Is Censorship Acceptable?

[Zombie]

I don't think that any minority group - queers, women, whoever - carries any particular obligation to Give The Right Impression in its fiction. A basic element of equal rights is the right to be terrible people without it being taken to reflect on your entire group. In some ways, I honestly think that is the marking of equality: to be taken as individuals. As people.

 

The only point I would pick up on is women as a "minority group". Certainly they are not a minority in the general population, unlike "queers" who very clearly are. Nor in the publishing world - a brief scan of the local lending library and bookshop will confirm this. And certainly, for at least a generation, not in terms of their ability to write from a female perspective in whatever form they wish - assertive, pornographic, iconoclastic, whatever ... because there are no limits for female writers, and if they do get criticised or lambasted it is as individual writers not as "women".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Edited October 26, 2013 by Zombie

[Persinette]

The only point I would pick up on is women as a "minority group". Certainly they are not a minority in the general population, unlike "queers" who very clearly are. Nor in the publishing world - a brief scan of the local lending library and bookshop will confirm this. And certainly, for at least a generation, not in terms of their ability to write from a female perspective in whatever form they wish - assertive, pornographic, iconoclastic, whatever ... because there are no limits for female writers, and if they do get criticised or lambasted it is as individual writers not as a gender.

 

'Minority' isn't always just used to refer to numbers - it also refers to cultural power, so to speak. And yes, there are limitations set on women's writing. Heavy ones.

 

Women win a fraction of writing awards, especially compared to the number of female writers. Their work gets dismissed as 'women's fiction' in a way that men's is not. Some smug sod pops up once a month to explain how 'womenz just can't write substantial fiction like the menz can'. A lot of heavyweight female writers talk about how patronising interviewers are or about critics projecting onto their work because of their gender. A lot of women have had very good experiences as authors. A lot of women have encountered serious issues.

 

There are a ton of queer writers, but you wouldn't say they face no issues around their sexuality - particularly when it comes to presentating queer characters (as do straight authors, for that matter).

 

Hell, the classic example is that you know J.K Rowling as J.K Rowling because the publishers slapped her initials on the spine. Why? Because they thought a female name would stop her selling.

Edited October 26, 2013 by Persinette

[Zombie]

OK, there's clearly a male / female divide here which is outside the scope of this thread. You'll understand I'm unhappy about this being brought into the discussion in your previous post hence my response. So may I suggest we ignore your reference to women as a minority group, together with this post and #51 and 52, and return to the subject which is about "we as gay men and women" as the minority group?

 

[clumber]

OK, there's clearly a male / female divide here which is outside the scope of this thread. You'll understand I'm unhappy about this being brought into the discussion in your previous post hence my response. So may I suggest we ignore your reference to women as a minority group, together with this post and #51 and 52, and return to the subject which is about "we as gay men and women" as the minority group?

 

 

 

So, you admit that there is a massive gap between men and women, but you refuse to talk about it because...reasons? Women were only mentioned in passing as part of a list of examples of inequality in the writing industry. You threw a wobbler at this mention because you thought it didn't exist. Now you see that it does exist but it is irrelevent anyway?

 

Why is it irrelevent? Because you say so? Because you took massive offense at a passing mention, felt the need to stamp down on it and were then informed of your mistakes?

 

I find it interesting that you say it is irrelevent, but only after being told you were wrong. Clearly it wasn't a topic to ignore when you typed your first response, or you wouldn't have gone to the effort of writing an entire post simply to complain abut a single word.

 

As it is, Persinette's post - which was about how a community shouldn't feel the need to send out the 'correct' image, especially when that image is defined by those who are opposed to the community - is completely on-topic. It fully applies to the queer community. She just also mentioned that it applies to other cultural minorities as well.

Edited October 26, 2013 by clumber

[Thorn Wilde]

OK, there's clearly a male / female divide here which is outside the scope of this thread. You'll understand I'm unhappy about this being brought into the discussion in your previous post hence my response. So may I suggest we ignore your reference to women as a minority group, together with this post and #51 and 52, and return to the subject which is about "we as gay men and women" as the minority group?

 

 

 

Sorry, I feel like I'm actually gonna have to call you out a bit here... First of all, Brink was the one who brought up women writers in the first place, and you were the one who commented on Persinette's mention of it, and now you're placing the responsibility of all this on her? Last I checked, everyone was welcome on GA, and if a person thinks their point is relevant to the discussion, that person is permitted to make that point. Persinette's post was not offensive, as far as I'm concerned it was perfectly relevant to the topic, and she did not break any site rules. As such, I don't see why you should feel the need to, I suppose appropriately to the topic, censor her.

 

As a bit of trivia, I can add that the Nobel prize in literature has been awarded to 110 people, 13 of whom were women.

[Persinette]

OK, there's clearly a male / female divide here which is outside the scope of this thread. You'll understand I'm unhappy about this being brought into the discussion in your previous post hence my response. So may I suggest we ignore your reference to women as a minority group, together with this post and #51 and 52, and return to the subject which is about "we as gay men and women" as the minority group?

 

 

 

While I appreciate your generous offer to allow me to have not said something you you disagree with, I think I'm going to continue having said it. But thank you.

[Zombie]

I fear I'm repeating myself, but the subject of this thread is "Are we as gay men and women, in order to normalize ourselves to the greater world, supposed to censor ourselves?" It is not about women as a "minority group". So, to answer clumber, when Persinette continued to develop her views I simply acknowledged the divide and suggested the reference be ignored because this was clearly straying into politics. And to answer Thorn, brink's reference to women was in respect of historic discrimination against women in the time of George Eliot. As you know politics is not allowed in the forums. That's why I am not going to discuss this any further. If you have an issue with this then you must take it up with site admin not here.
 

[Thorn Wilde]

Sorry, I thought we were discussing literature and writing. I had no idea that making observations on culture was the same as discussing politics. As for going off-topic, this is The Lounge, there is some leeway, at least there has been in every other topic I've posted in. If anyone has made this discussion political, Zombie, it's you, and frankly I think you owe the lady an apology. Since you're not a moderator, it is not your responsibility to police anyone. 

[Aditus]

Or you could open a new thread; just to disentangle things...something like 'Are female writers a suppressed/oppressed/repressed (or whatever) majority? and see what happens just like Ron did with this thread, which if I remember this correctly, originated from the 'taboo thread'.. I'm just saying...

[Thorn Wilde]

I doubt that's necessary. I think we're done here. I've certainly said my piece.

[Ron]

Or you could open a new thread; just to disentangle things...something like 'Are female writers a suppressed/oppressed/repressed (or whatever) majority? and see what happens just like Ron did with this thread, which if I remember this correctly, originated from the 'taboo thread'.. I'm just saying...

 

This is not such a bad thread idea. I'm not sure what I could add to it but I would certainly follow it and hope to learn something.

[Thorn Wilde]

This is not such a bad thread idea. I'm not sure what I could add to it but I would certainly follow it and hope to learn something.

 

I don't think it was ever anyone's intention to discuss this particular issue in any great detail. It just got dragged out a bit. I'm reasonably sure we've seen the end of it now.