things and character development.

What is worse, you don't realise that by assuming this you paint all male readers as mouthbreathing idiots who wouldn't be able to spot character development, moral ambiguity or literary themes if it came up and bit them in the ass. So while your stereotypes for female readers (yes, this would be the correct description instead of the insulting "girls") are eyeroll material, what really sticks out is the assumptions that male readers are some sort of inept perverts who are drooling while reading about murders, rapes and twincest.

Now well, repeating his post word by word only restructuring it for female version really doesn't seem any sarcastic or condescending indeed...

Ridiculous. :dunno:

Yes, because illustrating why it was condescending to start with is wrong?

To quote Simone de Beauviour:

A man would never set out to write a book on the peculiar situation of the human male. But if I wish to define myself, I must first of all say: ‘I am a woman’; on this truth must be based all further discussion. A man never begins by presenting himself as an individual of a certain sex; it goes without saying that he is a man.

The terms masculine and feminine are used symmetrically only as a matter of form, as on legal papers. In actuality the relation of the two sexes is not quite like that of two electrical poles, for man represents both the positive and the neutral, as is indicated by the common use of man to designate human beings in general; whereas woman represents only the negative, defined by limiting criteria, without reciprocity. In the midst of an abstract discussion it is vexing to hear a man say: ‘You think thus and so because you are a woman’; but I know that my only defence is to reply: ‘I think thus and so because it is true,’ thereby removing my subjective self from the argument. It would be out of the question to reply: ‘And you think the contrary because you are a man’, for it is understood that the fact of being a man is no peculiarity. A man is in the right in being a man; it is the woman who is in the wrong.

[Kittykatknits]

This was/would have been a fantastic answer to the question

And i'll admit to using girls on purpose, I originally had used "women" except that just sounds weird in reference to a crowd that's largely under 30. Though hell that might not be true either. This applies to guys too. Saying "I met this man at starbucks, we traded numbers" just sounds weird as hell, like you just traded numbers with someone twice your age. "Young man" is usually fine but that can only be said by older men or women or else it also comes off weird. Both examples work exactly the same with genders flipped. The problem is that the female flipside of "guys" is... "girls", which is also obviously the female flipside of "boys". I guess there's "ladies" but... no. That's for coaches and horrible DJs.

Largely under 30....how'd you figure that out?

I'm past 30 and I assure you quite a few people on this board are as well. There are even people in their 30s, 40s, and 50s too.

[Kittykatknits]

Male readers men Boys, what in this series appeals to you?

It's a really quite layered fantasy series that involves following a number of female protagonists on their adventures, it has a lot of character development and focuses a lot on stuff like family, motherhood, female agency and what patriarchy does to women. While there is a lot of violence, rapes, beheadings and war which men male readers boys enjoy reading about more than anyting else, there are too much moral ambiguity, grey characters and non badass POVs: not to mention a distinct lack of gratuitous lesbian sex to really appeal.

I had kind of figured most readers were female. Not that I care of course, anyone can enjoy reading a story involving those things. Just seems like the stuff that would stereotypically appeal mostly to female readers women girls .

That wasn't sarcastic or condescending or anything, was a quite genuine question. What do you like about he series?

I'm out of likes but this was brilliant.

[Dr. Pepper]

This was/would have been a fantastic answer to the question

And i'll admit to using girls on purpose, I originally had used "women" except that just sounds weird in reference to a crowd that's largely under 30. Though hell that might not be true either. This applies to guys too. Saying "I met this man at starbucks, we traded numbers" just sounds weird as hell, like you just traded numbers with someone twice your age. "Young man" is usually fine but that can only be said by older men or women or else it also comes off weird. Both examples work exactly the same with genders flipped. The problem is that the female flipside of "guys" is... "girls", which is also obviously the female flipside of "boys". I guess there's "ladies" but... no. That's for coaches and horrible DJs.

I don't think any woman will find it weird to be called a woman whereas many women might find it condescending to be called a girl. The same can be said for men. Anyone who can read and fully comprehend that the story is more than just rapes and murders and incest is probably in the wo/man category as opposed to the girls and boys one.

[sillent]

Yes I think the post is more insulting towards men than it is to women, because really the last thing I think about when I think ASOIAF is sex & violence.

Also the reason the OP from the other thread wasn't torn to pieces is that the thread was actually posted in a more neutral way.

[Dr. Pepper]

This guy or girl, I didn't check out who started the thread wasn't torn into pieces...

Well, I don't know why this poor fellow here deserved what he got...

The difference between the other post and this one is that the other guy didn't infantilize female readers nor imply that female reader's propriety was shaken by the violence within the series. The other poster was genuinely curious about the difference in perception between the genders while this one is genuinely surprised that women ("girls") could handle such terrible scenes.

[kissdbyfire]

Yes I think the post is more insulting towards men than it is to women, because really the last thing I think about when I think ASOIAF is sex & violence.

Also the reason the OP from the other thread wasn't torn to pieces is that the thread was actually posted in a more neutral way.

Yes, better phrased. But that doesn't necessarily mean this guy here is a sexist troll. As someone said, give him a chance. If he proves to be an idiot, tear him to bits later. How can you tell by a poor choice of words whether someone is an idiot or not? I'd rather assume they aren't until proven wrong.

[SkipDouglas]

*facepalm*

You do realise that was sarcastic right? Because you assume male readers only want to read about rapes, murder and violence while female readers want to read about romance, pretty things and character development.

I did no such thing. I assume male readers are more likely on average to want to read exceedingly violent stories and female readers are more likely on average to want to read about romance. And I rather explicitly said (more than once... the first time being in sentence 4...) that I didn't see anything wrong with liking the story for the same reasons that men do.

Edit: Wait, was the specific little section meant sarcastically? I obviously recognized the post itself was, which is why I excised that little bit- and sarcastic or not, that would be a fine list of reasons to be a fan of the series.

Largely under 30....how'd you figure that out?

A guess, based mostly on book readers i've met in real life and the comments on GRRM's blog. To be fair I did leave room for the possibility of being wrong! Starting to think that misfiring on the age thing was the main mistake in this topic. I'm sticking by the idea that the wording would be completely acceptable if the ages of people responding had been what I expected.

[sillent]

Yes, better phrased. But that doesn't necessarily mean this guy here is a sexist troll. As someone said, give him a chance. If he proves to be an idiot, tear him to bits later. How can you tell by a poor choice of words whether someone is an idiot or not? I'd rather assume they aren't until proven wrong.

I've been pretty easy on the OP compared to some of the other people here. The only thing I've really been asking him is why he would classify ASOIAF as mainly books about violence. His question would make sense if it was coming from someone who has never read the books and wanted to know why this particular book has a large female following when its in the fantasy genre but as someone who has read the books you should know that it isnt just a lot of sword fighting and rape scenes.

[RhaenysBee]

The difference between the other post and this one is that the other guy didn't infantilize female readers nor imply that female reader's propriety was shaken by the violence within the series. The other poster was genuinely curious about the difference in perception between the genders while this one is genuinely surprised that women ("girls") could handle such terrible scenes.

So it's because he didn't use fancy words to inquire about the same thing? And that he wrote 'girls' instead of 'ladies', 'women', 'female forum users'? That's probably because people are rather young around here and he himself is probably also rather young.

Yes, because illustrating why it was condescending to start with is wrong?

Not wrong, condescending. And you can be condescending, but he can't? Because if you are condescending, that's justice, if he is so, that's degrading female sex. Even if he didn't use the proper politically correct words, you could just tell he wasn't trying to be condescending. Why attack him then? He is new, he doesn't yet know this forum so much to know what wording to use not to give offense. That took me some serious debates to learn too, maybe even with you. Drogo didn't rape Dany thread...?

[SkipDouglas]

I've been pretty easy on the OP compared to some of the other people here. The only thing I've really been asking him is why he would classify ASOIAF as mainly books about violence. His question would make sense if it was coming from someone who has never read the books and wanted to know why this particular book has a large female following when its in the fantasy genre but as someone who has read the books you should know that it isnt just a lot of sword fighting and rape scenes.

I wouldn't. But they ARE rather brutal books and they're part of a subset of a genre (beyond just fantasy, they're epic fantasy) that appeals overwhelmingly to men.

[SkipDouglas]

So it's because he didn't use fancy words to inquire about the same thing? And that he wrote 'girls' instead of 'ladies', 'women', 'female forum users'? That's probably because people are rather young around here and he himself is probably also rather young.

To be fair I do think it's reasonable that someone who should be called "woman" in all contexts would be a bit irked by the word choice. But as you said, I was kinda blindly talking to people I felt were roughly my own age.

[Kittykatknits]

I did no such thing. I assume male readers are more likely on average to want to read exceedingly violent stories and female readers are more likely on average to want to read about romance. And I rather explicitly said (more than once... the first time being in sentence 4...) that I didn't see anything wrong with liking the story for the same reasons that men do.

Edit: Wait, was the specific little section meant sarcastically? I obviously recognized the post itself was, which is why I excised that little bit- and sarcastic or not, that would be a fine list of reasons to be a fan of the series.

A guess, based mostly on book readers i've met in real life and the comments on GRRM's blog. To be fair I did leave room for the possibility of being wrong! Starting to think that misfiring on the age thing was the main mistake in this topic. I'm sticking by the idea that the wording would be completely acceptable if the ages of people responding had been what I expected.

No, the age thing wasn't the main mistake. If you look at the forum threads for a bit, you notice that people care about the characters, are fascinated by the history of Westeros, spend quite a bit of time trying to guess future plot points, debating prophecy and more. Discussions about both romance and violence are a small proportion of the thread topics here. You jumped to a lot of conclusions in your OP that were, quite frankly, insulting to both men and women.

Also, for the record, I would've found the use of the word "girl" insulting before I was in my 30s too.

[Lady of Shalott]

Starting to think that misfiring on the age thing was the main mistake in this topic. I'm sticking by the idea that the wording would be completely acceptable if the ages of people responding had been what I expected.

Really? Using "girls" would only have been appropriate if you were addressing a crowd of female children or teenagers, not women in their 20s. I am quite a few years shy of 30 and I also find "girls" condescending, except when used by close friends. I teach and would never describe a 19-year-old (i.e. adult) female undergraduate student as a "girl", just like I wouldn't describe a male student as a "boy". They are young adults, men or women, to me.

[Lyanna Stark]

Not wrong, condescending. And you can be condescending, but he can't? Because if you are condescending, that's justice, if he is so, that's degrading female sex. Even if he didn't use the proper politically correct words, you could just tell he wasn't trying to be condescending. Why attack him then? He is new, he doesn't yet know this forum so much to know what wording to use not to give offense. That took me some serious debates to learn too, maybe even with you. Drogo didn't rape Dany thread...?

Yes, he should have put some thought into his post and why it came across as condescending and offensive to both male and female readers. As I pointed out, while the stereotypes used for female readers were commonplace and degrading enough, the stereotypes used for male readers are worse. Male readers are implied to enjoy reading about rape, violence, torture and incest. That's downright dreadful.

Being new doesn't mean a poster as a watertight excuse to post degrading stuff about either gender.

For the record, I remember your views from the Drogo/Dany thread and it's not that politically correct words aren't used that was the main problem there, and neither is it here. It's the underlying meaning and the expression of that meaning both.

So it's because he didn't use fancy words to inquire about the same thing? And that he wrote 'girls' instead of 'ladies', 'women', 'female forum users'? That's probably because people are rather young around here and he himself is probably also rather young.

How is using "female readers" utilising "fancy words"? English is my second language and I don't have the least bit if a problem not using "girls" or "bints" when describing female readers. If English is your mother tongue, you really have no excuse to not go through at least a minimal amount of trouble to present your arguments correctly.

I wouldn't. But they ARE rather brutal books and they're part of a subset of a genre (beyond just fantasy, they're epic fantasy) that appeals overwhelmingly to men.

You have statistics on that? Last thing I saw (last year I believe), fantasy was more or less equal, while SciFi was overwhelmingly male, although it depends on your definition of Fantasy too.

[Lummel]

... But as you said, I was kinda blindly talking to people I felt were roughly my own age.

You assume too much. Remember when you assume that you make an 'ass' of 'u' and 'me' :)

You've assumed everybody is the samish age as you (not that we know how old you are) you've assumed that men (because all men are the same: it is known) like certain types of things and you've assumed that women (en bloc) like other kinds of things!

Why didn't you start by telling us what you liked about the books and then ask others what they liked? Then you might have got some answered that interested you!

[SkipDouglas]

Really? Using "girls" would only have been appropriate if you were addressing a crowd of female children or teenagers, not women in their 20s. I am in my mid-twenties and I also find "girls" condescending. I teach and would never describe a 19-year-old (i.e. adult) female undergraduate student as a "girl", just like I wouldn't describe a male student as a "boy". (Although given the maturity level of some male undergrads, I sometimes wonder why.)

You're in a position of authority though and in a more formal situation. And like I said before, the issue is the lack of a unique female equivalent of "guys" (because gals is just terrible and is never used). There's no word for 18-29 (give or take) year olds that can be used in informal situations. Girls is that word, but it's not unique and is also paired opposite "boys". You could call a room full of 40 year old men "guys" and no one would give a damn. Best word to use then? Nah. But no one would care. It's a nice and versatile word.

[NewJeffCT]

Male readers men Boys, what in this series appeals to you?

It's a really quite layered fantasy series that involves following a number of female protagonists on their adventures, it has a lot of character development and focuses a lot on stuff like family, motherhood, female agency and what patriarchy does to women. While there is a lot of violence, rapes, beheadings and war which men male readers boys enjoy reading about more than anyting else, there are too much moral ambiguity, grey characters and non badass POVs: not to mention a distinct lack of gratuitous lesbian sex to really appeal.

I had kind of figured most readers were female. Not that I care of course, anyone can enjoy reading a story involving those things. Just seems like the stuff that would stereotypically appeal mostly to female readers women girls .

That wasn't sarcastic or condescending or anything, was a quite genuine question. What do you like about he series?

On Facebook, when I post something regarding ASOIAF, be it on the books, a new episode of the TV series, or maybe some casting decision for the show, almost all the responders of my friends are women. I think only 2 or 3 guys respond somewhat regularly - one to complain about somebody posting spoilers, one to complain about how everybody dies, and the other is a TV show fan who had not read the books. Usually, there are 8-10-12 women that respond, sometimes a few more.

I've found the same on other non-ASOIAF forums, except for one related to role-playing games, where 80%-90% of the posters were male to start.

I think women tend to like the strong female characters and how they have to overcome a lot of difficulties in a "man's" world. Plus, they like certain male characters as well.

[RhaenysBee]

Yes, he should have put some thought into his post and why it came across as condescending and offensive to both male and female readers. As I pointed out, while the stereotypes used for female readers were commonplace and degrading enough, the stereotypes used for male readers are worse. Male readers are implied to enjoy reading about rape, violence, torture and incest. That's downright dreadful.

You are really polarizing this to the utmost negative edge.

For the record, I remember your views from the Drogo/Dany thread and it's not that politically correct words aren't used that was the main problem there, and neither is it here. It's the underlying meaning and the expression of that meaning both.

Oh, I was sure, you would. As for the meaning, you are polarizing it to emphasis on the worst possible way it can be meant. Words can be meant in a hundred ways, that's why writing is never as expressive as talking face to face with somebody. All the mimic, the body language, the tone is missing here. And you are totally right (hey, historical moment, I'm agreeing here :) - this was a joke, don't get angry, please) that one should be very careful what words to choose to manage to express what you mean, no more and no less, and possibly in a way that doesn't offend others. But that takes a lot of practice to learn. Goodness we are learning this for a lifetime. So maybe we should be a little more tolerant and patient?

How is using "female readers" utilising "fancy words"? English is my second language and I don't have the least bit if a problem not using "girls" or "bints" when describing female readers. If English is your mother tongue, you really have no excuse to not go through at least a minimal amount of trouble to present your arguments correctly.

No, female reader is not a fancy word, but it assumes that the user gave a good thought to political correctness before using it. 'Girls' was not trying to degrade or infantilize (I'm so sure I misspelled), it was just a common invocation not taking into consideration that it might offend adult women around here. That has nothing to do with English as your mother or second language.