A Female Dragon? Examining the Evidence

[Tim]

Just now, DaddyFinn said:

Hopefully this will be removed or toned down significantly. I hate it in the books.

 

Agreed. Frankly I will be disappointed if the gender politics are not substantially improved in the show. 

Rand having a harem of girls who have chosen to share him but otherwise be monogamous is in no way important to the overall plot. Rand's relationships with each of them? Sure. The fact that he can feel romantically engaged with more than one of them at a time? Possibly (and Rafe saying he is more comfortable with the notion of polyamory seems consistent with that). 

But most of the stuff that is uncomfortable in the books along these lines is much less important than that even.

How about Shaidar Haran raping female forsaken that disappoint him?

How about the fact that the only same-sex relationships are weird psychosexual domination relationships amongst female channellers?

 

There is really no excuse for the show to be faithful to these elements. 
 

[TheMountain]

26 minutes ago, Skipp said:

 

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MarsAndVenusGenderContrast

 

" The ways of men are by their very nature incomprehensible to women, and vice versa"

It's much more than that or the TV Tropes description. The closest scholarly term is "Gender Essentialism":

 

"Gender essentialism is a concept used to examine the attribution of fixed, intrinsic, innate qualities to women and men. In this theory, there are certain universal, innate, biologically or psychologically based features of gender that are at the root of observed differences in the behavior of men and women."

-Wikipedia

 

Saidar/Saidin being split by gender, embracing the source (feminine) vs seizing it (masculine), souls being gendered, etc.

 

Men and women not being able to understand each other would be part of that, and is just the most blatant manifestation in television/film.

Edited October 29, 2021 by TheMountain

[Morani]

10 hours ago, Beidomon said:

I think you’re gonna really like Rafe’s take on WOT. Happy for you. 

 

As will I, then. Cause I 100% agree with everything that @SinisterDeath wrote. I am sorry that you are not getting the wheel of time you want, but maybe it is time for you to understand that you are a minority, even among fans? You write "woke" a lot, but most of the things you are upset over just sounds like common sense to me. 

 

You say that you do not think that things should change to fit an agenda, and I agree with this to some extent. But look at it this way: Say that you are re-adapting Gone with the wind. It would be really weird to cast black actors as Scarlet, Brent or Stuart, because that would make a lot of the points of the movies moot. HOWEVER, when writing the role for Mammy, you would not have to write her as a black stereotype, cause frankly, we know better now.

 

In the same way, I would be really disappointed if some or RJs very stale gender dynamics were to make it on the show. I do think that men and women are different, and while I am a strong believer in LGBTQ rights, I also think that 99% of all people have a biological sex that partly defines them. I am so sick and tired of the really sad and tired writing of women in fantasy and sci fi (the Expanse being a massive exception, that is writing women done right!). I have 0 interest in the spankings and all the descriptions of bosoms and such. I hope there is sex, but not through the male gaze. I also reject that "strong women" are strong because they more or less behave like men with boobs and a good hair style . This is why I am not keen on them making Min a soldier - the reason she is my fav character is that she is so strong why being the main character who has the least power. All of her friends could crush her like a fly, and she still holds her own.

Edited October 29, 2021 by Morani

[king of nowhere]

10 hours ago, Beidomon said:

Anybody who wasn’t immediately gripped by the prologue is… well… let’s hope WOTTV isn’t being made for those people. 

go ahead, throw your "more fan than thou" contempt at me.

 

but it seems wottv is indeed being made for those people

[king of nowhere]

10 hours ago, TheMountain said:

It's much more than that or the TV Tropes description. The closest scholarly term is "Gender Essentialism":

 

"Gender essentialism is a concept used to examine the attribution of fixed, intrinsic, innate qualities to women and men. In this theory, there are certain universal, innate, biologically or psychologically based features of gender that are at the root of observed differences in the behavior of men and women."

-Wikipedia

 

Saidar/Saidin being split by gender, embracing the source (feminine) vs seizing it (masculine), souls being gendered, etc.

 

Men and women not being able to understand each other would be part of that, and is just the most blatant manifestation in television/film.

yes, and it always felt horribly contrived. like, requiring willful ignorance.

Worst, I associate that to my parents. Who are very good people, but have a very dysfunctional relationship. I don't like seeing my family drama back in the pages.

 

i would say this whole mars/venus contrast looks like a cheap excuse: "instead of trying to talk through our difference, we'll just prejudicially assume we can't because we're different genders and keep on being passive-aggressive to each other". It's a miracle back in the time people managed to mate without killing each other.

Finally, I also feel mildly insulted by the assumption that as a man I must have certain traits and behave in a certain way. While there are some traits that are more common in men and some that are more common in women, individual differences supersede everything else. I don't have to be a walking stereotype.

(though, in that regard, I feel even more insulted by some "woke" assumptions that if I don't fit gender stereotypes I must be some kind of genderqueer. But I'm going on a tangent here).

 

now, don't get me wrong, I do recognize that gender contrast is an important theme in wot, and removing it would destroy any claim of being based on the books.

But I would welcome those themes being smoothed a bit around the edges. Like, whenever a male and female characters try to communicate, they both pick up the idiot ball, and this could be avoided.

[Maximillion]

1 hour ago, Morani said:

 

As will I, then. Cause I 100% agree with everything that @SinisterDeath wrote. I am sorry that you are not getting the wheel of time you want, but maybe it is time for you to understand that you are a minority, even among fans? You write "woke" a lot, but most of the things you are upset over just sounds like common sense to me. 

 

You say that you do not think that things should change to fit an agenda, and I agree with this to some extent. But look at it this way: Say that you are re-adapting Gone with the wind. It would be really weird to cast black actors as Scarlet, Brent or Stuart, because that would make a lot of the points of the movies moot. HOWEVER, when writing the role for Mammy, you would not have to write her as a black stereotype, cause frankly, we know better now.

 

In the same way, I would be really disappointed if some or RJs very stale gender dynamics were to make it on the show. I do think that men and women are different, and while I am a strong believer in LGBTQ rights, I also think that 99% of all people have a biological sex that partly defines them. I am so sick and tired of the really sad and tired writing of women in fantasy and sci fi (the Expanse being a massive exception, that is writing women done right!). I have 0 interest in the spankings and all the descriptions of bosoms and such. I hope there is sex, but not through the male gaze. I also reject that "strong women" are strong because they more or less behave like men with boobs and a good hair style . This is why I am not keen on them making Min a soldier - the reason she is my fav character is that she is so strong why being the main character who has the least power. All of her friends could crush her like a fly, and she still holds her own.

 

Important points you make here.

I guess it comes down to whether there is a shared belief that entertainment should fit with current 'common sense'.  You are correct, I think, that those who think that the current way of approaching topics like gender are the majority.  However, I think most of the 'woke' elements in our society today are as far from common sense as one could get.

But, majority rules, I guess.  We make the world we want to live in by consensus, ultimately.

 

To me, at least - and I can only speak for myself - WoT is not a story about our modern world and I don't see the need for modern day belief systems to be injected into sci-fi/fantasy - especially when it fundamentally changes the story.

 

Still it is what it is - we'll get something that is more socially acceptable to the majority and for that I guess the show has a better chance of success.  It just won't be RJs story - for that we have the books, thankfully.  The series seems like it will be rather loosely based on the books.

I am sure it will be entertaining for those that that can get past - or enjoy - the virtue signalling that I anticipate.

 

 

 

 

 

[king of nowhere]

22 minutes ago, Maximillion said:

 

To me, at least - and I can only speak for myself - WoT is not a story about our modern world and I don't see the need for modern day belief systems to be injected into sci-fi/fantasy -

 

i would agree in principle, and i certainly agree for hystorical fiction.

but wot (and, in general, fantasy) already is injected with modern beliefs. they're just modern beliefs from 40 years ago rather than current beliefs.

It's maybe a paradox, but i'd have far less problems with gender issues in wot if they reflected a middle-age society instead of my parent's disfunctional relationship

 

Actually, middle age values work very well for the purpose of making more babies, which at the time was needed to keep a stable population against epidemics, famine and war. They focus on the baby-making role of women.

And modern western values focus on individual choice and freedom.

the gender values represented in wot... what are they? what do they stand for? Do they have any purpose besides promoting strife?

the just feel disfunctional. I don't know if it's an uncanny valley effect or what else, but they feel wrong in a way that more ancient customs would not.

[Maximillion]

3 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:

i would agree in principle, and i certainly agree for hystorical fiction.

but wot (and, in general, fantasy) already is injected with modern beliefs. they're just modern beliefs from 40 years ago rather than current beliefs.

It's maybe a paradox, but i'd have far less problems with gender issues in wot if they reflected a middle-age society instead of my parent's disfunctional relationship

 

Actually, middle age values work very well for the purpose of making more babies, which at the time was needed to keep a stable population against epidemics, famine and war. They focus on the baby-making role of women.

And modern western values focus on individual choice and freedom.

the gender values represented in wot... what are they? what do they stand for? Do they have any purpose besides promoting strife?

the just feel disfunctional. I don't know if it's an uncanny valley effect or what else, but they feel wrong in a way that more ancient customs would not.

 

I disagree with some of what you said here, agree with other things, but that's OK.  We look at things in a different way.  I, for example, would not relate modern day western values to either freedom or choice, quite the opposite in fact.  That said, I am aware enough to know I am not in the majority. 

Overall, though, there is so much that could be spun into a good discussion/debate from what you said , however would not be WoT specific, I'll respectfully leave it to another place and another time. ?

 

[king of nowhere]

9 minutes ago, Maximillion said:

 

Overall, though, there is so much that could be spun into a good discussion/debate from what you said , however would not be WoT specific, I'll respectfully leave it to another place and another time. ?

 

yes, i agree, we (myself, mostly) are straying away.

back to wottv, i belive we can safely agree that no matter how rafe approaches the issue, he will be harshly criticized for it by someone, and lauded by someone else.

 

which means he's more or less free to do as he wishes

 

EDIT: well, unless he does something really extreme, like making egwene the dragon or making rand a transsexual, in which case he can expect a horde of rabid fans to tear down his home ?

but i really don't think he'd do something that stupid

Edited October 29, 2021 by king of nowhere

[JaimAybara]

There are definitely edges that need smoothing but I feel like when this discussion is had both sides make good points, but talk over each other or switch the point of discussion to avoid acknowledging points being made. Now, I’m not saying this will happen, but in the last 10-20 years often times female characters are elevated by stepping all over the men. Which is disappointing because it’s not needed. To me it appears they are significantly pandering to the hardcore feminists in the show by over highlighting things that should easily speak for themselves and if they allow characters to do this, it will be fantastic. If they aren’t careful it will feel forced. 
 

As for Rand’s love life, it’s kinda funny to me that if we see women in shows that have multiple partners it is seen as “empowering” and if men do, it’s just “patriarchal oppression” or they are “douches”. This train of thought has been gaining steam for quite some time. Also, polyamory is more acceptable than polygamy? I just kinda roll my eyes at this. Not because I think one is worse than other or anything, but to demonize one and celebrate the other doesn’t feel very feminist or progressive at all. And both of them have been considered taboo. So it’s just funny to me that one is being chosen as “better”. Both have existed for a long time. And there are partners in both that it worked for. To me they could have just written the relationships in a more nuanced way. 

 

Examples of knee jerk reactions that hurt story: Ray not needing anyone for anything, she can speak almost every language, fix anything, knows martial arts, doesn’t need coaching with the force, etc. all while being an orphan scavenger that’s likely never flown any ship ever. Then she is surrounded my male Dum dums and grumpy old men, and after searching for one for an entire movie she doesn’t actually need him at all because we can’t have a man teach an independent woman anything can we? If you think that is a good thing to put in a film, just switch the roles and think about how distasteful it would be.  
 

Dad’s/men in sitcoms and Disney movies are either stinky loudmouths or are lovable idiots and it is a trope that they seem insistent on keeping. (Thank God for Tam!)

 

 Now for the other side. Yes there is a lot of weird spanking and gazing in the books. homosexuality isn’t handled very well, and transgenderism is portrayed as a punishment from the Dark One later on. These are things that should be changed and handled with more care. There is also a lot of abuse, that if it is in the show,  should not be conflated as okay or celebrated. (That being said abuse does exist and shouldn’t be ignored entirely) I wouldn’t handle it the way Game of Thrones did though. 
 

Lastly, I’ve mentioned before but the cheeky competition between the sexes could be good fun if they allow both sides to get good digs in, just don’t overplay the hand. An example for this is when Perrin is getting advice from elders in Two Rivers and the advice is actually very similar but flipped for perspective. That always gave me a kick in the pants because it highlights  our similarities while stubbornly claiming how different we are. Also the Maidens of the Spear do this all the time and it is great. The Stone Dogs competed with them etc. had a great back and forth.

 
 

 

 

 

Edited October 29, 2021 by JaimAybara

[king of nowhere]

34 minutes ago, JaimAybara said:

If you think that is a good thing to put in a film, just switch the roles and think about how distasteful it would be. 

must!.... resist!..... urge!.... to go!.... offtopic!!!!!

[Beidomon]

4 hours ago, king of nowhere said:

go ahead, throw your "more fan than thou" contempt at me.

 

but it seems wottv is indeed being made for those people

Ha ha, hope I didn’t offend you. I’m actually a pretty “black sheep” fan because I don’t find RJ and Harriet to be infallible and I really disliked big chunks of the latter half of the series. 
 

But to me the prologue really sets WOT apart with a bang from more generic “battle of good versus evil” fantasy. I mean, it still is good versus evil, Dark One, etc. but with a really terrific and unique hook: this is a struggle that spans ages and reincarnations, and now the supposed savior is also a potential destroyer who has to deal with a tainted source of power that will threaten to drive him mad, and a resulting hegemony mostly working against him even though they are supposedly the good guys (gals).

[king of nowhere]

2 hours ago, Beidomon said:

 I mean, it still is good versus evil, Dark One, etc. but with a really terrific and unique hook: this is a struggle that spans ages and reincarnations, and now the supposed savior is also a potential destroyer who has to deal with a tainted source of power that will threaten to drive him mad, and a resulting hegemony mostly working against him even though they are supposedly the good guys (gals).

you mean you actually understood all that the first time you read it?? ?

congratulations, I suppose. Me, I was just puzzled.

 

Though I have to say, back when i started reading wot i was still a teen, and less fluent in engish than i am now, that certainly contributed.

 

When you describe it that way, a prologue that can evoke that is a good prologue. if only they make it more comprehensible

[Beidomon]

2 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:

you mean you actually understood all that the first time you read it?? ?

congratulations, I suppose. Me, I was just puzzled.

 

Though I have to say, back when i started reading wot i was still a teen, and less fluent in engish than i am now, that certainly contributed.

 

When you describe it that way, a prologue that can evoke that is a good prologue. if only they make it more comprehensible

Heck no, but it was the hook that drew me in! I was like, “woah, this is something different!”

[TheDreadReader]

3 hours ago, Beidomon said:

Ha ha, hope I didn’t offend you. I’m actually a pretty “black sheep” fan because I don’t find RJ and Harriet to be infallible and I really disliked big chunks of the latter half of the series. 
 

But to me the prologue really sets WOT apart with a bang from more generic “battle of good versus evil” fantasy. I mean, it still is good versus evil, Dark One, etc. but with a really terrific and unique hook: this is a struggle that spans ages and reincarnations, and now the supposed savior is also a potential destroyer who has to deal with a tainted source of power that will threaten to drive him mad, and a resulting hegemony mostly working against him even though they are supposedly the good guys (gals).

 

 

The prologue to the TEOTW really got me too.   It was a good example of how old-school fantasy and science fiction (relative in terms of time) was more like throw you into the deep end of the pool and let you figure out the rules as you went along.    Martin did a good job of that that too with AGOT.   We the readers knew that the White Walkers were real in the story even if the characters didn't and we could read the character's storylines with a bit of dread because of it.  Newer stuff tends to be a little too hand-holdy with that stuff to me (mileage can vary on that one).

 

I do like the idea that the show is going to keep prologues in the show.  It is a nice touch (even if I am a little critical of how RJ used prologues inconsistently throughout the series).

 

 

[Beidomon]

7 hours ago, Morani said:

 

As will I, then. Cause I 100% agree with everything that @SinisterDeath wrote. I am sorry that you are not getting the wheel of time you want, but maybe it is time for you to understand that you are a minority, even among fans? You write "woke" a lot, but most of the things you are upset over just sounds like common sense to me. 

 

You say that you do not think that things should change to fit an agenda, and I agree with this to some extent. But look at it this way: Say that you are re-adapting Gone with the wind. It would be really weird to cast black actors as Scarlet, Brent or Stuart, because that would make a lot of the points of the movies moot. HOWEVER, when writing the role for Mammy, you would not have to write her as a black stereotype, cause frankly, we know better now.

 

In the same way, I would be really disappointed if some or RJs very stale gender dynamics were to make it on the show. I do think that men and women are different, and while I am a strong believer in LGBTQ rights, I also think that 99% of all people have a biological sex that partly defines them. I am so sick and tired of the really sad and tired writing of women in fantasy and sci fi (the Expanse being a massive exception, that is writing women done right!). I have 0 interest in the spankings and all the descriptions of bosoms and such. I hope there is sex, but not through the male gaze. I also reject that "strong women" are strong because they more or less behave like men with boobs and a good hair style . This is why I am not keen on them making Min a soldier - the reason she is my fav character is that she is so strong why being the main character who has the least power. All of her friends could crush her like a fly, and she still holds her own.

I actually agree with many of your (and others’) complaints about the way RJ wrote women. I guess the difference is that, rather than get offended by it, I just found all the constant sniffing, bickering, shawl-adjusting, and outright stupidity extremely annoying. 
 

So by all means, Rafe, clean that crap up. But I don’t consider portraying women as normal human beings “woke.” That’s not what I’m talking about, or worried about. 

[Katherine]

"Lastly, I’ve mentioned before but the cheeky competition between the sexes could be good fun if they allow both sides to get good digs in, just don’t overplay the hand. An example for this is when Perrin is getting advice from elders in Two Rivers and the advice is actually very similar but flipped for perspective. That always gave me a kick in the pants because it highlights  our similarities while stubbornly claiming how different we are. Also the Maidens of the Spear do this all the time and it is great. The Stone Dogs competed with them etc. had a great back and forth." @JaimAybara

 

 

That was always so well done. 

The Wise Ones and the Clan Chiefs had great back-and-forths as well. 

Edited October 29, 2021 by Katherine

[Ryan al'Thor]

Here’s a concept, stick with the story that RJ wrote. He built in more diversity and powerful females than you typically see in fantasy, especially for the time. The cast looks great, they did a good job with it. 

[WhiteVeils]

One of the brilliant and innovative things that RJ did in writing WOT is that he made applications of the feminine aspect of virtues heroic.  Men and women both can have courage, and that courage is both in going out/fighting (an active application), and in resisting/enduring (a passive application).  Strength, leadership, patience, wit, compassion, sacrifice...men and women both have all these virtues, and both exhibit them in a traditionally masculine AND a traditionally feminine way, and both ways are necessary and heroic.   That aspect of WOT still hasn't quite made it out there into the broader fantasy/fiction universe, and it would be such a pity if we can't see that aspect of the story because it all gets held back with everyone thinking it's so neanderthal because of stale cliches.  Besides, think how embarrassing it will be to be a fan of this if every TV writer is just writing articles about the 5 spankings per season going on for the shock value of it?  Gah. There's so much I love here. And soooo much that needs to be cleaned up.

[Rose]

On 10/29/2021 at 3:08 PM, Beidomon said:

I actually agree with many of your (and others’) complaints about the way RJ wrote women. I guess the difference is that, rather than get offended by it, I just found all the constant sniffing, bickering, shawl-adjusting, and outright stupidity extremely annoying. 
 

So by all means, Rafe, clean that crap up. But I don’t consider portraying women as normal human beings “woke.” That’s not what I’m talking about, or worried about. 

 

I think whether you're annoyed or offended depends on your personal experience with the issue in question. If it's something that you've been repeatedly hurt by throughout your life, you're more likely to feel strong emotions towards it when you find it in fiction, and that's just a normal part of the human experience. As long as we don't assume "I only find this annoying, so anyone who finds it offensive is overreacting," these differences are great opportunities to broaden our worldview, exercise our compassion, and understand experiences different from our own.

 

Personally, I definitely find some aspects of RJ's portrayal of women  to be problematic. Through no fault of his own--I truly believe he was doing his best--but we all have limitations. But those aspects have nothing to do with whether or not the Chosen One is a man, or whether there are enough powerful female characters in the story. It's in the nuances of the ways they're characterized, the kinds of relationship dynamics they get, the patterns of behavior they display, and the ways in which the narrative views them. And these are all things that would require very minor tweaks with little to no impact on the overall story to fix. 

[king of nowhere]

23 hours ago, WhiteVeils said:

 Besides, think how embarrassing it will be to be a fan of this if every TV writer is just writing articles about the 5 spankings per season going on for the shock value of it?  Gah. There's so much I love here. And soooo much that needs to be cleaned up.

that must be the most compelling argument for fixing the problems with women in the show

[MasterAblar]

The way women were portrayed in the books was definitely at times a bit of a caricature and beyond being annoying could be just silly as well. I think the series would naturally minimize that.

 

As for the whole Mars/Venus contrast thats largely a construct in the books that mainly serves to show how dumb the respecitve sexes are when it comes to each other. However I hope they don't remove that (or at least not entirely) since its very symbolic of the world being imbalanced due to the taint on saidin. 

 

They only real solid differences are when it comes to channeling (pretty much anything to do with saidin and saidar) and I don't see how you could possibly to aways with those, they're far too key to the story.

Edited October 30, 2021 by MasterAblar

[Maximillion]

31 minutes ago, MasterAblar said:

The way women were portrayed in the books was definitely at times a bit of a caricature and beyond being annoying could be just silly as well. I think the series would naturally minimize that.

 

As for the whole Mars/Venus contrast thats largely a construct in the books that mainly serves to show how dumb the respecitve sexes are when it comes to each other. However I hope they don't remove that (or at least not entirely) since its very symbolic of the world being imbalanced due to the taint on saidin. 

 

They only real solid differences are when it comes to channeling (pretty much anything to do with saidin and saidar) and I don't see how you could possibly to aways with those, they're far too key to the story.

 

That's the thing.  The relationship between men and women in Randland is shaped by the history of Randland NOT by our real life history.  I see no reason to inject our modern day beliefs into a fantasy/sci fi story of such depth and background as WoT.  

 

 

Edited October 30, 2021 by Maximillion

[MasterAblar]

25 minutes ago, Maximillion said:

 

That's the thing.  The relationship between men and women in Randland is shaped by the history of Randland NOT by our real life history.  I see no reason to inject our modern day beliefs into a fantasy/sci fi story of such depth and background as WoT.  

 

 

 

For sure, I agree. And I'm against taking away that dynamic. However that doesn't mean that a lot of the women don't act like caricatures at times and that is something that could be improved because it would look terrible on screen to be honest.

[Ralph]

 

On 10/28/2021 at 11:24 PM, swollymammoth said:

Rafe Judkins
I’m a feminist and it’s very important to me that the show is feminist in today’s context. So a lot of those things will be changing

 

So I paraphrased. Big deal. But Rafe is clearly stating that he will be changing anything which doesn't agree with his politics in this regard. If he has this mindset, why would he stop there? Answer: he won't. He'll change anything that he disagrees with. For example, Rand is going to be polyamorous in this series, not polygamous. Rafe has said this. This changes nothing about the story, but Rafe has decided to make this change because one of those words makes him uncomfortable and one doesn't. 

 

I'm totally against incest, but if I'd have been the showrunner of GoT, I wouldn't have taken that out. I don't like gratituous nudity or violence in TV, but I wouldn't have dulled Oberyn Martell's death scene just because I was uncomfortable with it. Rafe has no such qualms, and he's stated it clearly. This isn't gonna be RJ's WoT on TV, it's gonna be Rafe's. 

 

Sorry but this is a false equivalence. 

 

Do you think GRRM is not against incest? The whole point of his story is to shock, both in story and to the reader. Changing that because you don't like shocking people is creating a different story. 

 

RJ tried to write a story based on his understanding of the norms of his time. Some things he updated slightly over time, eg non heterosexual relationships. Some problematic things completely passed him by, eg Mat/Tylin. 

 

Rewriting these points to modern day norms (not woke sermonising, just things that most people nowadays accept) is just WRITING THE STORY RJ WOULD HAVE WRITTEN HIMSELF if he were writing today.