This was a fascinating, and helpful video. As an old, white CIS male editor, and small press publisher, I've occasionally found it difficult to easily navigate the waters of inclusivity, for some of the very reasons you mention. We made an effort to make it known that were were looking for diversity, in characters, settings, and authors. Not just because we wanted to promote inclusivity, but also because the sub-genre we publish in is narrow enough, without limiting it, and our readership further by pandering to what the average white CIS male is presumed to be comfortable reading. So, yes, we have had many submissions where a character is queer, simply to tick the diversity box, but as you intimated, it's not always that cut and dried. Very occasionally you realise that a character didn't really need to be queer, and it's never particularly relevant to the story, but somehow it works anyway. It's an instinctive thing, based as you said on the vibes you get from the author. I do worry that CIS authors sometimes try too hard to fit in to what they see as a new set of rules in the writing community, and this can lead to that anti-woke nonsense we now have to suffer. What you said about those books that are set in an almost totally gay world, where the characters stop being queer, because they're now the norm, is also interesting. In some ways it seems related to something that tends to annoy me when dealing with racism... this being when they start cleaning up older books, to avoid offending people, or setting a story in the past, but ignoring the problems a black character, or indeed a queer character might have encountered back then. Both strike me as attempts to whitewash the past (a phrase that I am aware is dripping with irony) and I've never believed that was the best way to help future generations become more inclusive. We need to remember the wrongs that were (and frankly still are) committed, not pretend they never happened. I could ramble on incoherently forever here. I think all we can do is listen to each other, and try our best.
I am glad to be part of the conversation! Inclusion can be a difficult thing since we instinctively have a hard time seeing past our own circumstances and privileges, and there has been such poor representation in the past that we didn't have exposure when we were young... of course that is all the more reason for it now. But also, it is difficult because in real life it is usually the case that being queer is not the most interesting thing about a person. If you have a friend group with a half dozen folks in it there is a decent chance of one of that group being queer, but within that group you don't think of them as the queer one... they're the funny one, the shy one, the adventurous one, the tortured one, maybe even the bully, who knows? So when including diverse characters it isn't their difference that needs to define them, but it certainly shapes them, and that is where often authors fall flat. How does their queerness contribute to their role as the funny one or shy one, etc.? How does their identity give them some experience and perspective that straight characters may lack, and how does that small thing change how they exist in space and relate to others? You can have queer secondary or incidental characters that _don't_ feel like they just get that label slapped on to them, like it is doing something to inform the rest of their character traits and experience. That is why I appreciate the example I give from _Authority_ so much. That character didn't need to be queer, but by making her queer, and giving her the backstory she had about being married and waiting until her child started college before divorcing and getting a girlfriend, VanderMeer gave us all this information about her personal struggles, her loyalties, her sense of what is expected of her, and so on, all these small things that inform how and why she acts like she does in the story. There is nothing she does that is explicitly queer, aside from maybe having a picture of her girlfriend or partner on her desk, but just knowing these few details makes her character so much richer. To be honest, yes, there are folks who seem to be adding diversity just for the sake of it. But in general I think it is in good faith, just poorly executed. The anti-woke backlash isn't due to poorly executed diversity inclusion, it is due to people who have lived their whole lives never being asked to confront the heaps of privilege through which they operate in the world, and when they are forced to do so it is scary and upsetting to them. When you spend your whole life with the implicit understanding that everything should look like you, sound like you, and be catered to your tastes because you are "the norm," you are the platonic ideal against which everything else should be measured... well, anything to question that, whether done well or done in a clumsy way, can feel like a threat, and so you act out like a spoiled child. That is where anti-woke backlash comes from. Sure, virtue-signalling does exist, but I would argue that is probably more prevalent in online spaces than in art that people are putting their blood, sweat, and tears to create. And yes, in an effort to be more inclusive sometimes people can get to defensive, can over-police a space, can do all these things... But the fault of any backlash still needs to be situated on the people who are actually reacting in small-minded and destructive ways. I think another commenter made a good point, in that it _can_ be fun to explore sci-fi and/or fantasy worlds that are radically accepting and inclusive, which does mean essentially erase queer identity, but only when those worlds then still appreciate their diversity/inclusiveness as what part of makes them strong and unique. Ideally we do want to live in a world where sexual and gender identities and presentations aren't questioned, they aren't sources of any sort of friction.... So if you want to portray that in your world-building, then that shouldn't be some stealth thing, it should be something the world is appreciative of, something that is celebrated as making that world unique (and I don't mean necessarily by the characters but by the author in the way the world-building itself is done). I think that whitewashing--or rainbow-washing--historical spaces in the way you mention can sometimes be good, sometimes bad, it really just depends on a lot of other factors. If it is done intentionally and mindfully then that can be really powerful, allowing for marginalized and oppressed folk to claim ownership of spaces they have historically been excluded from. Revisionist history can be a powerful way of highlighting and reflecting on the actual harms and violence that constitute the actual historical record. But if done is a lazy way, or done merely for the sake of appearances, then yes it can suggest that history maybe wasn't as harmful as it actually was, and that only makes it easier for us to not learn anything from it and repeat it. As you say, all we can do is our best...
Your points are spot on! I do want to add, however tangential and rambling, that, in my limited experience, the disconnect often comes down to authorial intent and the author's ability to convey that intent: the oversimplification of story and character may be due to author's writing craft, thus creating these (to put it bluntly) stereotypical and/or performative depictions of the "other". A story does not need to be complex to have complex and nuanced characters. A story simply and straightforwardly told can have complex and nuanced character depictions, representations, etc. As you so well put it, they have to put in the work, and I would extend that work to the craft of writing as well.
That's definitely true. I tend to give authors the benefit of the doubt and choose to believe whatever diversity or inclusive world-building they adopt is done not only in good faith but with the best of intentions, unless I have some specific reason to believe otherwise. That doesn't change the fact that they can do better, but it does help stave off a type of cynicism which doesn't really go hand-in-hand with the kind of person I want to be in the world. Yes, sometimes inclusion is performative and only done to say it was done, but I like to believe that more often the intentions are better than that but are not matched in thoughtfulness, writing acumen, or both. I hadn't really thought about it in that way, but you're right, a part of doing the work to be more accepting and inclusive in general means doing work on yourself, and that definitely extends to improving your craft. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
Excellent topic. Something I see often in writing groups--especially screenwriting--is the suggestion to diversify a work by just changing some characters' gender/race/sexuality. I strongly dislike that approach because that's not representation. Because our experiences aren't the same, and those experiences inform our actions. And as in your examples, it can be a small detail that has a broader impact. Celebrating diversity means celebrating difference. And it's the range of experience and expression that enriches our cultures. It seems that the utopian idea of treating all sexualities the same loses that richness.
Also, thinking about this in terms of BookTube: There was one person I unfollowed because they had read queer or trans stories and remarked that they couldn't say anything about the book because it wasn't for them... and then, on reading Blackouts, said they weren't going to comment because they'd get in trouble for "disagreeing with the lifestyle". This is someone who clearly thinks of themselves as accepting and liberal, but when presented with any queer story that made them uncomfortable, they had a problem with it. Yet they could read, appreciate, and talk about Blood Meridian.
Celebrating diversity and _with intentionality,_ that's key, I think. I very much appreciate that if you are creating a future or fantastical world, in sci-fi and fantasy, etc., genres, why not make a world that embraces a fluid, diverse, radical acceptance regarding gender and sexual identities and presentations? There are times when it can just be fun and liberating to create idealized worlds (or idealized in that way, at least). And, in addition, it can suggest a hopeful future, an escapist world where bullied or ostracized queer folk can want to project themselves, and sometimes that kind of temporary shelter is a perfectly wonderful function of art. But for whatever may be gained, something is definitely lost in this type of "inclusion," and that is something that is worth thinking of, both when creating and when consuming art.
I do hold sympathy for (generally cishet) folks who are afraid that they will say the wrong thing and offend people unintentionally. Those folks do exist, and if someone is operating out of good faith then I am happy to give them space to grow and learn. I know my personal experiences talking about race, gender, and disability are such that I always have more to learn and I am aware that I might speak out of turn or use an incorrect phrase or term. But that is why I do the work to educate myself and apologize when I make mistakes, instead of getting defensive or doubling down on my self-righteousness. However, some people just use this idea, that they're "afraid to say the wrong thing," as a mask for their personal attitudes of grievance, attitudes that "things didn't used to be like this," or that "folks didn't used to be so sensitive about everything." They realize their views may be regressive, or at least out of touch with where things are going, and they use a faux-humility to disguise their frustration with having their privileges questioned. If people aren't acting in good faith I don't really expect any internet discourse to be convincing in any way. If I meet them in real life then I need to decide how much effort I am willing to feed into this potential trauma machine and do the calculus of whether it is worth it or not. Sometimes it is, sometimes for self-preservation it isn't. You're right, it is funny/sad how much easier it is for us, as a society, to feel comfortable/relate to with horrific violence than with situations that challenge our experiences of normalcy/cultural supremacy... And "disagreeing with the lifestyle" is its own kind of thing...
@@arockinsamsara I had given him the benefit of the doubt for a while. It's not a political channel at all, and I understand wanting to avoid politics online (though being able to is definitely privilege). It was the lifestyle comment that got me--even though I think he didn't mean homosexuality, but casual sex and prostitution. But one doesn't have to agree with the behavior of characters in a story to either appreciate it or talk about it. For many people, Mayor Pete is easy to accept, but a street hustler is not.
@@tyghe_bright I mean, your comment about relating to _Blood Meridian_ kind of says it all. It is a rare thing where the internet is an effective means to change folks' mind, so I think un-following someone, just choosing not to take part of their content, is often the best option for self-preservation. When people are working in good faith and willing to be humble and learn than I will speak 'til I am blue in the face, but that is rare in these digital wastelands. There comes a point where I am not actually helping anyone but just actually clinging even more tightly to my own ego, and that is why removing myself from the situation can just be the most skillful course of action.
Your insights on this topic were precise, considerate, and nuanced! We will have to discuss this on “Why Read?” I hope many will watch this video and take to heart distinctions between queer inclusion and erasure.
Thanks! We can definitely talk about this... 12 October is fast approaching, I am excited! I did struggle organizing my thoughts and editing this, because there are some lines that can be very clearly drawn in the sand that most people can agree on, where as other times it really is more about vibes. I obviously want more straight/straight-presenting authors to include queer story lines in their stories, so I wish I could pinpoint what might cause something to be inclusive vs. being exploitative or dismissive, but it isn't always cut and dry. Which is why it _is_ important to think and talk about this things, while always holding a space of grace for good-faith efforts that may not quite hit the mark.
Excellent discussion, Lekden - really appreciate your thoughts on this topic, very considered and detailed. 😊 I'm all for more non-queer authors writing queer characters in their work - I'm firmly of the belief that authors can and should reach outside of their own experience. But it has to be done with care and intentionality. As long as any author is asking themselves the question of why that particular character needs to have that identity and what that facet of their character adds to the story, then I'm more than happy for anyone to try to include more diversity in their work. I think we're fortunate in our modern world to have a ton of resources available to us (as writers) to research elements like this in depth. I think that's what ticks me off when representation in books falls short, it's really not that difficult to find plenty of detailed information one can use when developing characters and world building. Just do your homework! Likewise, there's no shortage of folks to call on as beta readers, who'll be able to offer suggestions as to how the representation of diverse characters works in a story and could perhaps be improved upon. Writing, whilst largely a solitary pursuit, has a pretty significant 'team sport' element to it, for me at least. Sharing work and getting feedback, especially on elements an author is less certain of or has less experience with, is a really important part of the process. I think it shows when an author has done this, and when they haven't! I am admittedly a fan of the super positive representation found in a number of books of recent years - worlds/societies where difference (be that in gender, sexuality, race, religion or anything else) is accepted almost universally. But the books like this that work for me (all are either fantasy or sci-fi) are those that celebrate difference in an intentional way and emphasise how diversity enriches the world. How our differences are so often our strengths. This doesn't have to be the focus of the plot, but it has to have an significant impact on how the society operates and/or how the characters interact with one another. It can't just be glazed over - I love the idea of a world where we're all accepted and equal, where we love who we love and are able to be who we are without fear of discrimination, but the author has got to show me how and why this works for their story and their world. Even better - show me your ideas of how we might eventually get to that point in reality! I live in hope... 😉
Thanks so much for sharing these thoughts! I don't have much to say except I agree on all of your points... And we kind of _have_ to live in hope. That doesn't mean being Pollyanish or naive, of course, but balancing realism with optimism and some sort of trust in humanity. It would be a rather grim existence if we couldn't have some _glimmer_ of that.
Well, it's good that you're struggling with it, I would say. That's better than pretending it doesn't matter. I would say don't put it off too long, as you might learn new and interesting things about your characters if you recognize they are queer. It can be part of their character development instead of something you have to go back and retcon in. Especially given where you live, I am sure you see examples somewhat regularly of how queer folk have to navigate certain things differently than straight/straight-presenting folks. Those little micro things can all add up. It is hard, though, for sure. I was talking to my sister about this as I was gathering my thoughts for this video, and I brought up the dark fantasy series _A Land Fit for Heroes_ by Richard K. Morgan (a cishet author) that has a queer main character, and Morgan had been given all these accolades for writing a convincing and tender queer sex scene, which he felt were misplaced because it wasn't particularly hard to do. As my sister pointed out, the actual sex is the easiest and often least interesting thing about queer folks-- it is easier to write queer characters in sexual situations than it is to write convincing queer characters outside of sexual situations, because then you have to depend on understanding the uncommon struggles they navigate and realities they live in, you have to actually care about their humanity and lived experiences. And that can be hard and daunting, especially when you want to do it well but feel like it is outside of your experience. I think as long as artists are working in good faith, and are being intentional and considerate, then it all tends to work out.
@@arockinsamsara I’m doing research and trying to use it to come up with ways of allowing my character’s asexuality to be meaningful but not dominant. There are no instances of actual sex in the book, but of closeness for lack of a better word.
@@BookishTexan I commend you, that's hard! Especially because it is only relatively recently, maybe the last two decades or so, probably less in the broader community, that people are becoming more aware of asexuality and the many numerous ways it can be experienced. So you don't have as many examples to look to. There is a lot more discussion and advocacy around it now than before, though. There is a wonderful YA dark fantasy/horror story that is coming out later this month, _Don't Let The Forest In,_ that has a really compelling of an asexual teenager struggling with coming to terms with both his asexuality and how that intersects with his attraction (to his best friend). But other than that I can only think of maybe a half dozen stories I have read that featured an (explicitly) ace character in a main or prominent role, so you don't have an abundance of literary forebears to look at. The fact that you are actively thinking about it and researching it, not just slapping a label on a character for the sake of inclusion already shows me that your characters will be thoughtful, a proper type of inclusion, not just inclusion in name or term only.
@@arockinsamsara Thanks for the kind words and the recommendation. I hope I do the character justice and have the wisdom to change the character if I realize I can’t.
It can be frustrating to see that lack nuance even on the level that you mentioned in Authority in stories. The idea that there is some neutral "person" and everything specific is just a coat of paint. So even if there are authors that can write basically whoever they want to, Le Guin is my first thought, I tend to look for authors to represent themselves most of the time. That last bit though, I've definitely seen discussed online, especially for representation of people of colour, because only including stories about struggles takes away from the idea that they can just be happy when given the chance. We really don't see many rom-coms in cinemas focusing on a pair of queer or poc characters. It looks like that Doocy book is gonna be part of a trilogy, so hopefully those other characters are fleshed out a little more and this was just an introduction to wide cast whilst focusing on the main pair.
They're all complicated topics, but I am glad they are being thought about and discussed. I do think there is a difference between including a community and speaking for a community through your art. I wouldn't expect any straight person to speak for the queer community in their art, but that is world's away from including genuine and well-thought out queer characters. It does look like Doocy's _Sorcery and Small Magics_ is the first in a trilogy. I actually enjoyed the story though. It did present this world where queerness doesn't really exist, or where this is a radical acceptance of sexual and gender presentations and identity, at least. So that does erase the lived experiences of contemporary queer folks, in some ways. But the characters, at least the ones we spend a lot of time with, are well-rounded and engaging. It just isn't really appropriate to label it as a queer love story, since there isn't anything non-normative about the characters in the world they're in. That's fine, sometimes. Something is lost in the process, but sometimes more might be gained. As long as that is something the artist is aware of, as long as it is considerations they're taking into account, then go for it. It is hard to quantify, as I mentioned in the video, but sometimes it feels like artists are making a deliberate and informed decision, acting with consideration and intention, and sometimes it just feels like either projection, an after-thought, or something they just haven't put much thought into. It is hard to say what the line is in the sand that makes a story feel one way over the other. It is more vibes than anything specific I can point to, which is a horribly unscientific way to evaluate anything... But that is why thinking about them and talking about them, with openness and humility, is important.
@@arockinsamsara Just based on what you described of Doocy's book, I wonder if an element of heteronormativity would be expected in that world due to the need to pass on magical genes. That could possibly be an interesting driving force of tension. And yeah, it really is just vibes a lot of the time. Anything quantifiable is going to be outright great representation or just awful.
@@JamoboBorg It is certainly possible that there is a heteronormative element to Doocy's world that we don't see simply because of the character we follow and circumstances they are in. It doesn't seem it, but it is possible. There is a lot of the world we haven't seen, too, including whole other countries with entirely different cultures and magic systems, so who know. _Anything quantifiable is going to be outright great representation or just awful._
I'm glad you made this video. It is a discussion that should be talked about more. It has inspired me to look at some of my characters and put a little more work and nuance into them. Thank you!
Thanks! It can be difficult to talk about sometimes, because it can be a moving target, taking new dimensions as culture and awareness grow and expand. I think what will always be true is that if you are genuine and honest, and do your best to recognize that these areas of difference--whether it be sexuality or gender or ethnicity or religion or what have you--are reflections of those characters' humanity and lived experiences, not just mere labels that can be thrown around for some extra spice, then what you create out of that will be pointed in the right direction.
@arockinsamsara very well spoken. I think in the work I've been doing I was very honest with the characters and that's just who they are. But I wasn't as honest with the world and how it would react to them. Even in a world that the vast majority were okay with all sexualities there would still unfortunately be those that aren't okay with everything. And I could do better at conveying a little of that experience and not just erasing it.
I don't know that it is always best to avoid writing about those things.. That is how you end up with art that looks exactly and only like the artist and their specific experiences... The details aren't hard to figure out, at least to some extent, if you do some work. I think more important is simply not assuming your own experience of people that are different than yourself is the same as their experiences of themselves. If you are working under that assumption than yeah, stay away from detail, because it is more projection than anything else. It obviously depends on the character and the role they play in the story you're telling. Sometimes small hints and subtlety are perfect. Sometimes, though, it is that subtlety which leaves it feeling like this aspect of the character is an afterthought, and gives that vibe of "checking off a box" that I mentioned. You just need to be honest, intentional, and considerate in your approach. If folks are doing their best to be responsible then that usually shows in the work. There is, generally speaking, a lot more grace for folks who are doing their best and are humble when they aren't perfect than for folks who are dismissive or defensive.
@@arockinsamsara Most of them must be afterthoughts, as we've seen in the movie. After the author crafted an appealing story, someone instructed, "We need to add some black faces, Asian faces, and more LGBTQ+ characters." There's actually someone in charge of ensuring these representations are included in the content creation process.
This was a fascinating, and helpful video. As an old, white CIS male editor, and small press publisher, I've occasionally found it difficult to easily navigate the waters of inclusivity, for some of the very reasons you mention.
We made an effort to make it known that were were looking for diversity, in characters, settings, and authors. Not just because we wanted to promote inclusivity, but also because the sub-genre we publish in is narrow enough, without limiting it, and our readership further by pandering to what the average white CIS male is presumed to be comfortable reading.
So, yes, we have had many submissions where a character is queer, simply to tick the diversity box, but as you intimated, it's not always that cut and dried. Very occasionally you realise that a character didn't really need to be queer, and it's never particularly relevant to the story, but somehow it works anyway. It's an instinctive thing, based as you said on the vibes you get from the author.
I do worry that CIS authors sometimes try too hard to fit in to what they see as a new set of rules in the writing community, and this can lead to that anti-woke nonsense we now have to suffer.
What you said about those books that are set in an almost totally gay world, where the characters stop being queer, because they're now the norm, is also interesting.
In some ways it seems related to something that tends to annoy me when dealing with racism... this being when they start cleaning up older books, to avoid offending people, or setting a story in the past, but ignoring the problems a black character, or indeed a queer character might have encountered back then. Both strike me as attempts to whitewash the past (a phrase that I am aware is dripping with irony) and I've never believed that was the best way to help future generations become more inclusive. We need to remember the wrongs that were (and frankly still are) committed, not pretend they never happened.
I could ramble on incoherently forever here. I think all we can do is listen to each other, and try our best.
I am glad to be part of the conversation! Inclusion can be a difficult thing since we instinctively have a hard time seeing past our own circumstances and privileges, and there has been such poor representation in the past that we didn't have exposure when we were young... of course that is all the more reason for it now. But also, it is difficult because in real life it is usually the case that being queer is not the most interesting thing about a person. If you have a friend group with a half dozen folks in it there is a decent chance of one of that group being queer, but within that group you don't think of them as the queer one... they're the funny one, the shy one, the adventurous one, the tortured one, maybe even the bully, who knows? So when including diverse characters it isn't their difference that needs to define them, but it certainly shapes them, and that is where often authors fall flat. How does their queerness contribute to their role as the funny one or shy one, etc.? How does their identity give them some experience and perspective that straight characters may lack, and how does that small thing change how they exist in space and relate to others? You can have queer secondary or incidental characters that _don't_ feel like they just get that label slapped on to them, like it is doing something to inform the rest of their character traits and experience. That is why I appreciate the example I give from _Authority_ so much. That character didn't need to be queer, but by making her queer, and giving her the backstory she had about being married and waiting until her child started college before divorcing and getting a girlfriend, VanderMeer gave us all this information about her personal struggles, her loyalties, her sense of what is expected of her, and so on, all these small things that inform how and why she acts like she does in the story. There is nothing she does that is explicitly queer, aside from maybe having a picture of her girlfriend or partner on her desk, but just knowing these few details makes her character so much richer.
To be honest, yes, there are folks who seem to be adding diversity just for the sake of it. But in general I think it is in good faith, just poorly executed. The anti-woke backlash isn't due to poorly executed diversity inclusion, it is due to people who have lived their whole lives never being asked to confront the heaps of privilege through which they operate in the world, and when they are forced to do so it is scary and upsetting to them. When you spend your whole life with the implicit understanding that everything should look like you, sound like you, and be catered to your tastes because you are "the norm," you are the platonic ideal against which everything else should be measured... well, anything to question that, whether done well or done in a clumsy way, can feel like a threat, and so you act out like a spoiled child. That is where anti-woke backlash comes from. Sure, virtue-signalling does exist, but I would argue that is probably more prevalent in online spaces than in art that people are putting their blood, sweat, and tears to create. And yes, in an effort to be more inclusive sometimes people can get to defensive, can over-police a space, can do all these things... But the fault of any backlash still needs to be situated on the people who are actually reacting in small-minded and destructive ways.
I think another commenter made a good point, in that it _can_ be fun to explore sci-fi and/or fantasy worlds that are radically accepting and inclusive, which does mean essentially erase queer identity, but only when those worlds then still appreciate their diversity/inclusiveness as what part of makes them strong and unique. Ideally we do want to live in a world where sexual and gender identities and presentations aren't questioned, they aren't sources of any sort of friction.... So if you want to portray that in your world-building, then that shouldn't be some stealth thing, it should be something the world is appreciative of, something that is celebrated as making that world unique (and I don't mean necessarily by the characters but by the author in the way the world-building itself is done).
I think that whitewashing--or rainbow-washing--historical spaces in the way you mention can sometimes be good, sometimes bad, it really just depends on a lot of other factors. If it is done intentionally and mindfully then that can be really powerful, allowing for marginalized and oppressed folk to claim ownership of spaces they have historically been excluded from. Revisionist history can be a powerful way of highlighting and reflecting on the actual harms and violence that constitute the actual historical record. But if done is a lazy way, or done merely for the sake of appearances, then yes it can suggest that history maybe wasn't as harmful as it actually was, and that only makes it easier for us to not learn anything from it and repeat it.
As you say, all we can do is our best...
Your points are spot on! I do want to add, however tangential and rambling, that, in my limited experience, the disconnect often comes down to authorial intent and the author's ability to convey that intent: the oversimplification of story and character may be due to author's writing craft, thus creating these (to put it bluntly) stereotypical and/or performative depictions of the "other". A story does not need to be complex to have complex and nuanced characters. A story simply and straightforwardly told can have complex and nuanced character depictions, representations, etc. As you so well put it, they have to put in the work, and I would extend that work to the craft of writing as well.
That's definitely true. I tend to give authors the benefit of the doubt and choose to believe whatever diversity or inclusive world-building they adopt is done not only in good faith but with the best of intentions, unless I have some specific reason to believe otherwise. That doesn't change the fact that they can do better, but it does help stave off a type of cynicism which doesn't really go hand-in-hand with the kind of person I want to be in the world. Yes, sometimes inclusion is performative and only done to say it was done, but I like to believe that more often the intentions are better than that but are not matched in thoughtfulness, writing acumen, or both.
I hadn't really thought about it in that way, but you're right, a part of doing the work to be more accepting and inclusive in general means doing work on yourself, and that definitely extends to improving your craft. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
Excellent topic.
Something I see often in writing groups--especially screenwriting--is the suggestion to diversify a work by just changing some characters' gender/race/sexuality. I strongly dislike that approach because that's not representation. Because our experiences aren't the same, and those experiences inform our actions. And as in your examples, it can be a small detail that has a broader impact.
Celebrating diversity means celebrating difference. And it's the range of experience and expression that enriches our cultures. It seems that the utopian idea of treating all sexualities the same loses that richness.
Also, thinking about this in terms of BookTube: There was one person I unfollowed because they had read queer or trans stories and remarked that they couldn't say anything about the book because it wasn't for them... and then, on reading Blackouts, said they weren't going to comment because they'd get in trouble for "disagreeing with the lifestyle". This is someone who clearly thinks of themselves as accepting and liberal, but when presented with any queer story that made them uncomfortable, they had a problem with it. Yet they could read, appreciate, and talk about Blood Meridian.
Celebrating diversity and _with intentionality,_ that's key, I think.
I very much appreciate that if you are creating a future or fantastical world, in sci-fi and fantasy, etc., genres, why not make a world that embraces a fluid, diverse, radical acceptance regarding gender and sexual identities and presentations? There are times when it can just be fun and liberating to create idealized worlds (or idealized in that way, at least). And, in addition, it can suggest a hopeful future, an escapist world where bullied or ostracized queer folk can want to project themselves, and sometimes that kind of temporary shelter is a perfectly wonderful function of art. But for whatever may be gained, something is definitely lost in this type of "inclusion," and that is something that is worth thinking of, both when creating and when consuming art.
I do hold sympathy for (generally cishet) folks who are afraid that they will say the wrong thing and offend people unintentionally. Those folks do exist, and if someone is operating out of good faith then I am happy to give them space to grow and learn. I know my personal experiences talking about race, gender, and disability are such that I always have more to learn and I am aware that I might speak out of turn or use an incorrect phrase or term. But that is why I do the work to educate myself and apologize when I make mistakes, instead of getting defensive or doubling down on my self-righteousness.
However, some people just use this idea, that they're "afraid to say the wrong thing," as a mask for their personal attitudes of grievance, attitudes that "things didn't used to be like this," or that "folks didn't used to be so sensitive about everything." They realize their views may be regressive, or at least out of touch with where things are going, and they use a faux-humility to disguise their frustration with having their privileges questioned. If people aren't acting in good faith I don't really expect any internet discourse to be convincing in any way. If I meet them in real life then I need to decide how much effort I am willing to feed into this potential trauma machine and do the calculus of whether it is worth it or not. Sometimes it is, sometimes for self-preservation it isn't.
You're right, it is funny/sad how much easier it is for us, as a society, to feel comfortable/relate to with horrific violence than with situations that challenge our experiences of normalcy/cultural supremacy... And "disagreeing with the lifestyle" is its own kind of thing...
@@arockinsamsara
I had given him the benefit of the doubt for a while. It's not a political channel at all, and I understand wanting to avoid politics online (though being able to is definitely privilege).
It was the lifestyle comment that got me--even though I think he didn't mean homosexuality, but casual sex and prostitution. But one doesn't have to agree with the behavior of characters in a story to either appreciate it or talk about it. For many people, Mayor Pete is easy to accept, but a street hustler is not.
@@tyghe_bright I mean, your comment about relating to _Blood Meridian_ kind of says it all. It is a rare thing where the internet is an effective means to change folks' mind, so I think un-following someone, just choosing not to take part of their content, is often the best option for self-preservation.
When people are working in good faith and willing to be humble and learn than I will speak 'til I am blue in the face, but that is rare in these digital wastelands. There comes a point where I am not actually helping anyone but just actually clinging even more tightly to my own ego, and that is why removing myself from the situation can just be the most skillful course of action.
Your insights on this topic were precise, considerate, and nuanced! We will have to discuss this on “Why Read?” I hope many will watch this video and take to heart distinctions between queer inclusion and erasure.
Thanks! We can definitely talk about this... 12 October is fast approaching, I am excited! I did struggle organizing my thoughts and editing this, because there are some lines that can be very clearly drawn in the sand that most people can agree on, where as other times it really is more about vibes. I obviously want more straight/straight-presenting authors to include queer story lines in their stories, so I wish I could pinpoint what might cause something to be inclusive vs. being exploitative or dismissive, but it isn't always cut and dry. Which is why it _is_ important to think and talk about this things, while always holding a space of grace for good-faith efforts that may not quite hit the mark.
My thoughts exactly.
@@heman52 Thanks!
Excellent discussion, Lekden - really appreciate your thoughts on this topic, very considered and detailed. 😊
I'm all for more non-queer authors writing queer characters in their work - I'm firmly of the belief that authors can and should reach outside of their own experience. But it has to be done with care and intentionality. As long as any author is asking themselves the question of why that particular character needs to have that identity and what that facet of their character adds to the story, then I'm more than happy for anyone to try to include more diversity in their work. I think we're fortunate in our modern world to have a ton of resources available to us (as writers) to research elements like this in depth. I think that's what ticks me off when representation in books falls short, it's really not that difficult to find plenty of detailed information one can use when developing characters and world building. Just do your homework! Likewise, there's no shortage of folks to call on as beta readers, who'll be able to offer suggestions as to how the representation of diverse characters works in a story and could perhaps be improved upon. Writing, whilst largely a solitary pursuit, has a pretty significant 'team sport' element to it, for me at least. Sharing work and getting feedback, especially on elements an author is less certain of or has less experience with, is a really important part of the process. I think it shows when an author has done this, and when they haven't!
I am admittedly a fan of the super positive representation found in a number of books of recent years - worlds/societies where difference (be that in gender, sexuality, race, religion or anything else) is accepted almost universally. But the books like this that work for me (all are either fantasy or sci-fi) are those that celebrate difference in an intentional way and emphasise how diversity enriches the world. How our differences are so often our strengths. This doesn't have to be the focus of the plot, but it has to have an significant impact on how the society operates and/or how the characters interact with one another. It can't just be glazed over - I love the idea of a world where we're all accepted and equal, where we love who we love and are able to be who we are without fear of discrimination, but the author has got to show me how and why this works for their story and their world. Even better - show me your ideas of how we might eventually get to that point in reality! I live in hope... 😉
Thanks so much for sharing these thoughts! I don't have much to say except I agree on all of your points...
And we kind of _have_ to live in hope. That doesn't mean being Pollyanish or naive, of course, but balancing realism with optimism and some sort of trust in humanity. It would be a rather grim existence if we couldn't have some _glimmer_ of that.
Struggling with this in my current work in progress (actually I am putting off dealing with it until I have to).
Well, it's good that you're struggling with it, I would say. That's better than pretending it doesn't matter. I would say don't put it off too long, as you might learn new and interesting things about your characters if you recognize they are queer. It can be part of their character development instead of something you have to go back and retcon in. Especially given where you live, I am sure you see examples somewhat regularly of how queer folk have to navigate certain things differently than straight/straight-presenting folks. Those little micro things can all add up.
It is hard, though, for sure. I was talking to my sister about this as I was gathering my thoughts for this video, and I brought up the dark fantasy series _A Land Fit for Heroes_ by Richard K. Morgan (a cishet author) that has a queer main character, and Morgan had been given all these accolades for writing a convincing and tender queer sex scene, which he felt were misplaced because it wasn't particularly hard to do. As my sister pointed out, the actual sex is the easiest and often least interesting thing about queer folks-- it is easier to write queer characters in sexual situations than it is to write convincing queer characters outside of sexual situations, because then you have to depend on understanding the uncommon struggles they navigate and realities they live in, you have to actually care about their humanity and lived experiences. And that can be hard and daunting, especially when you want to do it well but feel like it is outside of your experience. I think as long as artists are working in good faith, and are being intentional and considerate, then it all tends to work out.
@@arockinsamsara I’m doing research and trying to use it to come up with ways of allowing my character’s asexuality to be meaningful but not dominant. There are no instances of actual sex in the book, but of closeness for lack of a better word.
@@BookishTexan I commend you, that's hard! Especially because it is only relatively recently, maybe the last two decades or so, probably less in the broader community, that people are becoming more aware of asexuality and the many numerous ways it can be experienced. So you don't have as many examples to look to. There is a lot more discussion and advocacy around it now than before, though.
There is a wonderful YA dark fantasy/horror story that is coming out later this month, _Don't Let The Forest In,_ that has a really compelling of an asexual teenager struggling with coming to terms with both his asexuality and how that intersects with his attraction (to his best friend). But other than that I can only think of maybe a half dozen stories I have read that featured an (explicitly) ace character in a main or prominent role, so you don't have an abundance of literary forebears to look at.
The fact that you are actively thinking about it and researching it, not just slapping a label on a character for the sake of inclusion already shows me that your characters will be thoughtful, a proper type of inclusion, not just inclusion in name or term only.
@@arockinsamsara Thanks for the kind words and the recommendation. I hope I do the character justice and have the wisdom to change the character if I realize I can’t.
It can be frustrating to see that lack nuance even on the level that you mentioned in Authority in stories. The idea that there is some neutral "person" and everything specific is just a coat of paint. So even if there are authors that can write basically whoever they want to, Le Guin is my first thought, I tend to look for authors to represent themselves most of the time.
That last bit though, I've definitely seen discussed online, especially for representation of people of colour, because only including stories about struggles takes away from the idea that they can just be happy when given the chance. We really don't see many rom-coms in cinemas focusing on a pair of queer or poc characters.
It looks like that Doocy book is gonna be part of a trilogy, so hopefully those other characters are fleshed out a little more and this was just an introduction to wide cast whilst focusing on the main pair.
They're all complicated topics, but I am glad they are being thought about and discussed. I do think there is a difference between including a community and speaking for a community through your art. I wouldn't expect any straight person to speak for the queer community in their art, but that is world's away from including genuine and well-thought out queer characters.
It does look like Doocy's _Sorcery and Small Magics_ is the first in a trilogy. I actually enjoyed the story though. It did present this world where queerness doesn't really exist, or where this is a radical acceptance of sexual and gender presentations and identity, at least. So that does erase the lived experiences of contemporary queer folks, in some ways. But the characters, at least the ones we spend a lot of time with, are well-rounded and engaging. It just isn't really appropriate to label it as a queer love story, since there isn't anything non-normative about the characters in the world they're in. That's fine, sometimes. Something is lost in the process, but sometimes more might be gained. As long as that is something the artist is aware of, as long as it is considerations they're taking into account, then go for it.
It is hard to quantify, as I mentioned in the video, but sometimes it feels like artists are making a deliberate and informed decision, acting with consideration and intention, and sometimes it just feels like either projection, an after-thought, or something they just haven't put much thought into. It is hard to say what the line is in the sand that makes a story feel one way over the other. It is more vibes than anything specific I can point to, which is a horribly unscientific way to evaluate anything... But that is why thinking about them and talking about them, with openness and humility, is important.
@@arockinsamsara Just based on what you described of Doocy's book, I wonder if an element of heteronormativity would be expected in that world due to the need to pass on magical genes. That could possibly be an interesting driving force of tension.
And yeah, it really is just vibes a lot of the time. Anything quantifiable is going to be outright great representation or just awful.
@@JamoboBorg It is certainly possible that there is a heteronormative element to Doocy's world that we don't see simply because of the character we follow and circumstances they are in. It doesn't seem it, but it is possible. There is a lot of the world we haven't seen, too, including whole other countries with entirely different cultures and magic systems, so who know.
_Anything quantifiable is going to be outright great representation or just awful._
I'm glad you made this video. It is a discussion that should be talked about more. It has inspired me to look at some of my characters and put a little more work and nuance into them. Thank you!
Thanks! It can be difficult to talk about sometimes, because it can be a moving target, taking new dimensions as culture and awareness grow and expand. I think what will always be true is that if you are genuine and honest, and do your best to recognize that these areas of difference--whether it be sexuality or gender or ethnicity or religion or what have you--are reflections of those characters' humanity and lived experiences, not just mere labels that can be thrown around for some extra spice, then what you create out of that will be pointed in the right direction.
@arockinsamsara very well spoken. I think in the work I've been doing I was very honest with the characters and that's just who they are. But I wasn't as honest with the world and how it would react to them. Even in a world that the vast majority were okay with all sexualities there would still unfortunately be those that aren't okay with everything. And I could do better at conveying a little of that experience and not just erasing it.
@@N.A.Summur It can be hard work, but in my experience it improves the art, so it is usually worth it. Thanks for putting in the effort!
@arockinsamsara of course! And the hard work excites me, because I'll be happy to see the end result.
It's best for a responsible author to avoid writing about things they are unfamiliar with in detail. A label or a small hint can be effective.
I don't know that it is always best to avoid writing about those things.. That is how you end up with art that looks exactly and only like the artist and their specific experiences... The details aren't hard to figure out, at least to some extent, if you do some work.
I think more important is simply not assuming your own experience of people that are different than yourself is the same as their experiences of themselves. If you are working under that assumption than yeah, stay away from detail, because it is more projection than anything else.
It obviously depends on the character and the role they play in the story you're telling. Sometimes small hints and subtlety are perfect. Sometimes, though, it is that subtlety which leaves it feeling like this aspect of the character is an afterthought, and gives that vibe of "checking off a box" that I mentioned. You just need to be honest, intentional, and considerate in your approach.
If folks are doing their best to be responsible then that usually shows in the work. There is, generally speaking, a lot more grace for folks who are doing their best and are humble when they aren't perfect than for folks who are dismissive or defensive.
@@arockinsamsara
Most of them must be afterthoughts, as we've seen in the movie. After the author crafted an appealing story, someone instructed, "We need to add some black faces, Asian faces, and more LGBTQ+ characters." There's actually someone in charge of ensuring these representations are included in the content creation process.