"Women in SF: Image and Reality": A Criticism

Meta
Title:	"Women in SF: Image and Reality" - A Criticism
Creator:	Jennifer Bankier
Date(s):	November 1974
Medium:	print
Fandom:	Science Fiction
Topic:	feminism, science fiction, female writers, con panels
External Links:
Click here for related articles on Fanlore.

"Women in SF: Image and Reality" - A Criticism is an essay by Jennifer Bankier and was printed in The Witch and the Chameleon #2 in November 1974.

It discusses the panel "Women in SF: Image and Reality" that had been held at the most recent Worldcon.

The panel's moderator was Sue Wood. Panelists included Katherine Kurtz and Chelsea Quinn Yarbro.

See the second page of the DisCon II programming for its place on the schedule: DisCon, ^{Archived version}

Excerpts

One of the feature panels at Discon II was entitled "Women in SF: Image and Reality". Such a topic offers the possibility of a truly stimulating discussion. Unfortunately, at Discon this possibility was not realized, primarily as a result of the domination of the diaoussion by Katherine Kurtz. Her influence caused the remarks of the panelists to be coloured by tired, anti-feminist cliches. In particular, it was asserted a) that there is no discrimination to interfere with the writing of scienoe fiction by women and b) that images in science fiction that put down women were merely the product of bad writing that stereotyped men as well as women. There were strenuous objections from acme members of the audience to these assertions, but a member of an audience is at a severe disadvantage in a confrontation with a panel member, in terms of the amount of time available to make any given point, and ability to reply to challenges, so that a proper balance was not struck. It Is for this reason that I feel that it is appropriate to reply to the assertions of Ms. Kurtz in a context where arguments can be developed in full.

I am not a science fiction writer, so I cannot say from personal experience whether there is a tendency for sf editors to discriminate against women writers who submit stories to them. However, in the legal profession similar charges are often made by older women who have experienced some success, and are frequently coupled with claims that any woman who says she has experienced discrimination is merely trying to cover up her own failure. I personally succeeded in gathering evidence which demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that, whatever the experience of women who have already established a reputation for themselves, younger women starting out upon their legal careers are undeniably the victims of sexism and discrimination. It would not surprise me if women trying to break into the science fiction field experienced similar difficulties. The fact that many women sf writers have adopted noms de plume that are noncommltal about sex (C.L. Moore) or actually masculine (Andre Norton, also known at one time as "Andrew North") would seem to indioate that such difficulties did at least exist in the past.

Even if it ie accepted that there ie no discrimination against women fantasy or science fiction writers once they have written something of acceptable literary quality, it should not be forgotten that there are many social pressures that serve to prevent otherwise talented women from achieving their full potential in this field. Some women are probably deterred from ever becoming familiar with science fiction and fantasy because these fields are treated in society at large as being an appropriate area of interest only for boys and men. Admittedly, science fiction readers of both sexes have, in the past, been mocked by non-fans, but a woman who engages in "unfeminine" activities is subject to the additional threat that she will be socially isolated and unloved (a fear which is not totally unfounded in the case of serious unorthodoxy). I suspect that one of the long range contributions of Star Trek fandom to the general science fiction field will be that it has helped to break down the traditional image of of fandom as male dominated, and introduced a large number of intelligent women to both science fiction writing in general and fandom as a whole, which may lead, after an appropriate intervals to an increase in the number of women writers.

Turning to the panel's second assertion, i.e. that the use of stereotyped Images of women is merely reflective of bad writing which also stereotypes men, it must be acknowledged that there is some truth to this assertion. However, it is also neoessary to examine the nature of the stereotypes that are used for eaoh sex. The stereotyped science fiction or fantasy male is brave, good at his work, heroic, and usually (but not always) intelligent* The stereotyped woman in speculative fiction Id either a) beautiful, helpless and dumb, b) domesticated and maternal, or c) an intelligent but frustrated woman (usually a scientist) who is pursuing a career only because she Is unloved, and who will fall into the arms of the hero with the slightest encouragement, (The archetypical example of category c) may be found in the story, whose title escapes me, perhaps because I don't want to remember it, which concluded with the sentence "And then the blond icicle melted.")

Given the choice of identifying with a person who is brave, heroic, and capable, and one who is stupid, unremarkable, or frustrated, most individuals, of either sex, are going to identify with the former. I remember my own frustration with the contemptible women in most science fiction, and my own efforts to dissociate myself from them, and identify myself with the stereotyped but admirable males, and I suspect most other sf fans felt the same way. The trouble is that such an attitude tends to carry over into one's daily life. It may cause the intelligent woman who has had some encouragement to make a career for herself to cut herself off from her less fortunate sisters, and identify herself with male attitudes toward women, in an effort to acquire for herself some of the high status associated with the male stereotype. It is this kind of reaction which tends to produce the "I-personally-succeeded-and-any woman-who-didn't-do-likewise-is-inferior-and-stupid" syndrome, which is frequently found among women who have achieved some success by male standards. Ms. Kurtz would seem to be among the victims of this syndrome.

Moreover, the portrayal of women in traditional female roles is not, in fact, limited to stories by bad writers. One often encounters women who have fully developed and believable personalities but who are restricted either to the traditional wlfe-and-mother role (as in Anne McCaffrey's Decision at Doona or A Womanly Talent), or who are isolated individual successes in societies where the vast majority of women are still confined to traditional roles, such as Andre Norton's heroines, or Susan Calvin in Asimov's robotics series. (Incidentally, I am continually annoyed by people who put down Susan Calvin as neurotic, and fail to realize that her devotion to her work and love for her robots are a perfectly rational adaptation for an intelligent woman in a society where men are taught to disapprove and be afraid of intelligent females. If any one is to blame for Dr. Calvin's social isolation, it 1b the men who have been taught to disapprove of her, and not Dr. Calvin herself.)

It is not surprising that it is possible to write a story showing a believable woman in a stereotyped role, since the vast majority of real-life women are in fact trapped in such a position. It is a pity, however, that most writers of speculative fiction have not been able to go beyond describing what they see around them, and portray a truly non-sexist society, although, as indicated above, editorial prejudice may be partly responsible for this. (The rarity of the creation of really alien societies in sf undoubtedly results from the same tendency to see cultural characteristics as absolute, or "natural".) In view of what haa been said above, it is perhaps not surprising that some of the most hopeful signs of change, such as Leguin's Left Hand of Darkness and The Dispossessed, or the work of Joanna Russ or Vonda Mclntyre, come from newer women writers, who have more reason to be dissatisfied with the status quo.

Fan Comments

One of the panelists, Chelsea Quinn Yarbro, commented in The Witch and the Chameleon #3:

I write In response to Jennifer Bankler's evaluation of the 'Women in SF" panel at the last Worldcon. Now, while I share her lively desire to throttle Katherlne Kurtz, as a (you should pardon the expression) fellow panelist of hers, I'd like to bring up a few things. One: Sue Wood, the moderator, talked over the whole question with those of us on the panel, and we agreed with Sue that if possible we should avoid turning the thing into a shouting match. So those of us with rather more feminist views agreed to tone it down. Unfortunately, Katherlne chose to be vocal on the other side. And the majority of the audience tended to support her. Which I think is sad.

After the panel, one of my friends cemented that It was one of the few times he had heard me speak In a restrained manner on the subject, and I know that Sue felt she had held back a great deal, too. Now, it was not the con committee who told us to avoid a shouting match, and it was not pressure from other groups. Sue felt, and Leigh, Betty and I agreed (apparently Katharine did, too, but her views, as you know, weren't quite the same as ours), that if we wanted to get some points across, we'd have to keep the tone restrained, and for the most part, this worked. I think we reached more people than we would have if we were presenting a more radical front.