In response to a new thread on glake

[zodiacal_light]

Since I really, really don't want to get tangled in an argument there, I will post my thoughts here. EDIT: Grar, ok, fine, I'm posting there. This whole issue annoys me too much for me to leave it be. *has no self-control, sigh*

Someone just posted that it's not just all girls (aside from very minor characters) who fight, but all the men, too.

First, we have a few more prominent examples of men who don't fight (though again, we don't know they can't). I'm thinking here largely of Duke Baird, and we get a whole slew of background men in the form of the Mithrans. Hell, there's Thom, too. I'd bet that on the whole we get more male background characters who don't fight but are good than background female characters who don't at least want to. Part of that's because of the fact that these books - even the ones that aren't about female knights, for some reason - tend to be set in a "man's world". Which, incidentally, is something I despise, especially when there's no reason for it (like in the Daine books).

Second, it doesn't change the fact that these books are girl-centric, and sending the message to people that girls are only worthwhile if they fight is still a problem; if it's true that all the guys are also only worthwhile if they fight (which it isn't), that message is still a problem, just a bigger one.

You know the only good female characters who don't fight and aren't condescended to that I can think of? Tian, Adalia, and Oranie. Adalia and Oranie show up in one scene; we don't see Tian much more often. (I don't count Kara and Kourrem because the book is explicit that being a Bazhir shaman means you do fight, even though we never to my knowledge see them fighting. Varice and Sarra don't count because the text is very condescending towards them both; Maura is arguably either a character who does fight, or falls into the same category as Varice and Sarra.)

Compare that to the good men who don't fight: Duke Baird. A whole slew of Mithran masters. Si-cham. Arguably, Thom. I won't, out of fairness, count any man who's been knighted, even if they seem to be averse to fighting, so I won't count King Roald or Myles.

Bottom line: it doesn't even compare. Pierce seems to feel far more free, in Tortall, to create peace-loving or non-fighting men than peace-loving, non-fighting women. Any woman who's on the side of good and non-fighting is explicitly treated in a condescending manner, in a way that no non-fighting man is. (Edit: Aside from King Roald, who is treated like an idiot because he explicitly tries for peace. Which just feeds into the whole nasty "fighting is awesome!" subtext that I'm really starting to loathe.)

...There's something deeply wrong, there. As far as I'm concerned, it's still sexist if you say that the only way for women to be worthwhile is to know how to fight. It's not empowering at all, just a new twist on the same old "women must be THIS way, but men have choices" crap.

If Pierce were doing that deliberately, to build up some subtle statement on such sexism, I would be thrilled. Unfortunately, given how the text reads and how her comments read, I doubt very much that's the case.

ETA: It occurred to me, belatedly, that we also have the interesting case of Neal, who had a different and noncombatant career path before switching to knighthood. And he is the only fighter in the series whose decision to fight is legitimately questioned, who is treated as if doing something other than fighting would be just as legitimate a choice.

And he's, well, male. We never get that grace for a woman in the series - the message for women is "fight, or we'll make you, or you're not worthwhile".

You can contrast him a bit with Lalasa, actually; Lalasa, in a series of cringeworthy scenes that I never reread, is forced to learn to fight, even though she doesn't want to, and when she does learn and starts teaching others, this is treated like how things should be and the text explicitly starts portraying Lalasa as a strong, worthwhile person, as opposed to the caricatured meekness we first meet.

Neal, on the other hand, also initially didn't want to fight, and changed his mind and learned to do so. But he is treated as if he would have been just as worthy a person as a healer, whereas Lalasa is very clearly shown to be not really a worthwhile person until she can fight.

Lalasa also bothers me because here we get another warped aesop, that shows up in more minor ways with Daine and Maura and Kel's ... aunt? I think? - If you're a woman and don't fight, circumstances will conspire to make you, or you will be victims of circumstance.

With men, the message is: you can fight, or not, as you will. Go for it.

That is wrong. I can't even express how repugnant I find that. It's like rape "advice" that tells women they must be scared and know martial arts and carry pepper spray and a gun.

I think I would only ever recommend the Tortall books to people with a good head on their shoulders and a good grasp of such issues. That saddens me - I do like these books - but I have serious moral issues with them that are only becoming clearer the more I poke at the books.

Comments

[q_sama]

This falls into one of the many reasons I prefer the world of Emelan - because non-combatants are the emphasis (even though there are situations where they defend themselves).

I can see your point on Lalasa, though I don't completely. I didn't like that she was forced to protect herself, but I never felt that her learning was in any way placing the blame of her victimization on her lack of ability to defend herself. I don't know... maybe there's to much baggage for me to assess properly.

But comparing the men to the women and saying it's okay because there are non-combatant men isn't right (and I'm not sure if the original poster would ever mean to create such a sexist statement).

[zodiacal_light]

I'm not sure if the original poster would ever mean to create such a sexist statement

I doubt she would, but that's the implication to that argument.

Lalasa - admittedly, I've heard a lot of such "defend yourself!" advice, but my biggest problem with those learning-to-fight scenes is that she doesn't want to. Kel basically uses her position of authority to force Lalasa to learn it, and I'm sorry, I find that morally repugnant. I also don't find it right to force an adult to learn something against their will. Kel basically left Lalasa no choice, and those scenes are painful to read.

(Then again, abuses of authority are something I'm really sensitive to, and are a big part of why I'm not fond of monarchies or of Daine/Numair.)

I also don't like it because it reinforces the whole "fighting solves everything!" and glorification of fighting we see in Tortall already. On its own, in a 'verse like, say, Emelan, I'd probably still find Lalasa being forced to fight problematic, but it wouldn't be reinforcing an existing attitude of glorification of fighting.

[carmarthen]

I have a pile of issues with Lalasa, and it bothers me that Kel forces her to learn self-defense, and her initial hyper-meek characterization baffles and bugs me. But learning self-defense can and does often make people feel more confident*, so I don't think that's necessarily an unrealistic development. And as I said earlier, I don't think being willing to defend oneself makes someone a "fighter", or anyone who's not a total pacifist is a fighter. Plenty of people are willing to do violence in self-defense who would never go bandit-hunting or join a military or pick fights.

*Not necessarily justifiably; self-defense techniques have to be drilled frequently and regularly or they are likely to be useless, and even then they are certainly not foolproof and people can freeze or miscalculate or be attacked by someone with a weapon or more skill. But learning self-defense provides a feeling of psychological control that can be beneficial.

[zodiacal_light]

I know learning self-defense can make people feel more confident. The portrayal of Lalasa, imo, goes far beyond that, though; she goes from hyper-meek to super businesswoman who's not meek at all and even intimidating. That's ... extreme.

[carmarthen]

Yeah, agreed. There are so many issues with Lalasa's character arc it's hard to disentangle them.

[zodiacal_light]

One thing is that it seems almost more like Lalasa's a pet - she's treated in much the same way that the cutesy animals are, like some stray thrown in to show how awesome and patient Kel is. For all the comments on how Tobe's a stray Kel picked up, Lalasa is written more like one.

Though what really bugs me is the undercurrent of nasty rape "advice" and the issues of what I see, frankly, as Kel abusing her power over Lalasa. We already knew Pierce has trouble writing convincing Tortallan characters. :P

[carmarthen]

I'm not really a fan of stories where the main character acquires a series of human "strays" to complement their animal ones, honestly. And yeah, I think you're right that Lalasa is written as even more of a pet than Tobe.

[zodiacal_light]

One thing that bugs me a LOT that I just realized is that Pierce tends to almost infantilize female characters who don't fit her Strong Woman mold - but I can't recall her ever doing that to a male character.

Varice, Sarra, Lalasa - they're all written about and thought about by characters as if they're somehow incapable of taking care of themselves. It isn't until Lalasa learns to fight that she's suddenly capable of being left on her own and becomes a badass businesswoman; Varice and Sarra are talked down to/about the whole time. Sarra's a goddess, for fuck's sake, and yet the whole time the text and Daine (whose view is presented uncritically) treat her like she's totally incapable of doing anything.

[zodiacal_light]

Also, and I'll get into this more whenever the hell I get the Lalasa meta post up, but part of why I don't think Lalasa really bucks the trend isn't Lalasa herself, but the way the whole situation's written.

First, there's the nasty undertone of "she was victimized, now she MUST learn to fight, then she won't be a victim" that the books push, which implies that if she'd known how to fight before she'd have been fine. This fits a trend in Tortall of good women who don't fight being forced by circumstance to do so.

Second, the whole tone of the Kel and Lalasa interactions; it's treated not as an abuse of power on Kel's part, but as some obviously right thing; it's portrayed as being taught to fight; and Lalasa is portrayed as silly and rather useless until she learns to do so.

What bugs me with Lalasa is that you're right, in a way: in a more balanced 'verse, Lalasa learning self-defense wouldn't ping me as learning to fight or glorification of fighting. But the way it's written (including the extreme difference in pre- and post-fighting Lalasa, which includes how the text itself treats her), and the fact that it is in a 'verse that glorifies fighting, make it read very differently to me.

That's the thing - none of the examples are bad on their own, save the Ralon thing. Alanna fighting isn't bad. Knights aren't. Daine being awesome with a bow isn't. Lalasa learning self-defense isn't. But when every. single. female. character. either fights, wants to, is forced to learn, or is condescended to or evil or incredibly minor, it's a nasty message.

[carmarthen]

First, there's the nasty undertone of "she was victimized, now she MUST learn to fight, then she won't be a victim" that the books push, which implies that if she'd known how to fight before she'd have been fine.

Ugh, yeah. I hate that.

I think I would have liked the whole thing better had Kel offered to teach Lalasa and explain why it might help her. Although, to be fair, Kel is what 10? 11? So I'm not surprised she goes about it badly--but the narrative shouldn't give her a pass for it.

Anyway, I certainly agree on the overall message.

[zodiacal_light]

That's the kicker, for me; if this had been written as a flaw for Kel, as, say, Kel having good intentions but going about it badly, it could have been interesting. But Pierce has that whole the-heroines-are-always-right thing going on, and as much as I love Kel, I despise these scenes with Lalasa.