Show, don't tell: why they need to be there.

It's books like Mercedes Lackey's Valdemar series and Marion Zimmer Bradley's Darkover books, that painted gay, lesbian, and bisexual characters as perfectly normal, that I didn't hate myself when I realized I was bi. I grew up in a very Christian house, hearing homophobia and hate from my dad, and I had quite literally no link to the outside world for most of my adolescence. Those books made a huge impact, and it seriously bothers me that with all the strides forward we have made, there is still crap about how "well, books with gay characters won't sell". Or, you can get away with a side character (sometimes) but not the main character. And even if it's not 100% true, new writers who long to be published and pay way too much attention to "the rules" take it as gospel. And there really aren't that many more books with GBLT characters being published now than there were in the 90s. And I find that sad and horrendous.

On a similar note, although this has changed now, I pretty much gave up reading YA as a kid because girls couldn't be heroes. There were a few exceptions, like Tamora Pierce, but most of the books I could find with girl protagonists were like the Sweet Valley High books. And this was again in the 90s. And even now, I hear it trotted out that "Well, girls will read everything, but boys will only read books about boys, so we have to write about boys." Early last year, there was a blog post that went around about how the trend of girl heroes in YA was fucking over boys and setting them up to fail, because we aren't paying enough attention to them. Christ on a cracker.

And I was the girl who refused to read about boys, because I don't identify with them. I want to read about women kicking ass, being the heroines of their own stories. Fortunately, when I got to the point that I graduated beyond kids' books, there was a lot of adult fantasy options with heroines. I had quite the collection of Sword & Sorceress anthologies, and I'm pretty annoyed my former housemate sold my box of them thinking it was my ex's.

It is an amazing thing when you keep reading books that stereotype people like you, often as the villain, and then you come across a book that actually has people like you as the well-rounded hero/ine. I did not particularly care for the internalized homophobia in Black Blade Blues -- although it was realistic -- but it was amazing to read about a lesbian protagonist who isn't treated any different because she's a lesbian. I LOVED the sequel, in which she had worked through her internalized homophobia, and was about her and her girlfriend having adventures, and blessedly free of the whole "we have to make the otherwise competent heroine fuck up in some way so the hero can have His Moment" trend that is oh-so-common in urban fantasy. (Seriously, if I see one more heroine fuck something up that is supposedly the thing she is best at, or do stuff that is TSTL, so the hero can shine.... I will fucking break something.)

Thank you for writing this. <3

Oh, I wasn't saying it was bad or poorly done... it was very very well done, but it was uncomfortable for me to read because I went through that, and it brought back a lot of bad memories. It was very realistic, and I can see where it would be helpful to some people. For me, though, I preferred the second. (And can't wait for more in the series!) :)

Unfortunately, then Lackey went and perpetrated a truly appalling trans fail. :( It kind of broke my heart, because I fell in love (sort of literally - a serious crush, anyway) with Vanyel when I was a young teen looking for some indication that people like-me in orientation if not in sex existed. She really did do a fantastic job with the LGB axis. I have no idea why she took leave of her senses for the T.

(The latest Diana Tregarde short story features a trans woman who is played as a joke and a killer, and routinely misgendered. There's also this : http://www.mercedeslackey.com/am_valdemar.html [search for "transgender"]; warning for serious cissexism and general jackassery.)

I dunno either. I remember that story and was pretty horrified. Particularly when there are so few representations of trans characters in fiction or media. (Which is why I'm trying to include them in my own fiction, although writing while dealing with chronic pain is argh-inducing.)

As far as the Valdemar Q&A... ISTR reading that back in the late 90s/early 00s. I knew authors at that time whose agents were telling them to take their gay characters out of books because they "wouldn't sell". One of these agents was the same agent that Lackey has -- and writers tend to believe the agents because they supposedly know the market better. This particular agent said similar about a certain author's lesbian character (lesbians won't sell, lesbians are boring, people won't be able to identify with them, they're a niche market).

This is not to try to excuse Lackey, because what she said was clearly screwed up, even if she was just repeating what she was told. But, speaking as a writer, being discouraged by an agent can mean a lot (and everything I have heard about this particular agent indicates that he is pushy about his opinions). When the Gay YA thing made the rounds last summer, there were a lot of authors spoke up about how they took gay characters out of their books because their agents or editors told them to. It's a serious issue.

I'm hoping that she will rethink the issue and write trans characters that are equally as awesome as her gay and bisexual characters in Valdemar. I can hope, right?

Hmm. I had not heard that about the agent before. In some ways that makes it weirder that Lackey *did* write good, strong GLB characters, but you're right that she might have unquestioningly swallowed his BS when it came to trans characters. It is also sadly quite likely that one reason my wife was able to include a trans protagonist (where it wasn't an after-school special story, just someone who happened to have that background) is that she's working without an agent and with a tiny publishing company.

I'm hoping so as well, but honestly, I think Lackey's now got the "older, established writer set in her ways" thing going on. Unfortunately.

It's not especially common knowledge. The author who talked about it initially did so on a public board, but that board is unfortunately long gone so I can't link to it.

I don't have an agent and since I'm doing e-publishing, I don't need one, but from what I have heard from published writer friends, there are a lot of agents that are pretty conservative. Not socially conservative, per se, but conservative in what they think will sell. They don't want an author to "waste" their time writing something that they can't sell (and this does happen, a lot). Particularly in the current publishing environment, where NY has not recovered from the economic downturn, and is further threatened by the explosion of e-publishing and self-publishing. I have heard a lot of agents advising authors to "play it safe" and stick with what will sell, rather than taking chances. And I can kinda understand the theory they're working behind, but it sucks.

In the series I'm working on right now, which is urban fantasy with romantic elements, the love interest in book 4 is a trans lady. (Now, how long it will actually take me to get to the point of writing it is anyone's guess. Damn pain disorder.) It worries me a little, because I want to try to go with an e-publisher (as I really don't want to do all the work of self-pubbing, and NY is not an option for me because I cannot guarantee sticking to a regular publishing schedule with my health the way it is) and I don't know how they will take to a trans character. I'm still going to write it, and if I have to self-pub it to get it out there, I will.

On the subject of trans characters, I would recommend Amanda Downum's Bone Palace. One of the secondary characters is a trans woman (and in a poly relationship to boot), and it's quite well done IMO. I'm not trans so it is possible there is something I missed, but it felt very true to what my trans partners have described. :)

Makes more sense that I might've missed it, then, but I appreciate the background! It also makes sense that agents might be extra cautious; the agent-ed authors who are friends of mine have certainly run into similar hesitance to publish things that might be hard to sell, though blessedly nothing on the "socially conservative limitations" front (just "is there room for another YA vampire novel" or whatever).

(I hear you on the writing issues; not as bad for me, but typing is fairly painful.) Good luck, of course! If you do get the book published, I'll be first in line to buy it. :) Incidentally, if you do want to work with a tiny primarily e-publisher, I'm happy to tell you that Candlemark & Gleam *adores* books about less common characters, is flexible about pub dates, has a history of starred Publisher's Weekly reviews for their authors, and pays 30% royalties... the down side is that they are very, very small. One person and some volunteers, really.

I think I saw you mention that elsewhere, and promptly added it to my ILL list! Thanks!

Honestly, I think that's a large part of why self-pub is taking off so hugely. Folks have the option now to write the things they have wanted to, publish it themselves, and reach a readership. I know a bunch of authors who are publishing "trunk" novels that are perfectly good, but their publisher didn't want them for whatever reason.

I'm certainly not decrying traditional publishing, because I believe it has its place, but for those of us who write things that NY hasn't wanted to take a chance on -- it's awesome to have that option. E-publishers are great, too, but your bigger e-pubs are doing romance and if you don't write that, you have less options.

Though, it puts me in mind of Deidre Knight's Butterfly Tattoo. The hero is bisexual and the story takes place after his husband died. It's romance, and he's with a woman, but his late husband is an integral part of the story. Deidre is an agent herself and went all over the place in NY. She has talked quite openly about how so many editors told her "This is an amazing book, I love it, it's a keeper... but we can't publish it because it will be too controversial."

This, by the way, was in 2009.

I'll keep that in mind, thanks! :)

Thank you for recommending Butterfly Tattoo! I haven't finished reading it yet...but especially coming out of this conversation, I can see myself in both main characters' shoes, remember feeling some of the things they're feeling--regarding the sexuality, anyway, not the assault or partner's death.

Man, aside from being ace instead of bi and growing up in the 1970s to early 1980s, I was YOU. I wish i had run into the Valdemar books when I was young, for the Darkover books were incredible. (I only discovered Tamora Pierce a couple of years ago.)

I have a hard time finding good fantasy written for adults. Much of the good stuff ends up in the teen section in my town's library...but so does much of the stuff that's crammed full of internalized misogyny. What books would you recommend? (Aside from Seanan's, because I already have hers on reserve. So...whenever they come in.)

(Seriously, if I see one more heroine fuck something up that is supposedly the thing she is best at, or do stuff that is TSTL, so the hero can shine.... I will fucking break something.)

You and me both. That goes double for any book that fridges a woman so that the male lead can be motivated to do something halfway decent AND for any book that presents the creepy stalker-serial killer type who terrifies the heroine as the ideal love interest. ( If I could declare a moratorium on the Stuffed In A Fridge, Stalking Is Love and Rape Is Love tropes, I would do it in a SECOND.)

I am gonna cheat and point you to the thread on my LJ where I am doing just that. (because after writing this comment I went and ranted.) Book recommendations FTW! >_>

I think you just named my three most hated tropes. Well, that and the TSTL thing.

I would recommend Kate Elliot for the simple reason that she is deeply aware of virtually all of the cultural assumptions we make about just about everything (who says that anthropology is worthless?) She does the kind of world-building that some authors merely dream of, and does it in an off-handed manner that makes it look easy.

Mind you, in some of her books the lot of women Ain't Nice, but that's because the culture she's constructed works that way. A character basically sold into sexual slavery because of debt is something she pulled out of history, not something she stuck in for so-called character development. But some of her other series have completely different assumptions about the lot of women, or the lot of gender in general. She's not a one-note writer.

That's almost exactly how I felt once I watched the movie Agora. It was the first story that I ever remembered where there was a female main character who had no desire for romance, and didn't end with her in a romance at all, and that was not portrayed as a defect. It's also one reason I loved Feed and Deadline: Books where the characters' principal relationship isn't romance? SIGN ME UP NOW PLEASE. (I'm such a sucker for good sib relationships too). It's a powerful feeling, to finally find representation. Feels validating.

... I don't think I have ever heard of this movie. I shall have to look it up!

It's a not-extremely historically accurate, highly fictionalized account of the life of Hypatia (I say that so you know it's definitely not a historically accurate thing. I don't mind, but some people do.) I just thought it was wonderful to see a main female character whose main interest was in science and even though other people wanted her, she had no interest and was still respected and there was no need for a romantic subplot/ending. I squeed FOREVER when I realized she wasn't going to end up with anyone.

Meh, I don't expect any movie to be historically accurate. I expect it to be a good story! If it takes liberties with history, whatevs. XD

..... I would make a very bad SCAdian. LOL

That sounds awesome! I do love me some romantic plots but it gets really annoying that you can have plenty of stories with heroes that don't end up romantically involved with anyone, but heroines almost always end up paired off, particularly in movies. Blargh.

I don't either, so I would also be a horrible SCAdian.

Yeah, I mean, it's the fact that every. single. story. has to end with people paired off. Even 'inclusive' stories that feature queer people all end up with them in blissful romantic monogamous coupledom. The queer community has its own normality. Hence my never-ending squee haha.

I will admit to being really guilty of that myself -- but that's something I'll try to be more conscious of in the future. Cause, you're right, it shouldn't all be about pairing off :)

You write a lot of romance stuff, though, don't you? I mean, that'd make sense in that context.

What I dislike is when I pick up a book or story that has a really interesting plot without any need for romance and it's just kind of shoe-horned in there because you CAN'T HAVE A STORY WITHOUT ROMANCE OMG. I also find it really disturbing how many stories use pairing off and/or babies as 'everything will be okay now' shorthand. A lot of YA heroines/heroes really aren't in any place to have a healthy relationship, but that's completely glossed over in favor of romance where everything magically works out.

...I have feelings, can you tell? XD

I do :) and it does, but there's no reason I can't have side characters who are perfectly happy being single! Or a character in an ensemble cast, which is some of what I write too.

AND OMFG THE BABIES. HATE.

... okay let me explain XD

When I first started reading romance, there was a trend of baby epilogues. I remember quite vividly a book with a career oriented heroine who said quite vocally that she Did Not Want Children -- even after she met the hero. And then we have this epilogue! In which she has a baby and is acting like a fucking Stepford Wife and has quit her job to stay home with the kid. It was SICKENING, and it was really fucking common for awhile.

It is thankfully not as prevalent in fantasy/paranormal, which generally tend to avoid the matter of kids altogether. But holy shit. Some books hit the wall, I'm telling you.

Hey, many SCAdians are perfectly fine with taking some liberties with history. Don't write off a whole tens of thousands of people organization full of weirdos on that ground ;-). A lot of us are more about dress in a somewhat period fashion to putter in a lot of somewhat period ways while socializing with other weirdos.

I read Valdemar and the Dragonriders books in high school, and hadn't realized quite how earth shattering they were in their treatment of sexuality, and yes I include Pern because they made it very clear that men had sex with other men because they did. Not because they were perverts. The series also had a clear definition of relationships because we want to, and because we have to. Although, I didn't realize how much the fact that only men got away with that really irritated me.

I think that even for those of us who are young and straight...or not so young :-) ... it is critical that we read these other viewpoints written sympathetically, rather than that Asian guy who lives down the street but you don't KNOW anyone like that, because I went to a 2000+ person high school w 3 black students. Yes three, you didn't even have to try to count them. How am I supposed to get a diverse outlook, if I can't read them? I certainly won't meet them.

I graduated in the late 80s, diverse sexuality was still something relegated to San Francisco and other places. Not here. Those diverse main characters and viewpoints helped me accept the glbt spectrum as just another part of us, Midwestern hicks. I even appreciated the fact that Vanyel was a farm boy, well ranch but who's counting. It put him into my context and my world.

Thanks for keeping us open. Since I doubt you could write *any* faster, now I have new folk to read.