To state this up front:
Twilight is not my kind of book. Neither are the best-selling fantasy series from Sherrilyn Kenyon, Christine Feehan and J.R. Ward. That's no comment on the quality of the writing. Their books have fervent fans and they are well-respected among fellow writers.
It's only a comment on the fact that the subject matter isn't that interesting to me as a reader.
But even if I thought these books were the worst-written that I've ever seen–and they certainly are not–I would hate how they are denigrated for simply existing.
This is part and parcel of the fact that our society completely devalues female fantasies. And that's not just a problem for women, I think it's a problem for men, too.
As my daughter so eloquently stated in her article, no criticism of Spider-Man starts with "well, it'll teach impressionable boys unrealistic expectations for how their lives will go."
Instead the male fantasy as celebrated as something to be enjoyed, something valued, some ingrained need one must feed.
It's fun, let's blow stuff up, let's have action, let's have the man save the day. James Bond wouldn't be constantly reinvented if he didn't speak to some core male fantasy.
And there's nothing wrong with that.
I enjoy shoot-outs and explosions as much as the next person. I love the first Lethal Weapon film. (But, sorry, can't watch it anymore after Mel's breakdown). To name a few others, I love Die Hard, the Terminator movies, Hot Fuzz, the original Star Wars movies and my love for superheroes past and present knows little boundaries.
But if I'm going to accept these stories and characters as part of some elemental fantasy that men have, I want reciprocity.
And I also wonder just how much of these supposed "male" fantasies are actually universal empowerment fantasies but instead society closes the door and says, sorry, no girl cooties allowed.
For one, female fantasies are no more or less valid than the ones celebrated by men.
I suspect that men even share some of these fantasies. Oh, not about sparkly vampires.
But how about finding a life partner who understands you and creating a strong and loving family that will support you in good times and bad?
That seems a basic human fantasy rather than a gender-specific fantasy. But if men own up to that, if they want to say, stay home with the children instead of working outside the home, it's seen as somehow a betrayal of their gender. Unmanly is the worst thing to call a man.
The problem, of course, is that we still live in a somewhat patriarchal society.
That means what men who enjoy what are considered "womanly" things are denigrated, just as women's fantasies are somehow seen as less valid than the male fantasies that populate our airwaves. Take Brut's new commercial and advertising slogan, where men are seen as womanly and wimpy if they like, say, antiquing. The answer, of course, is a slap with the right after shave and, presto, you're a real man again.
Whatever that means.
As someone married to a man who likes antiquing far more than I do and would only watch a NFL game if tied to a chair, I object to putting any gender into a box.
And it's not just Hollywood or mainstream comic books that take this approach.
There was the recent controversy that erupted when authors Jennifer Weiner and Jodi Picoult objected to all the publicity given to Jonathan Franzen for his new book.
“I think it’s a very old and deep-seated double standard that holds that when a man writes about family and feelings, it's literature with a capital L, but when a woman considers the same topics, it's romance, or a beach book—in short, it's something unworthy of a serious critic’s attention," Weiner said.
The romance genre doesn't even rate a mention in the New York Times Book Review, even though the two genres that feature a lot of male authors, mystery and science fiction, at least get a round up.
Tell the Times that your book is a romance and they sniff their noses. A few years ago, I read a snide remark about the latest Nora Roberts book in the notes about new bestsellers. This despite the fact that romance readers are pushing the new trend toward digital publishing. See the recent New York Times article on how romance readers are driving the ebook train.
Why is it considered silly to have a happily ever fantasy where a romance ends well? Why is romance considered formulaic and mysteries are not? Writers in both genres must adhere to certain elements.
Mysteries must be investigated by someone and they must uncover some secrets, and there must be some sort of conclusion about the crime.
Romances must have a courtship between people who fall in love. They must learn to trust each other and they should be together at the end of the book. Everything else is allowed. Romance can features mysteries, paranormal elements, be set in a historical time period, and also be science fiction. Horror is the only genre usually not found in a romance but then, given some of the vampire and werewolf romances, that's not a solid rule either.
But, yet, trashy romance novel is practically one word. Trashy mysteries is not.
Naturally, there are some terribly written romances. But there are also terribly written mysteries, science fiction, and fantasy novels. Science fiction novels are rarely called 'pulpy' any longer and if they are, it's because people are retroactively fond of that type of book.
So what's so inherently lesser about a fantasy about meeting the right kind of person (or persons in some cases) and building a relationship with them? Or a book that features a strong male character who shows up out of the blue, causing all kinds of trouble, who sees something special in a woman that no one else sees?
And because female books are put in this "just for girls" box while, they're not allowed to escape it. They're not supposed to have "male" fantasies, such as being a superheroe.
For example, when the new Young Justice pilot aired on Cartoon Network this month, there were no girls involved in the storyline until the end. It's possible the show itself will feature more girls and women and the ending seemed to promise that but the fact is that the pilot is a very testosterone filled affair. But I wonder if that was deliberate, that somewhere along the line, an executive decided that only boys like superheroes.
I wonder because in an interview at comics journal, former DC Comics President Paul Levitz claimed, on very little evidence, that girls just don't like superheroes. This despite the fact that Levitz himself wrote strong female characters in Legion of Super-Heroes and Marvel's most popular heroes, the X-Men, have a solid female fan base that helped it become the franchise that it is. The logic seems to be "well, woman aren't interested in superheroes, so we won't write for them, and we won't market to them and from this I conclude that women aren't into superheroes." I don't think Mr. Levitz is alone in this opinion either.
(Don't get me started on the problems that the direct market has in attracting female readership. That's a whole different rant.)
We need to stop dividing fantasies along gender lines, with one side far more acceptable than the other.
Society needs to acknowledge that, yes, men are also interested in forming strong emotional bonds with another partner and that it's not inherently "unmanly" to like certain things currently shoved into the female category. Just as women are interested in the fantasy of being superheroes and saving the world and don't deserve to be shoved out because of their gender.
I do think this changing. At least, I hope so.
For example, Urban Meyer resigned earlier this week as coach of the Florida Gators. He didn't cite a need for a better job or more money. Instead, he spoke passionately about being a better father and a better husband and that his job took a serious toll on his family, and that enough was enough.
That's the kind of speech a man wouldn't have been allowed to make publicly years ago. It probably wouldn't have even occurred to most men that they were missing anything by working so hard back then. They went out, they worked, and women took care of the rest.
I know, it's a stretch to say that accepting sparkly vampires as a harmless teenage girl fantasy will lead to men being better fathers.
But, yes, I think the general acceptance of a well-written female fantasy about overcoming the other and that the general acceptance of the romance genre among all of society will lead to more well-rounded individuals of both genders.
