View Single Post
Old Dec 22 2011, 09:45 AM   #8
Junior Member
Heath's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2011
Gender: F
Fan of: Restoree
Now Reading: Longtime Companions-Harmful to Minors-Unwind
Default Re: When has Anne McCaffrey become answerable to Feminists?

I don't entirely agree with you about the BDSM aspects,

Sorry, read my above explanation to the other poster. I did not say that Anne wrote BDSM relationships, these function quite differently from what she describes. She wrote BDSMer fantasies. Completely different kettle of fish!

She wasn't the only one btw, quite a few writers of the same era and even later danced around the topic in a manner which today is expressed instead the way Laurell K. Hamilton or if you want that Laura Antoniou do. At the time there simply wasn't a way to move that past an editor like that. Instead you had to go about it the way she did.

but she also condemns Meron and Kylara pretty firmly

She didn't write them as a sadomasochistic fantasy either, instead she wrote a pair of greedy, dysfunctional people. So no problem.

I don't think talking about and thinking about how AMC's books have or haven't aged well is an "attack".

I guess what mainly is enervating for me is watching having her worlds dumbed down even further and at the instigation of people claiming they are fans when what I sense is being a fan with the ideas of that world and nothing much more.

it is completely relevant to use her books as a starting discussion point to explore social issues we are still dealing with today.

Whyever? McCaffrey wrote books about a fictive medieval world there(and other fictive worlds)

If you want to discuss social issues then I'd hazard the right point to start off discussions would be actual such issues where you live, no?

the "tentpeg" thing and short a few circuits

I find that discussion mainly laughable. Especially anyone who calls it homophobic or a basis for an evaluation of an author's works.

You bring quite a few of your own biases into the conversation, by the way. I read "feminist" as a slur in your mouth, and "misguided PC police" pretty obviously states your feelings on the matter.

Very definitely.

But...take a moment to step into the shoes of the ones fighting from this perspective, people who consider themselves "feminists", and people who seem to be "PC enforcers"...why are people arguing from these viewpoints?

Let's just not start that can of worms, or we're here for the next half year and still debating. On the whole I have a major problem with people telling me how I have to think. I also have a problem with people who - when you get to meet them or look at them closely - bend so far in the face of the male TPB that they can look straight into their back orifice, yet loudly clamour for more feministic ideals left and right and online (or especially in relation to writing and authors).

In short: before *I* would ask any author to amend a built world, a fantasy or the characters s/he likes writing, I'd have a good hard look in the mirror and ask myself why I still shave my legs. Careful though, that might result in self-awareness and can end in tears.

Yes, I know that sounds harsh. But I'm fed up to my backteeth with snarky-tongued wannabes.

Yet, we see this same young man become horny, without the influence of his OWN dragon, and then demand sex from a woman who resists, then gives in when he continues to press her. And this incident more or less is never brought up ever again in the books...Corana is pretty much completely forgotten. Despite this, Jaxom's still the golden child.

I have, as stated in the other post, absolutely no problem with this scene. I like it, it is hot. I do not at all see it in any way pertaining to anything which takes place in my daily reality.

And I think that THAT seems to be the main problem here. I read SF books in a fictive world. I do not mistake anything written in them for anything real.

If the subtle inclusion of gay green-riding men can be held up as one of AMC's accomplishments in the movement for acceptance of gay people...what are we to make of THIS subtle inclusion? Why count one as progressive, and ignore the other one because noticing it might seem disrespectful to the author?

I have no problem with the inclusion, I'm no particular fan of Jaxom (nor come to that of many of the later books and their characters). But if we accept gay men, what's the trouble with accepting that there are men who coerce?

So there's a pretty heavy pattern of male-over-female dominance, at least in relationships, in AMC's books.

Given that a lot of these books take place in societies where this is the case as per the basic politics, what is the problem?

And just a question aside: how many women do you know currently dominating their male partners (not in a sexual/BDSM way) in everyday real life?

it doesn't seem that AMC was necessarily aware of the BDSM lifestyle

I never said she was into BDSM lifestyle, or that she wrote BDSM relationships. You misunderstood that, as said, see above. She wrote fantasies.

And whether she would have owned up to it ever or not (I doubt that really, she was a very burnt bunny) it's very easy to see if you share these fantasies to some extent.
Heath is offline   Reply With Quote