![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sarillia posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
write_awayThis is a topic I've been thinking about a lot recently but due to the nature of the topic and the stereotypes about people on different sides of the issue, I want to make it clear that I'm not interested in proselytizing and I am interested in hearing from people who disagree with me.
So, a disproportionate amount of media is about white, able-bodied, straight cis men. There is absolutely nothing wrong with writing characters who fit into all those categories. However there is a discussion to be had about how the media both reflects and influences the way we see the world. I'm sure most of you have already seen these arguments.
Personally, even if I didn't agree with them, I would still want to write about people who aren't represented very often. Female characters who are gay or disabled and written well are very important to me because of the way I relate to them and get so happy to see them treated with empathy. I'd love to give that feeling to other people.
Now this is the part that I'm really interested in hearing about: there are people who agree with what I have said so far but who are afraid to get things wrong so they avoid writing about people they don't have personal experience with. I recently said elsewhere that I don't understand people who do this (and then got congratulated for not having massive crippling anxieties like other artists and I laughed and laughed) but I was wrong. I do understand the fear of getting something wrong.
What I don't understand is what makes this different. I get if you are always afraid of getting things wrong on any topic that requires research. But why does this one get defended where others are met with "just get over it and do the research"? I suspect there are two related reasons.
First is the spectre of the "Social Justice Warrior". I admit they exist and as much as I always end up arguing when someone uses this term, I also argue with people who perform the behaviors it describes. I also think they get more attention than they deserve and reasonable people often get slapped with that label. They are not that difficult to avoid if you know how and I would be happy to give some tips for separating the reasonable people from the ones to avoid (tips that don't begin and end with "if they're visibly angry then don't listen to them") to anyone who wants them. The social justice that I'm familiar with is a productive place that welcomes all voices and I would like to see some people get past their gunshy feelings after encountering SJWs and find their way to the more welcoming brand of discussion that I know.
Even putting aside the whole SJW thing, people seem to be terrified of being called racist or sexist or anything like that. So now I'm going to explain the way these things are seen in the circles I run in. I never use words like "racist" as a noun and I don't use them to describe people, only behaviors. Because everyone is capable of doing things that contribute to institutionalized oppressions and marginalization and that doesn't make you a terrible person. Jay Smooth gave a TED talk about this view of things and I can dig it up if anyone is interested.
Now that I've rambled on about something that is only vaguely related to writing, I want to get to one tip for Doing It Right for those who are nervous: have multiple people who fit into each group. It's fine for some of them to be stereotypical. There are always people who fit the stereotypes in real life. The problem comes when they are the only representation of that group in the media. So have a variety of characters. Strong Female Characters(tm) and women who are delicate flowers, gay people who are obsessed with sex and gay people who are hopeless romantics, butch lesbians and femme lesbians, trans people who are extremely dysmorphic and others who are comfortable in their skin but are still a different gender than the one they were assigned at birth, disabled characters who overcome all their problems and others who make peace with their limitations, and everything else you can think of. I don't like advice that says "stop writing x". I prefer "Go ahead and write x but also try writing y and z to balance it out".
I also want to welcome anyone who wants to try writing about issues that I have experience with but has questions to PM me. I have disabilities that include mobility problems, chronic illness, and mental illness, and I'm bisexual and homoromantic. I will do my best to explain my thoughts instead of just telling you what to write or not to write.
So, um, this got long. Thoughts?
I hope I don't regret posting this
So, a disproportionate amount of media is about white, able-bodied, straight cis men. There is absolutely nothing wrong with writing characters who fit into all those categories. However there is a discussion to be had about how the media both reflects and influences the way we see the world. I'm sure most of you have already seen these arguments.
Personally, even if I didn't agree with them, I would still want to write about people who aren't represented very often. Female characters who are gay or disabled and written well are very important to me because of the way I relate to them and get so happy to see them treated with empathy. I'd love to give that feeling to other people.
Now this is the part that I'm really interested in hearing about: there are people who agree with what I have said so far but who are afraid to get things wrong so they avoid writing about people they don't have personal experience with. I recently said elsewhere that I don't understand people who do this (and then got congratulated for not having massive crippling anxieties like other artists and I laughed and laughed) but I was wrong. I do understand the fear of getting something wrong.
What I don't understand is what makes this different. I get if you are always afraid of getting things wrong on any topic that requires research. But why does this one get defended where others are met with "just get over it and do the research"? I suspect there are two related reasons.
First is the spectre of the "Social Justice Warrior". I admit they exist and as much as I always end up arguing when someone uses this term, I also argue with people who perform the behaviors it describes. I also think they get more attention than they deserve and reasonable people often get slapped with that label. They are not that difficult to avoid if you know how and I would be happy to give some tips for separating the reasonable people from the ones to avoid (tips that don't begin and end with "if they're visibly angry then don't listen to them") to anyone who wants them. The social justice that I'm familiar with is a productive place that welcomes all voices and I would like to see some people get past their gunshy feelings after encountering SJWs and find their way to the more welcoming brand of discussion that I know.
Even putting aside the whole SJW thing, people seem to be terrified of being called racist or sexist or anything like that. So now I'm going to explain the way these things are seen in the circles I run in. I never use words like "racist" as a noun and I don't use them to describe people, only behaviors. Because everyone is capable of doing things that contribute to institutionalized oppressions and marginalization and that doesn't make you a terrible person. Jay Smooth gave a TED talk about this view of things and I can dig it up if anyone is interested.
Now that I've rambled on about something that is only vaguely related to writing, I want to get to one tip for Doing It Right for those who are nervous: have multiple people who fit into each group. It's fine for some of them to be stereotypical. There are always people who fit the stereotypes in real life. The problem comes when they are the only representation of that group in the media. So have a variety of characters. Strong Female Characters(tm) and women who are delicate flowers, gay people who are obsessed with sex and gay people who are hopeless romantics, butch lesbians and femme lesbians, trans people who are extremely dysmorphic and others who are comfortable in their skin but are still a different gender than the one they were assigned at birth, disabled characters who overcome all their problems and others who make peace with their limitations, and everything else you can think of. I don't like advice that says "stop writing x". I prefer "Go ahead and write x but also try writing y and z to balance it out".
I also want to welcome anyone who wants to try writing about issues that I have experience with but has questions to PM me. I have disabilities that include mobility problems, chronic illness, and mental illness, and I'm bisexual and homoromantic. I will do my best to explain my thoughts instead of just telling you what to write or not to write.
So, um, this got long. Thoughts?
I hope I don't regret posting this
no subject
Date: 2014-02-09 10:50 pm (UTC)I remember of a few conversations, both online and in person, where one person would say that writing evil or otherwise immoral race/sex/identity/orientation minorities was discriminatory. I, as a bisexual person, can definitely get sick of the "depraved bisexual" trope. But that doesn't mean that all gay/Latino/female/etc characters need to be moral, or good, or puppies and rainbows. They just have to seem like real people. Go ahead and make an evil gay man. Just make that man 1) not evil because he's gay (i.e., the gayness isn't evil, but he just happens to be both gay and evil) and 2) make him more than gay and give him a background and a personality (maybe he's a bad singer, maybe he's evil because of parental issues, maybe he's allergic to dogs).
Those are the two problems I see with depicting minorities. The piece, particularly if the creator is not a member of that group, often reduces the character to only being a member of that group or the creator equates the character's role with the character's demographics. It's not wrong to have, again, an evil gay man. It's wrong to equate being evil and being gay, and it's wrong to make him nothing more than gay. It's not wrong to write a black gang member; it's wrong to say he's in a gang because he's black, and it's wrong to give him no identity beyond that.
There's also the stereotypical behavior issue. Some gay men lisp, but that's so overplayed that you should really just not do it because people will dismiss it outright unless you write it really well.
My personal opinion is that characters, no matter their demographics, should be full characters, not just roles in the story. Approach from both a Doylist and Watsonian perspective. Don't just think about why you as the writer want them there; why would they put themselves there? This not only makes more enjoyable characters, but helps to round out personalities and counteract reduction. If you want a true-to-life character, you need to treat them like actual human beings, not just filler for the plot. That's true for all characters, but it greatly helps produce less bigoted portrayals.