[Epiph]

Ain't_It_Just_, on Oct 26 2008, 01:35 AM, said:

Sirryn Kanar was gay, as I recall. Yet another reason for me to hate him.

That's exactly the point that zwit was making. Yes, he is gay, but his homosexuality is used to highlight how despicable he is. The vast majority of the explicitly homosexual men in MBotF are villains, whereas every other girl is explicitly bi-curious, although I grant that in Felisin's case it's about survival.

[Osric]

Epiph, on Oct 30 2008, 09:05 PM, said:

Ain't_It_Just_, on Oct 26 2008, 01:35 AM, said:

Sirryn Kanar was gay, as I recall. Yet another reason for me to hate him.

That's exactly the point that zwit was making. Yes, he is gay, but his homosexuality is used to highlight how despicable he is. The vast majority of the explicitly homosexual men in MBotF are villains, whereas every other girl is explicitly bi-curious, although I grant that in Felisin's case it's about survival.

I have to agree with that.
However to be fair it's basically the way the world views it, girls on girls is fine but men on men is gross, homosexuality/male bisexuality is accepted but generally seen as a negative, while women being lesbian and only liking women is accepted and generally not seen as negative. Women being bisexual is even seen as a good thing.

For example, men don't want to see men kiss and have very strong outspoken opinions about it, but I hardly ever hear women complaining about not wanting to see women kiss each other.

Erikson goes against a lot of stereotypes, lots of major black characters, lots of same gender sex. Maybe a 'good' character that's as outspoken gay as Sirryn Kanar would be cool, but then I don't read these books for political views.

This post has been edited by Osric: 31 October 2008 - 10:55 AM

[Epiph]

I don't read Erikson for his political views, but I do read him for his depth. It is disappointing when a generally thoughtful author falls into this sort of cultural trap, since it is insidiously damaging to the progress that rights groups have made in society.

The same can be said of the attention Sarah Palin was getting shortly after her nomination: "Oh, she's so pretty and charismatic!...and smart..." It is just as sexist as criticizing a prominent women for looking like a harpy, just more insidious because it isn't hurtful and seems so innocuous. (However, in the interest of full disclosure, I cannot stand that woman.) It's not like the people who were saying it about Palin in anyway meant to undermine her, but you don't see pundits saying, "Man, that John Edwards. He's so good looking, AND I like his policies," you hear them saying, "John Edwards is an intelligent and promising young politician, and it doesn't hurt that he's charismatic and good looking." (Sorry for the tangent, it's been a pet peeve of mine the past couple months.)

So when Erikson creates a world in which it seems that sexuality is not a discriminatory factor, but only shows it to be either titillating (as in the case of most of the bicurious ladies) or villainous (as in the case of most of the gay dudes), it ends up being much more subtly damaging that it was probably intended.

[Jude]

Epiph has made a believer out of me. It really is too bad since I look at the malazan books as a huge statement on humanity and society most of the time, and it does somewhat cheapen the deal to have all the members of a certain sexuality stereotyped in such a way.

[Lisheo]

I agree with Epiph. I think Erikson needs a gay male character who fights on the side of good, and more evil bicurious dominatrix women....*drools*
Wait, what?
Seriosuly though, it's overdone, sexuality used as a blatant method of charecterization. Take the Errant. An obviously homosexual character in MT as the First Consort, and at first, I thought woo, how bout that, he's a hero. However in RG more was revealed, and he was shown as a perveted, debauched, selfish character who had sex with his own damn son!
Personally, I think SE should do a JK Rowling and issue a message telling us Cotillion is gay.

Laster Lycaon Lisheo, because everyone has those gay fanboy moments. Wait, what?

[Jude]

actually a good point Lish... how did we not see it before? Cotillion SO is gay. there's no question in my mind any more. I don't even need SE to confirm it.

[Aptorian]

It's been a well established theory for a long time that ST and Cots are butt buddies. Bow chika bow wow.

[Ain't_It_Just_]

Epiph, on Nov 1 2008, 07:10 AM, said:

I don't read Erikson for his political views, but I do read him for his depth. It is disappointing when a generally thoughtful author falls into this sort of cultural trap, since it is insidiously damaging to the progress that rights groups have made in society.

The same can be said of the attention Sarah Palin was getting shortly after her nomination: "Oh, she's so pretty and charismatic!...and smart..." It is just as sexist as criticizing a prominent women for looking like a harpy, just more insidious because it isn't hurtful and seems so innocuous. (However, in the interest of full disclosure, I cannot stand that woman.) It's not like the people who were saying it about Palin in anyway meant to undermine her, but you don't see pundits saying, "Man, that John Edwards. He's so good looking, AND I like his policies," you hear them saying, "John Edwards is an intelligent and promising young politician, and it doesn't hurt that he's charismatic and good looking." (Sorry for the tangent, it's been a pet peeve of mine the past couple months.)

So when Erikson creates a world in which it seems that sexuality is not a discriminatory factor, but only shows it to be either titillating (as in the case of most of the bicurious ladies) or villainous (as in the case of most of the gay dudes), it ends up being much more subtly damaging that it was probably intended.

The curious thing is that homosexuality almost seems to be part of the status quo...
And Apt, what have I told you about that!?

[Aptorian]

That ... it is good for you?

What do you mean status quo? You mean that homosexuality is accepted in the Malazan world? It is a very free society... women have equal rights, religion is free, other races are somewhat accepted, etc. Why shouldn't homosexuality beaccepted aswell.

Homosexuality has been accepted in other ancient cultures. In fact I think the proliferation of jewish laws through christianity is the only reason that gay couples is such a touchy subject now a days.

But then again, I don't remember any character in the Malazan world being completely open about their sexual preferences. Well, except for the soldiers, but an army is a world of it's own with it's own rules and traditions.

[Aptorian]

As a moderator I'm going to remind people that this is an open forum. The moderators do not wish to see any form of rasisme, biggotry or any other form of hatespeech.

This includes derogatory remarks about homosexuals.

This warning is brought to you from your friendly neighbourhood moderators.

[Blend]

Jude, on Nov 1 2008, 01:00 AM, said:

actually a good point Lish... how did we not see it before? Cotillion SO is gay. there's no question in my mind any more. I don't even need SE to confirm it.

So what, cause Lish says it, it must be true? Pretty sure I alluded to that fact earlier in this thread.

Apt, wasn't that reminder slightly unnecessary? I mean, I haven't seen anything overtly insulting or racist or sexist or homophobic in here... Just people being honest?!

[Osric]

Epiph, on Oct 31 2008, 09:10 PM, said:

I don't read Erikson for his political views, but I do read him for his depth. It is disappointing when a generally thoughtful author falls into this sort of cultural trap, since it is insidiously damaging to the progress that rights groups have made in society.

The same can be said of the attention Sarah Palin was getting shortly after her nomination: "Oh, she's so pretty and charismatic!...and smart..." It is just as sexist as criticizing a prominent women for looking like a harpy, just more insidious because it isn't hurtful and seems so innocuous. (However, in the interest of full disclosure, I cannot stand that woman.) It's not like the people who were saying it about Palin in anyway meant to undermine her, but you don't see pundits saying, "Man, that John Edwards. He's so good looking, AND I like his policies," you hear them saying, "John Edwards is an intelligent and promising young politician, and it doesn't hurt that he's charismatic and good looking." (Sorry for the tangent, it's been a pet peeve of mine the past couple months.)

So when Erikson creates a world in which it seems that sexuality is not a discriminatory factor, but only shows it to be either titillating (as in the case of most of the bicurious ladies) or villainous (as in the case of most of the gay dudes), it ends up being much more subtly damaging that it was probably intended.

I dunno mate, my girlfriend mostly hoped Obama would win cos she thinks hes hot. Not really a decision to base a vote on but shes not american and doesnt care about politics.

Just seems like women talking about men like that isn't a bad thing, but men talking about women like that is. It's the effect that happens when everyone feels that women are underneath men, so men feel the need to prove they dont think this and feel like it's wrong to say that a woman is good looking, cos women might assume it's all they're good for. Personally I dont think Palin is good looking, if I did I wouldnt have any trouble saying that. But I would always know that looks aren't really the main issue in politics, seeing as you need brains to run a country.

I do totally agree with the last part of your post though. But this is something weird about society in general anyway. Someone finds out that a man has sex with men and they automatically assume he's gay, not bicurious or anything like that. The way SE's world has been characterised there are no predijudges against bicurious or lesbian women, but there are no gay men at all.

Look at when the Bridgeburners went to the white faced barghast camp. It was described that the BB were being pulled away by barghast women, men and women alike. So why not by men as well?

Anyway, it doesn't matter to me that much, a good gay guy would be pretty cool, or a good bisexual guy, I dunno. But like I said before, probably a publishing decision.

Cottilion does seem gay, we discussed that in another thread. But SE hasn't acknowledged it like he has with the evil gay characters.

[Lisheo]

Blend, on Nov 6 2008, 03:28 PM, said:

Jude, on Nov 1 2008, 01:00 AM, said:

actually a good point Lish... how did we not see it before? Cotillion SO is gay. there's no question in my mind any more. I don't even need SE to confirm it.

So what, cause Lish says it, it must be true? Pretty sure I alluded to that fact earlier in this thread.

Apt, wasn't that reminder slightly unnecessary? I mean, I haven't seen anything overtly insulting or racist or sexist or homophobic in here... Just people being honest?!

I didn't say he was gay I'm saying I would like to see him being gay, though.

And as for Apt's warning, well, it was over something that came up earlier.

[Blend]

Lisheo, on Nov 6 2008, 05:24 PM, said:

I'm saying I would like to see him being gay, though.

This made me *lol*

[Aptorian]

Blend, on Nov 6 2008, 04:28 PM, said:

Apt, wasn't that reminder slightly unnecessary? I mean, I haven't seen anything overtly insulting or racist or sexist or homophobic in here... Just people being honest?!

You haven't seen anything because I deleted them

generally there were people who thought that some of the remarks were borderline biggotry.

Now I like a good gayjoke as much as the next man, but keep the tone light and openminded.

Also, Cotillion is soooo gay...

[Jude]

Blend I totally owe you an apology... hahah. on that note, Cotillion is soooo gay.

[Mcflury]

Quickly scrolling through this thread kinda makes me want to point out this small thing:

Men can be sensitive without being gay, friends can do borderline-gay stuff to eachother just for the joke of it without having to be gay.

By these rules neither Stormy, Gesler or Cotillion are gay. First two are just very good friends, have known eachother for a long time and have been through a hell of a lot, so they know how to prank eachother and know what the other person will find offensive and what that person will think is funny. Cotillion just has seen too much and got kinda emo because of it. Besides, if Cotillion is gay, who then does he love? Shadowthrone? Traveller? Cutter? Karsa?

In general I also think there are lots more gay women in the MBotF than there are men, but I don't really find this an annoying thing. The main cause for this is that none of the characters is strictly good or strictly bad, so you can't really say "oh, that character is a gay, and he's a bad guy. So I guess gays are bad guys" just because of the single fact that in MBotF there is no such thing as a purely good or purely bad guy/girl.

PS: just on a smaller side-note: I don't care about gayness or not, but naked picture of men is a nono!

[Epiph]

Osric, on Nov 6 2008, 10:23 AM, said:

I dunno mate, my girlfriend mostly hoped Obama would win cos she thinks hes hot. Not really a decision to base a vote on but shes not american and doesnt care about politics.

Just seems like women talking about men like that isn't a bad thing, but men talking about women like that is. It's the effect that happens when everyone feels that women are underneath men, so men feel the need to prove they dont think this and feel like it's wrong to say that a woman is good looking, cos women might assume it's all they're good for. Personally I dont think Palin is good looking, if I did I wouldnt have any trouble saying that. But I would always know that looks aren't really the main issue in politics, seeing as you need brains to run a country.

There's nothing wrong with saying a guy or a girl is hot, or not, and certainly, the tendency to call powerful women down on their appearance (poor Janet Reno) is incredibly harmful as well (I'm now thinking of that Tina Fey/Amy Poehler skit on SNL, "And stop saying I have cankles...And stop calling me a FLERG; I googled it, and I don't like what it means." Priceless.). It's the order that I have a problem with. The guy gets the "smart, capable, and hot," while the girl gets the "hot, smart, and capable." While this may not be true of your girlfriend, at least she's equal opportunity (and I really hope she doesn't vote that way when it's her country, because it can get you in trouble. Look at Bush; we appear to have elected him, TWICE, because we thought it would be a great idea to go out for drinks with a recovering alcoholic).

But as far as the generality goes, I was mainly referring to how the media, in this country at least, approaches the discussion. The McCain campaign got all up in Chris Matthews (and the Obama campaign's) face about it, but women on Fox News were just as bad.

[Jude]

Quote

Quickly scrolling through this thread kinda makes me want to point out this small thing:

Men can be sensitive without being gay, friends can do borderline-gay stuff to eachother just for the joke of it without having to be gay.

By these rules neither Stormy, Gesler or Cotillion are gay. First two are just very good friends, have known eachother for a long time and have been through a hell of a lot, so they know how to prank eachother and know what the other person will find offensive and what that person will think is funny. Cotillion just has seen too much and got kinda emo because of it. Besides, if Cotillion is gay, who then does he love? Shadowthrone? Traveller? Cutter? Karsa?

In general I also think there are lots more gay women in the MBotF than there are men, but I don't really find this an annoying thing. The main cause for this is that none of the characters is strictly good or strictly bad, so you can't really say "oh, that character is a gay, and he's a bad guy. So I guess gays are bad guys" just because of the single fact that in MBotF there is no such thing as a purely good or purely bad guy/girl.

Cot doesn't have to be in love with a dude to be gay. Let's say ST is straight. He's definitely not in love with anyone but himself. That doesn't make him a-sexual. Cot can be not in love but still prefer dudes to chicks. Also, I myself wasn't basing him being gay on the fact that he was sensitive or anything. I was more basing it on that I think it would be cool if he was, hahah.

Finally, all people were saying was that the characters that have been depicted as gay, while not being completely no-grey-area evil, have also been depicted as villains. Gorlas wasn't a nice dude (although we're not sure if he actually WAS gay or not) and the guys from RG were villains as well. Furthermore, their desires weren't just for some friendly man on man good-times, but were for things like pedophilia, incest, or taking people against their will. With that, it's fair to say that male homosexuality in the series thus far has been portrayed with immense negativity.

This post has been edited by Jude: 06 November 2008 - 11:19 PM

[Ain't_It_Just_]

I wonder if SE keeps the sexuality of the main duos (Ges+Stormy, ST and Cot) vague on purpose. Whereas with other characters (Sirryn Kanar, Gorlas) it's more clear.

Probably because bits written about them involve making deals/fighting/casting spells/spouting philosophy.

-AIJ, bracing for another stinging rebuke...