The Character Romance thread (Official)

Well let's take that argument to it's logical extreme (yes yes I know that's a fallacy Radium, you win enjoy your moral victory)

The implication of "write what you know" would be a death knell for any sort of fiction based writing.  Tolkien didn't know Middle Earth, Nabakov wasn't a pedophile, Mark Twain was not a Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's court.

As for why I take things personally, I point to my above arguments, and I'll toss in my jadedness from being on this forum, or rather its predecessor for years.

I don't see how you can't understand my point when you've summed it up pretty well in the next few sentences.

I'm not saying we shouldn't encourage more LGBT writers to share their stories and I've never said having done research with an LGBT person couldn't help(I don't think there should be mandates to hire them, but that's another issue)

And I don't agree with that.  I fail to see why straight writers aren't imaginative enough to write well about people who exist as our neighbors, friends, relatives, but are imaginative enough to write about fantastical worlds.

Because a Fantasy World is the writer's ORIGINAL creation. No one is going to tell GRRM that he wrote King's Landing wrong. No one is going to say, I've been to King's Landing and you wrote it badly. BAD GRRM!

Whereas gay people actually exist. It IS possible for ANY writer to be approached by someone who says I don't agree with your portrayal of gay people. In such a situation it is helpful to talk to gay people to learn what their experience is actually like. 

They can write it. But what I'm saying is it's not a guarantee they can write it well.

If they care about someone who has gone through this then they'll better empathise with it and be able to write more heartfelt characters.

But things that are so personal cant always be just plucked from thin air without the risk of it being hollow. Re: gay dads storyline in MEA.

It's not a Tumblr myth. You give an example of straight privilege in your very next post. Opposite-sex couples don't have to worry about holding hands in public. It's something they just take for granted as a thing to do.

The idea of privilege is about taking certain things for granted because you don't have to worry about them.



(I'm happy to slam Tumblr for similar things, but this isn't one of them.)

So basically you're arguing a very narrow academic point. You're saying it is POSSIBLE for a straight person to write a gay character well. Agreed. It IS in fact possible. 

Now on to the real world.

MEA has badly written LGBT characters. When these writers have proved through the finished product that they do not write LGBT characters well, it is not too much to ask that they do some actual research, which may include speaking to gay people about their experiences and relationships, speaking to and learning from writers who have written LGBT characters well in the past and speaking to LGBT writers to see how they would handle gay characters and relationships. 

If there are 2 kids, one is great at math and the other is getting a D, it is not unreasonable to suggest that the kid with the D spend some time with a tutor who knows the subject. It is POSSIBLE for kids not to need tutoring at all, indeed the first kid doesn't. But the second one DOES. 

@radium, I love your math example.

Phew, this thread has been hard work the last few pages.

I've come to some conclusions:

1. Writing about stuff you have experienced is often more authentic.
2. Writing credibility about something you have not experienced is possible but is more likely with a) skill and researched insight.
3. If material is well written, I'm less troubled by the personal characteristics of the author, bearing in mind points 1 and 2.
4. I quite like pizza pockets, is that bad? 

Eh, people have been talking about privilege since at least the 1930s (WEB Du Bois used it in those days, and I have no idea if it was in use before that, so it may be an even older concept).

Sure, teenagers on Tumblr are running with it these days, and the term has ended up with extra cultural baggage (most of which seems to come from a misreading of the concept), but at its core it's still a useful way of framing comparative experiences.

I've just read through the last 10 pages here, and I haven't actually seen anyone attempting to issue a mandate (and certainly no one imagines that they have that kind of authority). Most of the complaining (which I think is a more fair description than "shrieking") is about suggestions. A writer can take those suggestions or not, they're not losing their decision-making capabilities - if they choose to take those suggestions because they care about the ideas expressed (or just because they think it will benefit their sales), that's not forcing their hand. And on the flip side, there's no one forcing the unhappy customers to buy their products - and that's not issuing a mandate either, that's just standard consumer choice.

Again, you're making assumptions based on nothing but your own personal feelings.

And before you try to argue we're doing the same, this is about the depiction of our own group, so ofc it's going to be personal. However, you have no justification to take it so personally because it's not about you.


Not. everything. is. about. you.


It's not dangerous to think, based on our own experiences, that straight people tend to need help making LGBT stories feel authentic. No, it doesn't mean they can or should be banned from writing things with LGBT people in it, but that, oftentimes, they fail at depicting what it means to be LGBT unless they do prioritize LGBT people's perspective over their own.

And I don't think it's for a straight person to take this personally and decide that, due to hurt feelings (that you've made clear over and over again each time we've had these little conversations), it must be out of some hatred of hetero people.

I wish I could give this more than one like.