This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Part of a series on |
Sex in speculative fiction |
---|
When I looked at this title, I *thought* it would be an interesting essay on representations of Women in Science Fiction, which the title kind of implies. Instead, this is an article on Women Science Fiction Authors. All qualms about separating this from articles on Science Fiction as a whole aside, I think that this needs a new title and an appropriate article (I am not volunteering, because I don't think I could do justice to it) written in its place. I would assume that that article would not just include the treatment of Women in SF by women authors, but also some kind of "change over time, with influx of more female authors..." as well as treatment in art by people like Vallejo and Frazetta. Still don't see any justification for separating it. Anybody looking up Sci Fi will just miss out, I guess. SO I guess, even though it's important enough for an article, it's not important enough to be read by anybody that doesn't think to look under Women. JHK, feminist and proud of it.
< Eloquence> Moving this here; articles should not contain editorial instructions:
Subjects to be covered:
I think there is a lot to say about the general portrayal of female characters - in the early days, mostly sex symbols and love interest, typically needing endless rescuing from the monster. Some femme fatales. Typically films, comics and cover art show women who conform to current stereotypes of beauty, usually in clothing that is skimpy, tight, or both. Some stronger characters with their own agendas now seem to be emerging - e.g. Ripley in the Alien films, or Starbuck in the remake of Battlestar Galactica, Female leads in Star Wars offer interesting material - e.g. contrast Pricess Leia in the 1980s films with Padme inthe more recent batch.
Also female fandom. -- lquilter 13:19, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
I've tagged this article as unsourced, since it provides no references to back up any of its contents. Valrith 22:34, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
(I am posting this message on the discussion pages of several likely articles and lists; sorry for the cross-posting):
I'd like to invite anyone interested in women's writing to read and comment on a draft article, " Women's literature in English." It began in response to the recent removal of " Woman Writers" as a category. It's close to being finished, but a few more eyes would be really helpful. Thanks! scribblingwoman 16:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
I realize the change I made is fairly significant, but as it stood it was taking a very much minority view (by a critic I'd never heard of) as normative. Women certainly made great contributions to SF before the 1960s, but the genre being "male-oriented" than is the mainstream view and needed a bit more play.-- T. Anthony ( talk) 08:21, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Done - i know some wont like this fact (that SF was traditionally male orientated), but it is verifiable from genre critics. Without this, the lead makes it sound like genre lit was always a bias-free land of equality (like some kind of lesbian SF utopia in fact!). White washing the fact that publishers targeted men doesn't help anyone. I think mentioning that women often felt forced to write under pseudonyms, and the award discrepancy in the past sould slao be in the lead imo. Yobmod ( talk) 08:35, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
"However, some critics have argued that the reputation is unjustified. Eric Leif Davin, for instance, documented almost 1,000 stories published in science fiction magazines by over 200 female-identified authors between 1926 and 1960. [Argues? 1]"
Is the above really his position? Can someone check the cite? 1000 stories over so many years is a very small amount! It is difficult to compare it to the overall number of stories during the same period without original synthesis, but this looks more like an argument that women were massively unrepresented by publishers at the time (due to publisher / reader bias?). Yobmod ( talk) 08:51, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
What is the point of this article? If there is an article Women in science fiction, then why there is no article Men in science fiction? Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 11:28, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
User:Sappho1 has been removing cited content about early women writers, with no explanation. As 2 editors have reverted this multiple times, i think there is no consensus for this removel.
Is there a reason for removing it that i cannot figure out? Unless a reason is given, such removals should be undone, and if they continue, then warnings be given out. I am working on this article in parallel with the Gender in SF article and women in comics, so i notice any changes quite quickly, but if anyone else sees this happenning, reverting has consensus at the moment Yob Mod 08:42, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
It is disappointing that this article makes no mention of Connie Willis at all: with ten Hugos and six Nebulas [1], I believe she is the most-honoured science-fiction author ever (of either gender) (also see this list). Surely this is worth a mention? (I can't figure out how/where to work this in, but it would be nice if someone did.) Shreevatsa ( talk) 02:59, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
It would be nice if there were citations supporting the claims in the final paragraph of the "Fans" section. I, and am sure many others, have not seen a significant amount of notable people making such claims. So, it's either too minor a view to even be worthy of inclusion, or otherwise, there should be some reliable sources. The author is an admin on the site, so maybe I'm wrong, but generally claims like those should be backed up by citations (plus it shouldn't be from biased sources, such as hard SF writers themselves). Also, since when has biology been deemed as a "soft" science? Natural sciences are generally "hard", and biology is varied enough to include such "hard" things a genetic engineering and biophysics. Personally, I think the entire paragraph is pretty useless, especially since it pretty much admits that it's not actually based on any research, but some citations will help. I had initially removed the paragraph (with my other account (not a sock puppet, but one that I was using after I "retired", and one which I won't be using anymore. I edit Wiktionary as well, and had been signed in with that account), by mistake), but restored it after finding out that the author is a veteran here (and I realized I misinterpreted the intentions), and I hope that we'll get some citations here. Though, I am going to remove "biology" from soft sciences. Feel free to re-add it with a citation. Bloodredchaos ( talk) 21:34, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I'm working with OCLC, and we are algorithmically generating data about different Genres, like notable Authors, Book, Movies, Subjects, Characters and Places. We have determined that this Wikipedia page has a close affintity to our detected Genere of science-fiction. It might be useful to look at [2] for more information. Thanks. Maximilianklein ( talk) 23:46, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
I think renaming the article could be a good idea to avoid some confusion that's been mentioned above. I DO think there needs to be a "women in the sf community" article, and the "Gender in Science Fiction" article probably can/will serve the purpose of talking about female characters in sf.
What this article really needs is expansion -- there's a list of Nebulas won by women, but that should probably be joined by a section on the Hugos or else deleted. There's other notable honors that women sf authors/editors/etc have received that could be valuable as well.
The history of the treatment of women involved in the community is where this perhaps needs the most fleshing out. There's a lot of interesting ancedotal stuff in old sf books if you go digging (and I may or may not have ten or so different humorously unintentionally misogynistic/pandering author's notes from anthologies from the 1960s copied down). And it's still a really relevant topic (see: the recent SFWA scandal.) MSK 04:53, 11 June 2013 (UTC)Meagansk — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meagansk ( talk • contribs)
Doesn't count as speculative fiction ? -- Anne97432 ( talk) 08:03, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
It would be well worth including
Doris Lessing in this article. Possibly the most interesting thing about Lessing's contributions is that academia started to consider the genre as respectable - indeed, creating names such as speculative fiction and alternative reality as "grown up" alternatives to "science fiction" and "fantasy". All the best:
Rich
Farmbrough, 22:15, 20 October 2014 (UTC).
The exclusion of Ayn Rand who was the earliest female science fiction writers to gain international recognition is clear plotical bias. 47.189.168.137 ( talk) 19:59, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Part of a series on |
Sex in speculative fiction |
---|
When I looked at this title, I *thought* it would be an interesting essay on representations of Women in Science Fiction, which the title kind of implies. Instead, this is an article on Women Science Fiction Authors. All qualms about separating this from articles on Science Fiction as a whole aside, I think that this needs a new title and an appropriate article (I am not volunteering, because I don't think I could do justice to it) written in its place. I would assume that that article would not just include the treatment of Women in SF by women authors, but also some kind of "change over time, with influx of more female authors..." as well as treatment in art by people like Vallejo and Frazetta. Still don't see any justification for separating it. Anybody looking up Sci Fi will just miss out, I guess. SO I guess, even though it's important enough for an article, it's not important enough to be read by anybody that doesn't think to look under Women. JHK, feminist and proud of it.
< Eloquence> Moving this here; articles should not contain editorial instructions:
Subjects to be covered:
I think there is a lot to say about the general portrayal of female characters - in the early days, mostly sex symbols and love interest, typically needing endless rescuing from the monster. Some femme fatales. Typically films, comics and cover art show women who conform to current stereotypes of beauty, usually in clothing that is skimpy, tight, or both. Some stronger characters with their own agendas now seem to be emerging - e.g. Ripley in the Alien films, or Starbuck in the remake of Battlestar Galactica, Female leads in Star Wars offer interesting material - e.g. contrast Pricess Leia in the 1980s films with Padme inthe more recent batch.
Also female fandom. -- lquilter 13:19, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
I've tagged this article as unsourced, since it provides no references to back up any of its contents. Valrith 22:34, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
(I am posting this message on the discussion pages of several likely articles and lists; sorry for the cross-posting):
I'd like to invite anyone interested in women's writing to read and comment on a draft article, " Women's literature in English." It began in response to the recent removal of " Woman Writers" as a category. It's close to being finished, but a few more eyes would be really helpful. Thanks! scribblingwoman 16:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
I realize the change I made is fairly significant, but as it stood it was taking a very much minority view (by a critic I'd never heard of) as normative. Women certainly made great contributions to SF before the 1960s, but the genre being "male-oriented" than is the mainstream view and needed a bit more play.-- T. Anthony ( talk) 08:21, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Done - i know some wont like this fact (that SF was traditionally male orientated), but it is verifiable from genre critics. Without this, the lead makes it sound like genre lit was always a bias-free land of equality (like some kind of lesbian SF utopia in fact!). White washing the fact that publishers targeted men doesn't help anyone. I think mentioning that women often felt forced to write under pseudonyms, and the award discrepancy in the past sould slao be in the lead imo. Yobmod ( talk) 08:35, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
"However, some critics have argued that the reputation is unjustified. Eric Leif Davin, for instance, documented almost 1,000 stories published in science fiction magazines by over 200 female-identified authors between 1926 and 1960. [Argues? 1]"
Is the above really his position? Can someone check the cite? 1000 stories over so many years is a very small amount! It is difficult to compare it to the overall number of stories during the same period without original synthesis, but this looks more like an argument that women were massively unrepresented by publishers at the time (due to publisher / reader bias?). Yobmod ( talk) 08:51, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
What is the point of this article? If there is an article Women in science fiction, then why there is no article Men in science fiction? Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 11:28, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
User:Sappho1 has been removing cited content about early women writers, with no explanation. As 2 editors have reverted this multiple times, i think there is no consensus for this removel.
Is there a reason for removing it that i cannot figure out? Unless a reason is given, such removals should be undone, and if they continue, then warnings be given out. I am working on this article in parallel with the Gender in SF article and women in comics, so i notice any changes quite quickly, but if anyone else sees this happenning, reverting has consensus at the moment Yob Mod 08:42, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
It is disappointing that this article makes no mention of Connie Willis at all: with ten Hugos and six Nebulas [1], I believe she is the most-honoured science-fiction author ever (of either gender) (also see this list). Surely this is worth a mention? (I can't figure out how/where to work this in, but it would be nice if someone did.) Shreevatsa ( talk) 02:59, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
It would be nice if there were citations supporting the claims in the final paragraph of the "Fans" section. I, and am sure many others, have not seen a significant amount of notable people making such claims. So, it's either too minor a view to even be worthy of inclusion, or otherwise, there should be some reliable sources. The author is an admin on the site, so maybe I'm wrong, but generally claims like those should be backed up by citations (plus it shouldn't be from biased sources, such as hard SF writers themselves). Also, since when has biology been deemed as a "soft" science? Natural sciences are generally "hard", and biology is varied enough to include such "hard" things a genetic engineering and biophysics. Personally, I think the entire paragraph is pretty useless, especially since it pretty much admits that it's not actually based on any research, but some citations will help. I had initially removed the paragraph (with my other account (not a sock puppet, but one that I was using after I "retired", and one which I won't be using anymore. I edit Wiktionary as well, and had been signed in with that account), by mistake), but restored it after finding out that the author is a veteran here (and I realized I misinterpreted the intentions), and I hope that we'll get some citations here. Though, I am going to remove "biology" from soft sciences. Feel free to re-add it with a citation. Bloodredchaos ( talk) 21:34, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I'm working with OCLC, and we are algorithmically generating data about different Genres, like notable Authors, Book, Movies, Subjects, Characters and Places. We have determined that this Wikipedia page has a close affintity to our detected Genere of science-fiction. It might be useful to look at [2] for more information. Thanks. Maximilianklein ( talk) 23:46, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
I think renaming the article could be a good idea to avoid some confusion that's been mentioned above. I DO think there needs to be a "women in the sf community" article, and the "Gender in Science Fiction" article probably can/will serve the purpose of talking about female characters in sf.
What this article really needs is expansion -- there's a list of Nebulas won by women, but that should probably be joined by a section on the Hugos or else deleted. There's other notable honors that women sf authors/editors/etc have received that could be valuable as well.
The history of the treatment of women involved in the community is where this perhaps needs the most fleshing out. There's a lot of interesting ancedotal stuff in old sf books if you go digging (and I may or may not have ten or so different humorously unintentionally misogynistic/pandering author's notes from anthologies from the 1960s copied down). And it's still a really relevant topic (see: the recent SFWA scandal.) MSK 04:53, 11 June 2013 (UTC)Meagansk — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meagansk ( talk • contribs)
Doesn't count as speculative fiction ? -- Anne97432 ( talk) 08:03, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
It would be well worth including
Doris Lessing in this article. Possibly the most interesting thing about Lessing's contributions is that academia started to consider the genre as respectable - indeed, creating names such as speculative fiction and alternative reality as "grown up" alternatives to "science fiction" and "fantasy". All the best:
Rich
Farmbrough, 22:15, 20 October 2014 (UTC).
The exclusion of Ayn Rand who was the earliest female science fiction writers to gain international recognition is clear plotical bias. 47.189.168.137 ( talk) 19:59, 5 May 2024 (UTC)