quote:

---

Originally posted by DDDaysh:
Studies show that, in children at least, girls tend to relate ok to boy "main characters" but that boys simply aren't at all interested in girl "main characters".

---

Ah yes. This explains the unpopularity of the Tomb Raider video games.
 

---

Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
 
Actually, the popularity of female main characters in video games has been observed. It's no coincidence that such games are often played from a third-person viewpoint.
 

---

Posted by DDDaysh (Member # 9499) on :
 
I would also like to point out that in "video games" there is a VIDEO aspect, and that the visual appearance of the character may play a part in the popularity.
 

---

Posted by Gwen (Member # 9551) on :
 
Heck, if it's looks that explain it, heterosexual guys are probaby more likely to sit through Suriyawong's attraction to Virlomi or Achilles' and Bean's attractions to Petra than the other way around. Plus, how often every day does Petra stop to look in the mirror and think how beautiful she is?
Whereas girls are obviously more likely to be reading books for the sheer intellectual joy of the storylines, philosophies, and so on. Otherwise, we'd never have forgiven Mr. Card for writing Bonzo as good-looking but a stupid jerk, and Ender and Bean as short and not-necessarily-good-looking yet smart and nice in Ender's Game and Ender's Shadow.
Wow, making broad generalizations based on cliched gender stereotypes is fun!
 

---

Posted by DDDaysh (Member # 9499) on :
 
Well, I wasn't trying to MAKE stereotypes the first time. I was simply reporting what I'd read somewhere else, in an education class actually, about the stories included in text books. However, the argument involving Toom Raider sorta irked me, becaus most of the time I watched friends playing it, they were paying much more attention to their character than what she was doing...

However, I really DO think girls have an easier time reading things that do not come from their natural viewpoints... or at least any girls who bother to post here. I'm really not sure about the ones who read Dollar Tree romance novels because I've never read them. Society is geared towards thinking that the male viewpoint is the natural one and the female viewpoint is somehow inferior, or at least "different". Even all the work in "equality" is really more about allowing females to be more like males than the other way around. I'm not trying to be super feminist here or anything, because I really just dont' care enough to get excited about any of that, it's just the way I see things. I mean, sure women are allowed to wear pants and things to work these days, there's really not much a girl can wear that would really make her look like a GUY, but you don't see alot of male dresses in existance. I mean, what would the female equivilant to drag even BE? So naturally it's harder to convert male readers to a female mindset than the other way around, because that's just the way the world around us is set up.
 

---

Posted by Gwen (Member # 9551) on :
 
I know you weren't, it was just kinda fun to take it that extra step.

I agree with your points on masculine-as-natural. Although now it's getting to blur the other direction a little more (guys not being afraid to get rid of disgustingly excess body hair, businessmen wearing light red as easily as light blue, et cetera), in most cases women doing what men have done traditionally is more accepted. I think that may be because a woman taking on what are traditionally men's roles is seen as bettering her position in the world somehow, whereas a man who does more traditionally feminine things is often considered ridiculous. Mainly by other guys.

That dynamic may be why it's so much easier for me to think of women authors who frequently write men as main characters (Anne McCaffrey, Lois McMaster Bujold, even J. K. Rowling) than the reverse.
 

---

Posted by DDDaysh (Member # 9499) on :
 
I know... though personally, as much as I usually hang out with guys, I can't really write them as a main character very well in stories I create, because I'm never sure that I'm not feminizing them in their own thoughts. It's a rather difficult path to tred in either direction, which is why I'm so impressed when OSC does it so well.
 

---

Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
 
Honestly, I think he succeeds by not trying to feminize his female characters. He just writes them as people, and as it turns out, women are people, so it ends up feeling very accurate
 

---

Posted by DDDaysh (Member # 9499) on :
 
Well, men ARE people too, but that's not the same thing. He manages, for instance, to write very well about "motherly" things that Petra feels, and the insecurities that Luet feels, and MOST particularly does a good job of the demonstrating the different sorts of attacks on eachother that men and women get into. Kokor for instance, attacks quite differently than Elemak does.
 

---

Posted by Gwen (Member # 9551) on :
 
Yes, but I think that's more differences that would naturally occur between characters than their genders coming through.

Petra was so aggressive that the psychologist had her tested to make sure she was female. No one doubted Valentine's sex, on the other hand.

Honestly, if you made all the characters gender-neutral and then asked people to guess which person was which gender, I'd think they'd have quite a bit of difficulty.
 

---

Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 
I don't know, I once asked OSC why there weren't more girls in battle school. I am afraid I can't accurately quote his answer, but it was something along the lines of them not belonging there.

I got the later edition of First Meetings last year in order to read "Teacher's Pest" but I haven't actually read it because I prefer the story I made up for myself where Theresa was a top Battle School graduate, who accepted marrying John Paul and raising a family as a mission from the IF. Yeah, kind of childish, I know. But hopefully as harmless as OSC's speculations on Harry Potter VII.

P.S. I think when it comes to female heros, Dinah Kirkham is my favorite. Jane is probably second. The women of Genesis are all very interesting, but they are definitely operating within the sphere of women. Luet is, again, very interesting but doesn't have that "Wow" factor that I associate with a hero.
 

---

Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
 

quote:

---

I don't know, I once asked OSC why there weren't more girls in battle school. I am afraid I can't accurately quote his answer, but it was something along the lines of them not belonging there.

---