What a fantastic article/theory! My first time through the books, I didn't think much about the gender essentialism but I've noticed it much more in this book. Somehow I always thought Nynaeve had busted through, because that was who she was to me as a character. She was someone who is not moved, but tells others to move. That was my headcanon and on this current re-read I realize how much I was glossing over elements I didn't want to see!

LezbiNerdy, you might just have given me some new head canon...

Thank you! I have recently been having thoughts along these lines and am thrilled to read your ideas. As a CIS male I admittedly did not ponder such things during my original readings. I’m glad that I am being educated. And your ideas are enlightening and strike me as a missed opportunity for the series. 

Hi

I was with you until you said "Nynaeve is my favorite" ? Unfortunately, she is the one I like the least out of ANY female character mentioned in the entire series. 

As for your theory, I never looked at it that way. I'm from the generation that expected men to be strong and challenge forcefully while women worked behind the scenes and actually got things done (for very little credit I might add). 

Like you, I read one book at a time as it came out. I refused to reread the previous books every time a new book in the series came out so I'm guessing I missed a lot. (Not to mention that once Moraine was "killed" (MY hands down favorite character) I began speedreading the books and didn't slow down until the final book and she returned. 

That said I thought I read that it took both halves (male and female) now to combine and use the Power to its fullest. If so, wouldn't that make both genders equal now?

Thanks for describing how your theory about how saidin and saidar wouldn't be kept separate by Jordan ultimately failed.

It reminds the reader about one of the main themes of the series, which is: division doesn't help, and unity includes everyone to create a tapestry, a complete whole. 

He alludes to this in the forces of light and dark as well as male and female. 

As a person who knows both my own light and darkness I could argue that the dual states don't really exist because I experience both day to day. And life is a mix of the two. Jordan intended the point to be made clear: that humans need both dark and light to be whole. He also argues that people need both male and female energy to be whole; to accomplish the biggest feats of power. 

His vision was one of transmutation and togetherness, of bringing the whole to fruition instead of picking it apart in division. The forsaken represent the latter. They want to keep people's minds divided, focused on differences not similarities. 

Readers are free to interpret the series as they wish but it'd be a shame if they overlook the existing themes of togetherness to focus on the divisiveness of exclusion. 

I set my counter argument to you, writer: which is that the show should not try to shoehorn concessions to modern fashion in this theme, but rather doubles down on carrying the message of inclusivity no matter the current circumstances of our world. The wheel weaves as it wills, not as I will it to. 

Nynaeve isn't an aberration because she's strong, nor is she not feminine, nor is she stereotypically male. She's just an individual with enough power and self awareness to be herself, and her motive is to help others. That motive makes her a productive member of society and of use to the wheel, regardless of her sexuality, gender etc. 

The wheel weaves a universe and populates it with diversity to tell a story. I can't agree that the show should tackle stereotyoes using its own voice because RJ had already done so, and I'd prefer the show to authentically convey his ideas of unity instead of trying to concede to fashion. 

Great analysis! I've struggled like you, with the relentless-feeling way that Jordan drives home the division between genders throughout the series. 

I've wondered if he had an axe to grind; if he was truly blind to how extreme it felt... 

Your theory about Nyn would have been really really interesting! Imagine the way things would have cracked open if it turned out to not be your genitalia that determined which power you could tap into!

The thought that Jordan was intentionally emphasizing the gender battle in Randland to present a critique of the "men are from mars..." attitude that's so strong in our culture is a comforting one.  He clearly wanted to show the gender battle as something that was holding their society back.

I recently re-read Philippa Gregory's "Women of the Cousin's War" (The "War of the Roses" is a later XIX c. appellation. Apparantly it was known by the name in the book's title back in the XVth c.). The book is not an historical novel which Gregory has been known for writing but an actual history book.

What really interested me is Gregory's introduction to this book. Within it she says that women and their hi/stories have been side-lined for the most part in the past because men mostly ruled and held posts of power, the chroniclers were pretty much all men too, and many of them monks too, weighed down with christianity's misogynistic canon regarding women. as an aside if you even look at the name/noun "woman" etymologically it comes from the masculine noun wīfman in OE (wifeman in ModE).

She goes on to state that the later historians, like the contemporaneous chroniclers, have all been men too, and it has only been in the last seventy years that women historians have started to come to the fore, and many of them have searched out the famous women of history (Tracy Borman's "Matilda Wife of the Conqueror" is a fine example). She states how difficult it can be to find their quotidian happenings because of their near invisibility in the historical records. But their histories can be found. 

I have always been interested in the stories of historical figures, of those who held power, and especially the women who held power, because their stories are just as important as men's stories are, if not in some cases even moreso, as a woman attaining power in a man's world takes an exceptional character and intelligence in many cases. This is partly why the Wheel of Time was so engrossing for me to read and re-read: our world where the taint on saidin has rendered women for the most part, across nearly the whole board, more powerful than men.

I also have enjoyed Steven Erikson's "Malazan Book of the Fallen". This is another epic world that gives women an equal footing with its men. Erikson has dragged the fantasy genre [sic] into the twenty-first century. The first book in this vast series is "Gardens of the Moon".  ?

Interesting viewpoint, full of deep thought.

With any narrative, the reader can filter information and theories to their own tastes. Robert Jordan was a man writing his internal version of male-female dynamics, as was his due as the writer. And I believe the surrender requirement is difficult for many readers. I also have my own theory.

Anger is Surrendering.

Personally, I have always tried my hardest to constrain myself, my words, my thoughts, but especially my anger. However at times the only thing I could do was let myself get angry. It wasn't something I willingly grabbed onto, but instead something that crashes into you as if to sweep you away. If you do not surrender to your anger, let it in to run it's course, it will fester and turn ugly.

Striking out at another person, to me, is also giving up control of a physical situation. As long as you do not act, or react physically, you maintain control of the interaction. It's the fundamental part of pacifism (the way of the leaf): strength through non-violence. An action may ultimately be necessary but once you let it out, you no longer have full control if the outcome. That to me, action, is a form of surrender. 

I see this in the WOT. The females are taught to be calm and let the power in, whereas the males are taught to reach out and grab it. However, you'll note that the males are not instructed to get angry, just that they are required to control it once it is in them. There is a barrier for both methods, and neither could be considered easy or comfortable when first learning.

Though WOT may appear to be commentary on the sexes, it is just one man's perspective and not the reality of the our world.

I.. do not have the same issues that come up here that you have Lezbi.

Saidin and Saidar, for me, at least, show how men and women learn to tap those abilities are pretty much a metaphor for how boys and girls learn that there exist differences between them. A boys hands are different from a girls hands, once puberty ends, for example.

A boy runs and walks different form how a girl runs and walks, as well, once puberty development is constant, because a boy has to learn to protect what is developing, just as much as a girl has to. I do not know what a girl has to learn, but as a man, I do know what I had to learn.

Because the voice shifts alone were embarrassing, going by my experience at school as a kid, and mine started at a very early age, and was the first sign of puberty beginning. In fact, I was the first boy to start that development of my age group. 

As they come to learn about those differences, they each learn that, for example, one boy or man is unique from any other boy or man he will encounter in his lifetime, and one girl or woman is unique from any other girl or woman as well. 

These differences are on what each boy or girl likes or dislikes, and these carry through each life.

Experiences and relationships with others and the world around them throughout their lives changes these even more.

Then there is what each boy or girl is skilled at and develops in over their lifetimes. 

For example, as a boy, I was an avid reader and a budding writer at school, but sucked at sport due to being sickly and was an average student. As a result, I was one of the top readers, where I could read at 5 what a 14 year old could, and at the top for my writing among my pears, but was awful at maths, where I was at the bottom. I could not go past basic sums, until I was an adult at 23, and at the same time, had the instinct to protect vital parts of my body, like my head from a very young age.

My dead sister, by comparison at the same age was an avid reader and a gifted cricket player, and she was a top student. She never needed any help with her school work. She was top at reading, writing and maths, in addition to being the top cricket player when she used to play Saturday morning cricket. In addition, she lacked the natural instinct to protect her body, like her head, from injury.

These differences between my sister and me show how life determines what happens as we lived our lives. 

Sadly, my sister did not get the chance to live that life, because of circumstances and one vital difference between us cut that life short.

On 12/26/2020 at 6:51 PM, Charles Townsend said:

Anger is Surrendering.

 

Personally, I have always tried my hardest to constrain myself, my words, my thoughts, but especially my anger. However at times the only thing I could do was let myself get angry. It wasn't something I willingly grabbed onto, but instead something that crashes into you as if to sweep you away. If you do not surrender to your anger, let it in to run it's course, it will fester and turn ugly.

 

 

 

Excellent point about anger festering. And anger is not always bad--there is such a thing as righteous anger.

On 1/12/2021 at 9:29 AM, wotfan4472 said:

I.. do not have the same issues that come up here that you have Lezbi.

Saidin and Saidar, for me, at least, show how men and women learn to tap those abilities are pretty much a metaphor for how boys and girls learn that there exist differences between them. A boys hands are different from a girls hands, once puberty ends, for example.

 

A boy runs and walks different form how a girl runs and walks, as well, once puberty development is constant, because a boy has to learn to protect what is developing, just as much as a girl has to. I do not know what a girl has to learn, but as a man, I do know what I had to learn.

 

 

I agree. I did not have the problems with the gender issues in WoT either. More often than not, it was a source of amusement to me because it sounded so much like the way men and women talk about each other in real life. Remember Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus? Generally speaking, men and women are different, physically, mentally and emotionally. And that's why we complement and complete each other. I know there are exceptions, as Lesbi Nerdy said, but to have exceptions you have to have rules. Stereotypes develop from observation of commonalities among a given population

(be it humans, animals, or whatever).

Regarding Jordan's use of gender, the fact that saidar and saidin are so different but produce the greatest results when used together I think speaks to the fact that no matter how different we are, we are best when we work together and allow our differences to compliment each other rather than divide.

Furthermore, I think Lezbi Nerdy is only focusing on one aspect of gender in WoT. In the Aiel culture, men and women are absolutely equal, and in the case of Wise Ones, women might actually have the greater power. Not to mention that when a man has 2 wives, he has no say in how that relationship works.

Domani women are the best traders in the land, and among the Sea Folk it's the women who are the mistresses of the ships and the men the masters of trade, and their marriage customs balance authority between husband and wife.

Among the Seanchan, I could not see any difference in authority or the way men and women approached positions of leadership. Women could be ship captains, military and political leaders and be every bit as tough as the men.

On the whole, I think their is much more gender diversity than Lesby Nerdy gives Jordan credit for, but of course different things stand out to different readers.

On 1/12/2021 at 6:29 AM, wotfan4472 said:

are pretty much a metaphor for how boys and girls learn that there exist differences between them

This sounds pretty much exactly like "gender essentialism."  There's a Wikipedia article that begins to describe the various criticisms of this that various learned people have: 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_essentialism

 

Considering the Wheel Of Time is an example of how division of any sort can cause destruction, with how our world is going, we are not far from following suit.

Because experts in pretty much all fields (including food and water) nowadays are behaving like the Forsaken.

The experts discussing how children should or should not do things, or learn things after kicking the parents out of the children's lives is the start of a very, very slippery slope to what Mesaana did, and a warning not to follow, and one snapshot of what is happening.

As another example, coming from a nation with the Queen as Head Of State, being New Zealand, Meghan's interview with Oprah screamed Lanfear, and Harry screams a Rand outcome with her. Remember Moiraine's letter?

One outcome was that.

A couple not happy because they are not going to be King and Queen, with Harry as Head Of State of 16 Realms. I am surprised by how many real life parallels I have seen in the past 3 years. It is worrying with how much of the Shadow I am seeing playing out, at all levels. I fight it as much as I can, but....woof.

As a cis male, I have to say that I'm definitely very much bothered by the hard divide between the sexes. I'm currently making my way through The Lord of Chaos, and increasingly wishing someone would just "break the pattern", so to speak. So much that I explicitly googled for an article about it.

There's a lot to be praised about how important, powerful and independent the women are in the story, but about half of their thoughts and dialogue, if not more, is always about men and love - and the reverse is hardly true. So although both men and women are constrained to pre-determined roles of violence and manipulation (which, to be fair, serves neither), I can't help but still feel like the storytelling is rather sexist in the way it assigns gender traits so stereotypically, when the stereotypical traits are all made up by male writers.

Still, assuming best intentions, it definitely works to get people thinking.

Quite a long time since I posted here, but I agree that thinking and conversation is important.

At the end of the day, many issues are being discussed that have never been discussed before.

It is a legacy of these books that we can have discussions of these issues, because we all read examples of both how things went really well, and how things went really bad. All of it based on peoples choices through their lives in the world they lived.

I found this blog post by specifically searching for "gender essentialism and Wheel of Time."
I have been reading these books since the 90s, and for me, this aspect of it taints the whole experience. I use that word very intentionally, because it feels exactly like a sliminess inextricably enmeshed with a source of joy.
The idea that one set of humans has access to an inner experience that is completely inaccessible to the other half is absurd. Can intersex people not channel? I suppose the answer is, they just don't exist in this world. Like gay/bisexual/trans people.  
A lot of the commenters here don't seem to understand what is being critiqued. 

On 9/19/2021 at 12:19 AM, Riain said:

The idea that one set of humans has access to an inner experience that is completely inaccessible to the other half is absurd. Can intersex people not channel? I suppose the answer is, they just don't exist in this world. Like gay/bisexual/trans people.

For someone whose been reading these books a long time, you sure have missed a lot, like Galina Sedai, who can channel but is gay, as well as those Aes Sedai who had pillow friends as novices/accepted and then switch to liking men when they are raised to full sisters. Additionally, men do have access to the One Power and the joy it provides, but was tainted by an evil source. You must be reading another series.