I have heard "he needs to get laid" or some similar sentiment. However, this can be true regardless of whether the man is at that time experiencing blue balls. I've also heard it stated with respect to women.
But people will also say "she needs to get laid." So you can say, "Person X needs to get laid," to either sex, regardless of the underlying truth of the statement. Secondarily, you can also say "she must be PMSing" or some similar menstrual reference only to women, if it is to make any sense. (Although sometimes people will say this about a man, too, in a joking capacity.) As this is something that can only apply to women, it is also capable of misinterpretation and of being used in a sexist manner. The argument that it is not sexist because you could say that a man is suffering from blue balls is unconvincing. As I stated above, I have not heard the blue balls reference in a derogatory manner directed at a man in a belittling or derogatory fashion. Has it, at some point, ever been said by anyone to any man in the entire history of mankind? I'm sure it has. But not with the sort of regularity and widespread usage that PMS remarks have been used toward women. Given the limited upside to using it, and the potential downside to doing so, it seems to me that the balancing test on this issue would weigh in favor of not utilizing it. If someone feels that they simply must use it for artistic reasons, by all means go ahead. But that tells me something about the artist, and it's not something that would strike me favorably. If it's being used as artistic expression, it doesn't matter how it strikes me. But if the writer does not wholeheartedly believe that that subject is necessary for conveying the story in his heart, and does want to take into consideration what readers would think and how they would react, I'd say it's better not to use it.
Okay, we just appear to view the matter from a different perspective, then. Personally I believe hormones can sometimes make a guy behave irrationally even without a serious medical condition as its cause. Oh, that happens more often than you think. Guys do storm off because of blue balls and others do go: "Jeez, must have blue balls. That guy really should get laid," or something of the sort. So in that sense it is comparable if otherwise a wholly different kind of a bodily function. It can happen especially if the guy in question does not want to jerk off for whatever reason (which also happens more often than one might think). Let's just say that I have traveled long enough with other females that I've seen it happen to most, sometimes at the most inopportune moments, sometimes at the most opportune moments, most times just in-between. It's no biggie, but it happens, and sometimes plays some part in some events, that's all, no more, no less. And I do recommend you read the parts with Brienne in them, they're great. And in the books she's about as far from the Hound as a capable warrior woman can be. I haven't seen the TV-show so I don't know how they've portrayed her character there.
Let me preface this by saying that I have no intention of using it as a point for all the reasons you have stated. But I still maintain female readers who suffer particularly bad PMS could empathise with the character more because the mindset rings true for them. I know one woman in particular who becomes real dragon, to the point that I've wondered if she's doing it for effect. Almost as if she has a five day excuse to be a right bastard. But if that's not the case, and she does get insanely grumpy, then she would most likely read said content and feel it's very real.
It's not as widespread yet anyway. But let's just say that I've heard it a bunch of times in the past year whereas I didn't hear it at all ten years ago. Coincidentally, I haven't heard the PMS remark about women in at least a year. People around here at least seem to be sensitive enough not to accuse women of PMSing in instances when, say, a woman leaves in a huff from a social gathering with no satisfactory reason for her angry departure. After a stunned silence, folks seem to just go back to what they were talking about. On the flipside, it seems men don't have a similar social shield and do end up the butt of jokes after they've left in a hissy fit, be they accusations of blue balls, "male PMSing", having his panties in a bunch, having a pubic hair stuck under his foreskin, or what have you. And mind, I've observed this sort of behavior in more than one circle of people and in more than one city. Then again, it might be a cultural thing too: around here, men who crack such jokes about women usually find themselves with blue balls and a broken nose (or they're just shunned by both, men and women if it's a more sophisticated get-together/happens at work/school). Edit: I have met more women who think like that instead of viewing it as a sexist stab at their sex than vice versa, so perhaps opinions on the subject vary greatly in general (also probably depending on, well, everything: personality, age, upbringing, nationality, education, life experiences, social status etc. etc).
Hahaha. How long though? I know a couple of girls who travelled together for a year or so, a while, "it just stopped". Apparently it's hard to find a pregnancy test in the jungles of south east Asia, so it made for a nervous couple of weeks. They also didn't get their period until about three months after they got back. I've been told this is the case for women who have lived in foreign countries too. But who knows, birth control can have this effect, so it may have been related to medication they may have been taking. EDIT: Really? All the Finish girls I've met have been really friendly and quite relaxed... I can't imagine them breaking someone's nose over a sexist quip.
Perhaps there is a movement afoot (particularly amongst the young) to popularize blue balls as an excuse for a man's boorish or distasteful behavior, and to which I am not attuned. As far as someone who experiences bad PMS sympathizing with a character who experiences the same, I suppose that's true, but it's true with respect to almost any condition, especially medical ones. A similar statement could be made with respect to asthma, or allergies, or chronic fatigue syndrome or numerous other conditions. There have been similar discussions regarding mental health conditions, because they also have the ability to stigmatize groups of people, and the points made in those discussions are somewhat applicable here.
Most of the girls/women were travelling from one to several months. I actually haven't heard of anyone stopping menstruating because they're traveling (although I've heard many a lady wish they would!), quite the opposite: that it happens just when it shouldn't (usually starts earlier than expected), but of course I don't disregard the possibility that some women could stop menstruating altogether while on the road; stress can do weird things to a human body, female or male.
There will always be those who, for one reason or another, either cannot or choose not to control themselves. Alas. I find it comforting if I read a book and, lo and behold, a character emerges who is suffering of a similar thing as I am (be it a physical condition like an injury, a chronic injury, an illness, or something on the emotional side like PTSD, depression, or even a broken heart). Then again, ever since I was a kid I've always sought to form bonds with the characters I read about and if some have gone through something nasty I've experienced, it feels all warm and fuzzy, sorta kinda like I'm not the only person who's had thing X happen to them or they experience thing Y like I do. Naturally an author has the power to spew all kinds of shit and spread hate etc, but that's not nearly every author, thank goodness.
I realize that you're not necessarily arguing that the possible female traits that you mention are female traits, just that they could be presented as such, but I have to argue against the idea of presenting them as such. In our society, female children tend to receive positive reinforcement for crying. No, not in the from of "You're crying! Good for you!", but in the form of sympathy, attention, possibly bribes. Male children tend to receive negative reinforcement for crying and positive reinforcement for suppressing their feelings and putting up a brave front. Similarly, female children are encouraged to roleplay loving caretaking behavior; a boy that cradles a doll is treated as barely short of mentally ill, or perhaps _as_ mentally ill. In a society that lacks these patterns of reinforcement, I see no reason at all why girls would cry more than boys, or women be more drawn to children than men. And men, when they get together, invariably sing sweet songs of peace? Women in our society are often supposed to be sweetness and light and get along with everyone. Two men can argue and compete, and in fact are often expected to do so; women who do the same are seen as hating each other. This is something else that I would argue is societally determined. Manipulation is the strategy of a person with few other avenues of power. Vanity is the strategy of a person whose primary avenue of power is based in appearance. In a world where men and women have equal power, these should not be primarily female traits. They should also no longer be traits that a men fears to exhibit for fear of being called feminine. So I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see a much larger percentage of passive-aggressive and preening men. Speaking to the assault question, I would also expect sexual assault to either be much less frequent, or to see it much less lopsided in terms of the sex of the offenders and victims, than in our society.
No, there doesn't have to be, but it's a feminine trait, and considering how many irrational plot twists PMS and menses have caused in my life, if treated humorously (like the girl throwing a kid in a pond. I mean, yeah, horrible, but funny too cos the kid can swim) I find it refreshing something this reletable happens in a story. Or maybe the warrior got randy with some prince, and now she's afraid she got preggies because if she did, she'd be in big trouble as her occupation doesn't really allow being pregnant, and the prince would surely just forget all about her, and then she's like "where the hell's my period?" and finally it does come and she's off the hook, but this is something that wouldn't cross a male warrior's mind (he might be concerned of other things). I, as a woman, tend to write things that I, as a woman, can relate to. Plus, traits exclusively feminine can be treated positively: the quirky mom throws the first period party! Cake and fun! Just 'cause you haven't heard of it, doesn't mean it hasn't happened But in all seriousness, men's blue balls can have more devastating results that, in turn, can lead to an unwanted pregnancy and lots of emotional damage in the fmc's case. Well, let's just say that my history with the quirks of the female reproductive system reads like a stellar opposite of this "pattern." So yeah, I think it depends on the individual. A lot of exercise and a drop in body fat can mess up the cycle, even halt it, so that could explain the absence of menses in warrior women in medieval fantasy... at least that's what I tell myself. Are you arguing against me or whatever society that presents them as such? No, I wasn't saying they're female traits, but they occur in females (as in men too), yet our patriarchal society has over time dubbed certain traits 'feminine', certain 'masculine' (e.g. in Lois Tyson, 2006), so if used in a novel, many people may associate certain traits with women, certain with men. Which society is that? Yours or mine or someone else's? (I don't know where you're from, but if it's the US or the UK, yeah, there might be different gender roles there than in Scandinavia). Anyway, I have no real data on the reinforcement that kids receive, but in the context of AV's novel, it's probably ok for a girl to cry as a kid (while boys get slapped around their ears) and she doesn't learn to curb her emotions (I don't advocate this). Enter the world of fencing with the boys -- this is an example -- and she gets roughed up a bit in grappling. And cries. And the swordmaster tears her a new one. But it could be that the boys had already learned not to cry and won't have to deal with this at that point. Sorry, this is a horrible example. But to highlight the point. YES! They sing songs of peace and of honey on warm, crunchy toast, and of butterflies fluttering about half-naked nymphs-- No, wait. Ok, back to the topic. Again there's the "our society" we haven't defined. Well, let's not go into that then, but instead; So I go "I hate that chick" at the gym. Or, you know, this girl just got an awesome job and married some rich hunk. "I hate her!" So I guess I wasn't talking of real hate there, and I apologize for mispresenting my thoughts. In bodybuilding magazines some women even joke about this, hence I thought maybe I'm not the only one, and that this hate-that-isn't-hate felt like something rather feminine. You know, while men pat their backs and guffaw and get along swimmingly (after the group has agreed on who's the alpha...) Food for thought: here and here. But darn it, if I had to travel for a long period of time with a girl... I'd go nuts! (just 'cause I think so, doesn't mean it's a feminine trait. That's just a personal thing).
This is axiomatic. It applies to almost anything. Although some people who have experienced something similar, people who have not need to be drawn into the experience more. They can empathize more than sympathize, while people with the same experience can do both. People for whom the experience does not ring true, however, will be more alienated -- disconnect, rather than connect. That is, people who experience something, but experience and interpret in a vastly different way will have a more difficult time connecting with a character than will someone who has no experience or who has experienced it in the same way. It's up to the writer how he wants to weigh these considerations. Same as above Yes, but this is a practical issue -- not so much a character trait. And it's not always something relevant to the plot. It can become extremely relevant if part of the plot is the existence of the child, but it is not always necessarily worthy of exploration if nothing comes of it. (It might be as part of the character development or showing the relationship between the two characters and how it is handled, though.) [/QUOTE] I've heard of these and the whole idea is so cringe-inducing to me it makes me want to barf. For me, finding that plotline in a story would turn me off completely. But that's just me. I'd obviously not be the target reader. I freely admit this. If the man can't or won't take care of the condition himself, that's his problem. The blue balls themselves don't lead to unwanted pregnancy. A sexual assault could, but I don't think a blue balls defense would be very persuasive. Unlike severe PMS, there's a quick and easy fix, close at hand ;-) If a man sees sexual assault as his preferred solution, that's really a different matter entirely. He could see sexual assault as the way to resolve an erection, too.
This is a tad off-topic, but since it was brought up: In my society (Scandinavian), I've observed men and women have different sorts of pissing contests when in the context of purely male or female groups. This female "hatred" of females has already been discussed to a degree so I won't go there (and it's not like I know much about forming hierarchies in purely female groups anyway). I'm planning to write a blog post about this subject, but don't want to derail this thread, so I'll just post this interesting quote regarding forming hierarchies within groups of men from an article by Jack Donovan (author of Androphilia): "A man establishes his own position by applying pressure on the men around him. The men who succumb to that pressure fall beneath him. They may resent him or covet his status, but in some way they are always looking up to him." I've found that's often subconscious, but sometimes conscious as well, especially if the man in question is interested in studying human behavior. I've observed that once men fall into this sort of a loose hierarchy within a group, things grow a tad more peaceful and calm than prior to finding out who is the alpha and who occupy the rungs below him and in what order. I'm not sure of all the differences between the ways men and women form hierarchies in monosex groups and then act within said groups after the hierarchy has been formed, but I do believe men and women act a bit differently in this regard. Precisely, and no matter what he chooses, he will always end up pleasing some readers while alienating others. The curse of taste and free will, I guess.
In a way I agree, though we would have to venture into the world of semantics (traits, issue...) to arrive to a definite conclusion -- if any exists. Emphasis added, with that point I do agree. I also agree with this. Maybe a lot also depends on the writer: if they have certain experiences that have changed their lives or affected their relationships in a big way, they will be more inclined to transfer those experiences into a novel. I hope you didn't interpret I'm a huge fan of this stuff and have my characters throw parties like this 'cause it is weird. But hey, at least it's something positive. And I wouldn't put down a book that explored the subject. Way "worse" things turn me off completely. I was hinting at rape, yeah. And no, didn't even cross my mind that blue balls would be a defense. But probably wouldn't be the first time a man assaults a woman sexually after he's gotten blue balls and she's "led him on" (or so he says). The consequences of a seemingly mundane bodily function can sometimes be serious. But that's OT.
If anything, blue balls is an excuse to rape someone, just as wearing a skirt, her leading him on, her being drunk, etc. Rape is not the consequence of blue balls. Rape is the consequence of an entire culture where this kind of twisted, malicious thinking is believed to be reasonable. The biggest problem I have with these articles is that they are stereotypes of women. "All women hate each other," is an absolute statement. Generally, absolute statements are inherently false. In the other one, it claims that women hate women more than men hate men. Here is published scientific research that contradicts both these statements. While there may be patterns of women hating other women, that does not mean it is always true, nor even a persistent tendency. It just means it can happen sometimes. I personally tend to think of women as protective and nurturing toward over women rather than catty and jealous.
Yeah, I agree. Yup. Hence I wrote there, "food for thought" instead of "this proves my point, check out all this scientific data." Also, I wanted to show that "hey, I didn't make this up on my own! Other people have noticed something like this too and are talking about it." In any case, thanks for posting the published scientific research. It was very interesting, actually, though I'm afraid we're comparing apples and oranges here (or apples and apple pears; while not a hybrid, bears close resemblance to an apple). Also, it's a bit weird to put scientific data side by side with a subjective and very much non-scientific, opinionated blog rant, which I intended only as an example anyway, not as truth set in stone. Well, this is difficult to determine. Right now what we have here is one research done in the US, to college students, no less. What about later in working life? Or in elementary or high school? The army? (I'm not saying you have to answer these, just wondering "out loud" )
Isn't that essentially the age-old stereotype of the kind, caring, nurturing woman? One difference I have noticed between the sexes is solving conflicts between members of the same sex: even though the differences aren't nearly as vast as they used to be, men still generally resort to violence against other men more often than women against other women. The ladies tend to use other means to solve a conflict and if it's something like alienating one girl from a group of friends, its effects can be much more lasting than a quick punch or two behind the pub (men even quite often bond after a tussle and end up getting even more wasted together). Something to consider when wondering which traits commonly regarded as masculine or feminine to attribute to a fictional character.
Robert E. Howard, who wrote during the twenties recognised in his writing how callous women can be towards each other. There was a scene were a pirate lady was whipping a slave girl 'with feminine malice, a woman can only exact on another woman.' Then again, he struck me as a man who had a serious case of the blue balls.
While your cited blog rants may well be food for thought, research is always superior brain food. There are limitations to quantitative research (as this study is), but if you want a good counterpart to quantitative research, go with qualitative research. Not blog rants. If you want to learn more about this kind of research, you could try looking for dissertations here. They usually are the more comprehensive than your traditional study, and are sometimes qualitative (though mostly quantitative).
I'm not sure why you think women have to either act like men or act like bitches. You should research famous historical women. There are a lot of strong women who accomplished powerful things without the need to emulate men. You could find inspiration for your female characters among them.
lolled Exactly what I was trying to tell you. Things get confusing if one "counters" a blog rant with a study, only one, no less, because the blog rant is not "proof" of whatever phenomenon, but it's an example of behavior, it might even be part of the research material which, in the end, will turn, e.g. into a paper. However, research can show a generalization or a pattern. E.g. Men hate men more than women hate women among North-American college students, so one could deduce, one cannot really make a character look less like a dude with a vag if she uses certain not-so-nice social tactics around other women but not around men, because that's not established as a markedly feminine trait. Thank you, very considerate of you I have written a few papers during my less-than-stellar university life and working on one right now @AV: If you're looking for ideas, at least when I write characters, I often find inspiration and "realness" to them from blogs as well as forums dedicated to certain groups. That type of research (yes, the word 'research' is used with two meanings in this post) can provide a ton of ideas. Sure, it's good to know what kind of research has been done concerning the whatever field the author is interested in, but the meat and butter for the characters come from elsewhere, afaic. Oh, and I disagree that research is always superior brainfood, but that's also another topic.
When we're discussing a thing like creating an original yet credible character, I believe ideas derived from, say, word of mouth (e.g. you talked to a hobo at the subway station or a child in a park) can be just as valuable as ideas derived from, say, an academic study. This is because we're not talking about proving a scientific argument, but, rather, creating art. And if you really look at what constitutes a credible character, basically anything is acceptable because, after all, there are over 7 109 000 000 people on Earth and perhaps even more in a fictional world, so it's fairly certain that there are all kinds of weird individuals out there. That is to say, it's kinda hard to go wrong if your goal is to create a realistic, plausible character. Granted, if you really go "out there" with your creation, you have to accept that you are writing an exception, but then again, who wants to write characters who are just carbon copies of one another, all created according to strict standards derived from averages derived from statistics, nothing more? That might be a fun experiment too, of course: how standardized a character can I create and can I do something interesting and original with one? I daresay that writing a woman who dotes on other women is just as credible as writing a woman who simply loathes all other women. You could write something in-between just as well and still remain in the realm of credible and plausible characters; you just have to figure out what sort of a character would inspire you the most. If you've written plenty of tough women who love women, maybe you can toss in one who hates women. Or perhaps a dainty girl who adores or hates women or even visit the middle ground between the extremes. You know, play around with it, experiment, and I'm sure you'll come up with inspiring and original, yet credible characters a-plenty (this isn't aimed just at AVCortez, but to everyone in general).
