I prefer the way I write when, while writing, I imagine being read as a man.
There’s an immediate freedom to not be apologetic. To do as we were taught in high school English and eliminate the self-conscious “I think…” from the writing.
I’m not sure when it happened, the shift into having to pretend.
My father, a single parent, never gave my sister or me the impression that being female was considered a weakness or would limit us in any way. Now and then we’d have to fetch him things, and we were tasked with decorating and undecorating the Christmas tree, but that was because we were his kids. It had nothing to do with being girls. That I was a “girl” was so separate from my identity that I would sometimes be confused about why I didn’t feel more like one. Females my dad’s age who had soft, styled hair and wore perfume and nail polish were curiosities. I wanted to ask them questions about womanhood. I wanted them to somehow infuse me with the kind of femininity I saw blooming in the girls my age who wore clanking bracelets and pink lipstick.
That absence of innate femininity combined with being raised by a man contributed to my being comfortable with – and preferring to be one of – the boys. I didn’t fear them and hadn’t been raised to defer to them. We were friends, and we were equals. It never occurred to me that their thoughts, perspectives, experiences, or opinions were (or should be) more valid than mine. I was pretty sure I was even as strong as they were.
It took a woman telling me I was not, in fact, as strong as a man to introduce me to what is often a completely arbitrary system of inequity: At around 20 years old, I applied to be a stock person at a liquor store in upstate New York. I knew I could lift the boxes because I’d done it for about a year at a previous job. The store owner, a woman in her late 60s, immediately said no upon taking my application. I asked why. “You’re a girl,” she said. I told her I could lift the boxes. I asked her to allow me to demonstrate. “I’m not going to hire a girl,” she said. “I need a boy.”
I wanted to scream at her, “BUT I CAN DO IT!”
Even if I had proved I was capable, she still wouldn’t have hired me. I was a girl, and that was that. Worse was that she wouldn’t even let me try. Automatic disqualification.
It took a little over ten years for gender as a hindrance to come up again (and ten years, when you think about it, is pretty good). I was looking for an agent for Pretty Much True, a book that would seem to have had everything going for it: It was a war novel about the first year in Iraq (2003) that was being shopped around while service members were still in Iraq and that had been written by someone who had first-hand experience with war.
Turns out it wasn’t the right kind of experience.
One agent wanted more action in the first few pages of his war novels.
Said another male agent, “The market for war stories is pretty saturated.” (If you and I were having a conversation, this is where I would pause to allow time for counting through all the new male-dominated, male-written war novels and movies that have been released in the last seven years.)
What he meant was that there was no market for a literary war story written by a woman about a woman if the female character’s war experience didn’t include guts (by this I mean bloody innards), guns, grenades, and guys’ guys.
After the book’s eventual release, I discovered that although a few men had been very receptive and had even endorsed it (one of them decided he liked it enough to publish it), I was having a hard time getting “regular” men to read it. It’s never been a goal to write specifically to women; male readers were/are just as desirable. But how do you get men to read about a woman who isn’t shooting a bunch of terrorists? (And would men who don’t typically read “women’s books” read that story, even?)
“Where’s the drama or action in waiting?” said one male reader who took some persuading to get to read Pretty Much True.
Some of the most suspenseful and intriguing stories involve waiting…waiting for a court decision, waiting to be found by a killer, waiting for an acceptance or rejection letter, waiting for the return of a loved one, and all other manner of waiting. And of course it’s never just waiting; it’s waiting “plus”—plus a story, plus characters, plus conflicts, etc.
But put a woman waiting up against the word “war” in a book by a female author, and the waiting – unless it’s a soldier waiting for the action to begin – is thrust into a male arena where it immediately suffers by comparison and becomes the object of perplexity. “Waiting? What? What are you—really?”
“Your novel will obviously appeal to other military spouses,” said a man, who hadn’t read Pretty Much True, while interviewing me about it for a literary blog. “Have you been focusing your marketing efforts on readers in the military community?”
I wonder whether, following the release of We Were Soldiers Once…and Young, The Things They Carried, The Sorrow of War: A Novel of North Vietnam, or American Sniper, the natural target markets were veterans and active service members.
(I don’t really wonder. It’s assumed that the general public will be interested in the masculine war experience.)
A military consultant working in Hollywood, when approached about the potential film viability of Pretty Much True, said – also without having read the book – that it would be a great story for a specific female-focused cable channel, but that America might not be ready for another “dark” at-home war story. After all, Brothers had just been released.
Yep. One movie that explored nothing at all having to do with waiting, but that did have a woman in a primary role, had just come out. Add 1984’s WWII movie Swing Shift, and there we were flooding the market again.
Amusingly, the same man had mentioned, just moments before, that he thought the public was ready for another war movie.
(You know, a real war movie.)
Because males were clearly having better luck selling their war stories, it was hard not to imagine a parallel universe in which Pretty Much True had been published under a male name. Men writing a lot like women, even about women, generally achieve higher literary acclaim and garner more universal interest than do women when the story has nothing to do with war (Irving, Eugenides, Franzen), so wouldn’t the same be true if it were a story about a female during wartime?
No idea. But the temptation to approach future writing and publishing projects as a maybe-male, if even just to experiment with reactions, grew.
I officially decided on the name change at a party in Florida over the summer. When I told a man that I was thinking of using a gender-ambiguous pen name, he said, “I apologize on behalf of my sex.”
It hadn’t even been necessary to tell him why I was doing it.
Said another man, upon seeing the cover for my latest novel and noticing the name change, “I wish it weren’t necessary, but I can see why you’d do it.”
“But people do take women (and women writers) seriously,” it will be, and has been, argued.
It might be easier to agree were people not still saying, “My favorite authors are X and Y. My favorite female authors, though, are ….”
It might be easier to agree had novelist Nick Hornby, who wrote the screenplay for Wild, not recently thought it necessary to describe Wild as “not like any chick flick” he’d ever seen.
I’ve seen the trailer. Chick flick (read: movie directed expressly at women, and by definition pretty frivolous) doesn’t even come to mi—
Oh. Right. It stars a female.
Obviously that would be the natural conclusion.
My father raised me to be confidently outspoken, and to be myself. Until recently, I’d considered it the highest mark of honor to put my name on my writing—middle initial included. Anonymity was not for me. Pen names, I’d reasoned, were for the timid or the reclusive.
Now I just want to be reasonably sure I’m getting a fair shot at being read by a mixed audience and at being taken seriously as a writer. Life is short, and I don’t want to waste time fighting, no matter how legitimate the fight.
And as legitimate fights go, that this needs to be a fight at all is bleeping ridiculous.
I just read your post and want to comment on it.
Living in Europe, this whole gender debate that´s going on on the webs really baffles me. Let me explain. I am male, and I want to be an author. And I want to write smut. *lol That´s a female dominated space, even if I do not like this whole “gender dominated” debate. It misses the point. There are differances between men and women and that´s not a problem. More to this point in a second, I am also struggeling with choosing the right pen name.
Now I really was contemplating if I should choose a gender neutral pen name, a male pen name or a female pen name. Your blog post helped me a bit, and right now I think I should take a male pen name. Why is that? Because standing out of the masses is a good thing. I don´t think that it would be difficult for a woman to write a war novel. There will be people who like it if the story is tense. Both men and women will be looking into it because it is intresting. I really think many women don´t know how much more attention they will get than a man would ever get. Knowing this is a hot topic, I hope to have a real discourse over it, not just shaming that one could dare to say that.
Women have it a lot more easy to be recognised than they would think. There was this social experiment of a woman living as a man for the sake of finding out what it´s like, here is the link: Self made man [2006, abc Documentation] ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ip7kP_dd6LU ) it´s really intresting. I think that being a woman would be fun, but I am not a transgendered person. But talking about privileges, you are not dependent on a publicist. If you wrote a decent war novel that publishers deny, then go kindle and promote online. People will buy it, they really would.
For a long time I was working for a business that was building stages at rock festivals. We also had some very nice girls/woman working there and it was fun, but let me tell you, when it comes to handling really heavy objects, we would not let the girls do that. Simply because they were physically weaker and would have slaved themselves over it. It´s not that they wouldn´t have done it, but seeing us men struggeling to lift stage elements, and how it hurt sometimes, it was a clear division of labour that was the most efficient. There was very much respect from both sides, and not one girl complained. They wanted to do lift, that´s sure. Nothing wrong with that.
Then came the time where I was in charge of smaller productions and had to hire staff for it. I did not hire women to do the hard labour. What am I, a sadist? I would have been if I did. In fact, I think there is nothing misagonystic in that. Nothing. The woman who didn´t hire you had solid reasons for it, and that had nothing to do with sexism. It reads as if you found it unjust for that woman not to hire you, where in fact she knew exactly what she was doing. This was not sexist.
Hope I didn´t offend you, that is not my intent. I´m for equality. I really am.
I respect women, but somehow it seems that people are complicating too much. You know, there are men working as flight attendents, and women being pilots. There are women doing hard labour jobs, and men wanting to write erotic novels.
Being an unknown writer of erotica myself, what´s your opinion about my pen-name- struggle? Would it be best if I had a gender neutral pen name or a male pen name? Or even a female one?
Thanks for your blogpost, hope to read from you soon.
Hi, Alex. Thanks for taking the time to read and comment. I’ll try to address your ideas one at a time.
“…standing out of the masses is a good thing. I don´t think that it would be difficult for a woman to write a war novel. There will be people who like it if the story is tense. Both men and women will be looking into it because it is intresting. I really think many women don´t know how much more attention they will get than a man would ever get.”
I think women are pretty aware of the amount, and kind, of attention they get. I offered examples in the essay about the kind of attention Pretty Much True received and the lack of serious consideration it was given because it was both by, and about, a woman. (Another radio host, not mentioned in the essay, asked whether I’d written it because I “needed” to, implying it was my one writing project completed essentially as an extended journal entry. He did not seem to consider the possibility of my having been a writer for fifteen years, by that point, and one who – like all writers – uses an assortment of life experiences to fuel the fiction.)
About your experiences working with women and not hiring them to lift heavy things – I’m not offended. I doubt you would have hired men with no muscle mass, either, because they also wouldn’t have the strength to lift certain objects. In my case, however, it was just liquor. Six 1.75 liter bottles at the most per box. A dachshund could have lifted it. My being a female wasn’t an acceptable reason to not hire me.
“You know, there are men working as flight attendents, and women being pilots. There are women doing hard labour jobs, and men wanting to write erotic novels.”
Yes! That doesn’t necessarily mean equality has been achieved. Progress, yes. And men have long been writing erotic novels. (See: DH Lawrence.)
About your author name – I think it could go either way. Ideally, women (the majority of erotica readers) would be just as likely to read a male erotica author as female. Realistically, women who enjoy erotica might not believe a man can write it in a way that appeals to women, so a male name might hurt you. You might be interested in this Amazon discussion, “Favorite erotic novels written by male authors”: http://www.amazon.com/forum/erotica?_encoding=UTF8&cdForum=Fx1DWTTGXY8M202&cdThread=Tx2OM10PRRTC1WI
[…] Chris Jane on the power of gender in an author’s name: Right, Like a Man Chris Jane on the difficulties of selling and marketing a war story as a woman author. […]