I think he meant that men who exhibit feminine qualities are considered pathetic -- not necessarily that women are. But I could be incorrect. I think these guys sometimes still have issues in groups of other men -- unless they are Bill Gates and have a billion dollars. But once they're older, I think, they end up finding some other people who are similar to themselves. Even though other men might not put them high in the pecking order, they'll find other areas in which they can be in a better position within a group that is more like themselves. But as far as how women see them, I agree that there will be plenty of women who will appreciate them for these other qualities. Personally, I've always liked the nerds.
I've been a brains over braun kind of gal since sometime mid-college when I broke up with my macho gorgeous, but drunk too often, boyfriend.
I just wanted to include two notes: -I'm enjoying this forum; I love hearing the opinions about it. -Every time I read the title, I first read it as "I Love Triangles" and I'm like "...what?" Thank you, that is all.
Feminine guys in macho groups will be treated in negative ways if they can't cooperate or behave equally. Think how a nerd would be treated in a jock group. Even mice will get targeted in a cat group. The same thing can happen to tomboys in girlish groups.
It is not true that feminine guys in macho groups or boy-ish girls in girlish groups will be treated badly necessarily. It all depends on the kind of people one hangs out with, as well as whether or not one fits into that group in the first place. A nerd also would not necessarily be treated badly by jocks. But a cat will definitely attack a mouse on sight. Everything depends on the cohesion of the bonds forming the group.
Humans are complex, and animals are only program to survive. I also think that love triangles are love confusions between teenagers. Katniss cared so much about the two guys, it is hard for her to choose one of them, until she choose Gale.
I agree with Yotam's interpretation. While Gingercoffee's interpretation makes sense logically, I don't think there's enough evidence to prove one way or another that that is how Katniss was actually thinking about it. I disagree that most boys actually prefer male protagonists over female ones in sci-fi. I think there's a dearth of strong female protagonists in the genre, and an assumption that boys prefer male protagonists that comes from publishers, etc. I think boys prefer action stories over romance, and when there's an action-packed story, they don't much care if it's a male or female main character. Here's a question, what's more important: a love interest that the reader is attracted to or the character is attracted to? So far, we've talked about the macho vs. sensitive stuff, and these seem to be social archetypes that different groups of readers relate to. Team Jacob vs Team Edward and the like. That kind of seems like, if you want to write a romance, you want to write it so the readers can vicariously love their perfect man. I don't think it should be that way. A better romance is the main character finding their perfect partner. That is, the reader should think, "I think you guys are prefect for each other," rather than, "Oh wow that guy's super manly. Go get him (for me)!" Ultimately, that's where I think Twilight and Hunger Games failed. I see better romance in cheesy chick flicks, because more often than not, they're a true match. P.S. I love triangles.
Writers can write whatever love interest they want. However I think the relationship should be logical. If two characters known each other for a while, then that should create a logical relationship. If two characters suddenly fall in love without getting to know each other, then that would be unrealstic. I'm sure if I team up with a female warrior and say she is my girl friend, we wouldn't suddenly fall in love on the battlefield or arena. She can be friendly but not interested in me.
My dogs, crows, cephalopods, great apes, there are dozens of species that are complex and much more than programmed biobots. Spoiler How can you ignore the main theme of the book, Katniss' love for her sister Prim? Not sure what evidence you would need. But I agree that Yotam has it right, and it doesn't disagree with what I saw in the story. At the end, the story was not about Katniss' love relationships, she was devastated by the loss of Prim and nothing else mattered at that point. Later when she recovered, her love for Peeta came back into the picture. The fact that Gale was off in the city living his new life was also icing on the cake that he and Katniss were not on the same life path, he was not right for her and vice versa. That's what made the Twilight romance so unrealistic, the love at first sight fairy tale.
But then doesn't that mean that it'd be better to have a male and female MC's so both age groups would like it? Even though the story might be told form third person limited, it could still help to have both MC's serve as a foil to each other.
I actually really enjoyed the series. There were a lot of things I could relate to on an emotional level. Grief and hardship changes you. I feel it amplifies the good and bad in a person. The love triangle made sense to me. There was a lot more going on in that series than a love triangle as well. I didn't really feel it was the focus of it. Initially I didn't want to read the books after the poor experience I had with twilight and hearing there was a love triangle. Once I saw the promos for the movie I decided I wanted to see it and therefore needed to read the books first. I really fell in love with the characters. I know a lot of people wound up hating Katniss by the end but a lot of her decisions made sense to me in the context of her grief and overarching circumstances. On top of everything else she was just a kid going through all these things. Major series spoilers- Spoiler As for why things turned out how they did with Gale I'd say it's anyone's guess. I do feel like they both realized whether Prim's death was his fault or not she would not ever be able to separate him from that association. I also felt like she believed Peeta would be a foil to her personality and that's what she needed in a life partner. Not meaning he would stifle her, more like help her stay evened out. After what they went through in the arena together that also made a lot of sense to me. My boyfriend and I are extremely bonded over our common backgrounds with chronic health issues. We understand one another on a level that only another survivor would. Going back to right after they won the hunger games they were both a huge comfort to each other. A shared traumatic experience like that will either push people apart like opposing magnets or weld people together, imo. As for love triangles being such a prominent thing in YA fiction, I don't think it's prominent in just that. I think it's a prominent theme in fiction in general. I see multiple reasons for why that is. 1. Your first relationships are terrifyingly confusing. You don't know how to be with another person. You don't even fully know yourself when you're a teenager. (No offense to teens speaking from personal experience. ) 2. Relationship issues are a quick way to create drama. What is more dramatic than having the emotions of three people laid bare and in jeopardy? 3. The desire to be loved and sought after. A lot of people want to be desired or sought after romantically. Having two people vying for your affections is the pinnacle of such a desire. Those are my thoughts.
I haven't read much YA recently, but I know the deal with Bella+Edward+J... err... the werewolf, whashisname, and I'm about aware of some triangle happening in the Hunger Games and another in Stephanie Meyer's The Host, but I'll try to offer some angle to this discussion. So it seems. Even more so, there's the bad boy and the nerd guy, and then the pretty girl has to choose between them, eventually picking the nerd (as if!). I think this happened at least in Stormdancer if we think about recent YA novels. As a teen/pre-teen I read a lot of pony books, and in almost every book there was a love triangle! This one in particular: the heroine ends up with the older, more experienced guy. Which makes sense to me. Suspense? The reader is rooting for one of the guys/gals, waiting anxiously which one the hero/ine will choose. If s/he picks the wrong one, the book will fly at the wall. Personally I like love triangles 'cause they echo real world situations (as long as it doesn't turn into tedious, bitchy social porn). But these are complicated situations. Some people won't accept "damaged goods", and this angle is rarely discussed in YA. Definitely, and it would be interesting too. But for the characters to be okay with it, well, the writer could create a world where humans are less monogamous or then it just turns out that all parties are cool with the arrangement. But I'd imagine it requires plenty of discreation and deep understanding of the teenage mind(s) from the author as well, especially if they want to do it seriously. And I'm all for Katniss marrying them both. Yeah. Good for her. Oh, but can she be n love with them both? It happens
I agree with KaTrian -- I don't have such a problem with this aspect. It certainly can and does happen. But also, on a practical level, we kind of need to get on with the story, so unless the plot is specifically about the development of the relationship, it would take a lot of time to show those tentative first encounters. (Which again, can be great stories in themselves, but if there is another aspect to the plot, it might take too long.) As far as Katniss marrying both Peeta and Gale -- again, I haven't read the last 2 books nor seen the movie, but as a satisfactory resolution, I'm not sure it would be satisfactory as far as the two guys are concerned. There is an element of "she loves me and only me, and I love her and only her" that makes most romantic relationships special. This would clearly not be the case if Katniss were with both guys. I think there would be a lot of jealousy. And eventually, what of any children born later? How would they know who the father was? Would it matter?
I agree that this does happen in real life. I hadn't realized at first, but I think part of my fascinations with love triangles is because I was in one. Freshmen year of high school, cute girl shows interest in me at a dance. I wasn't exactly a stud muffin, so I immediately start crushing on her. Not long later, I realize she has crushes on not just me, but two other guys, both my friends. I was the sensitive one, one was a more-sensitive-than-average jock, and the third was a complete lunk. I can remember the three of us vying for her affections in the school cafeteria once, and then also once where the lunk and I were hanging out at her house and he was showing off his butt-muscles. Valentines day came up, and I wrote her a poem. Her friends loved it, and I think they peer-pressured her into choosing me over the two other guys. We dated for a few weeks, but she would still flirt with the other two guys, and other guys in general. I remember she three-way-called me with the sensitive jock. She stopped talking to me and avoided me in the hallways for a week and then broke up with me in a letter explaining how it was all my fault that our relationship wasn't working. Then she asked if I wanted to be friends-with-benefits, although she claimed to not know what that meant (though she still asked if I wanted to). I turned her down. I was pretty sad/angry at the time, but recounting this made me laugh a lot. I can also remember when a girl in my high school had a crush on twins, and couldn't decide which she liked better for a long time. I can't think of a time when a guy had a love-triangle with two girls, and drew it out as long as these examples. I think it's reminiscent of caveman dating, where men would compete for a woman's affection. I also think it most often happens in high school, when dating is new and you are so full of hormones that you rely more on instinct than social norms.
I almost put a caveat in my post that sometimes people who hit it off at first sight do go on to remain together. But if you think about it, an awful lot of infatuation which feels like love at first sight turns out not to be. I think your comments make sense, Liz. That you can't always put a whole relationship building in the limited amount of time in a novel. I liked the Twilight series and I even enjoy fantasy love in some books. But I still had problems with Bella's desirability not exactly being well supported in the story. She needed something more, probably just a women's lib thing of mine.
Some romance do sound lame in most YA fiction, but I guess that is the true fact of life to teenagers. Although some scenes are cheesy, some teenage readers relate to that stuff because they go through stupid romances too. In middle school, I use to have a crush on the girl, but she rejected me and I got angry at her. I tried to ask out other girls, but they rejected me too. I was never popular at school. Now in college, I just act friendly to other girls. Perhaps this is why I dislike romances in books and seeing real couples make out because I never got the chance to experience those heart warming moments.
This is part of what I find fascinating -- what causes people to initially get together and to stay together? I explore a lot of that in my writing. There is some sort of undeniable click that can happen in any relationship -- even in friendships, I can often determine relatively quickly who I really click with. In romantic relationships, there's that extra element of physical attraction, especially mutual physical attraction. But in addition to that, in both romantic and non-romantic relationships, there is that determination of a similar mindset, of common interests, of depth of thought, of the way one responds to conversation, and a bunch of other small things, that can indicate that there's something there that you understand this person, in a sense. It's not always necessarily love at first sight (although again, if there's that attraction, it could be) but maybe there's more love at first encounter? Of course, there are people with whom you don't think you have this rapport, who after spending time with them, you realize that you have perhaps more in common than you first thought, or you develop a general respect for the other person. And that can happen in both romances and in friendships. And also, that first impression doesn't always lead to a life-long relationship, but how many life-long relationships do we really have, anyway? I suspect that I perceive them (love at first encounter, that is) to be more common than you do, Ginger. And I also find it very interesting to ponder the reasons for that difference in perception. Miles: :-( I hope you get there. Don't give up.
Liz+Ginge: To be honest, I didn't believe in such a thing myself at first, but, hell, been with the-guy-I-fell-in-love-at-first-sight for over 6 years now, which is more than Bella's been with Edward, so I gotta believe it now x) Like Liz, I too find it fascinating how people meet and fall in love. Every novel/story we write as T. K. Trian explores a romantic relationship from some angle (F/M, F/F, M/M, white/black, monster/half-monster, undead/undead etc.). That's another reason why it's nice to write together because we have different relationship stories to tell, derived from very different yet oddly similar pasts. At times it's like therapy. I guess this is also where I agree with Funkybassmannick, that one's previous history can also lead them to gobble stories that offer something to relate to (strongly, even). A girl with daddy problems may enjoy reading stories of other girls gone through something similar. Etc.
I think people are confusing infatuation at first sight, very common, probably the way most love in Western cultures starts, and the lasting true love part of the relationship that comes after. Or perhaps we are just defining the stages of true love differently. I would call it being 'in love' when you meet that someone that you are quickly mutually head over heels with each other. But true, the only person in the world, partner forever love, takes time to build. It takes shared experiences, knowing you can tolerate the toothpaste tube cap on the sink instead of on the tube, and your partner's obnoxious best friend. It's working through disagreements with mutual consideration and all the rest of the stuff I don't need to list. I might name both those things 'love' but it takes until you get to the second part of that relationship before I would call it 'true love'.
Here's a cool "love triangle" with one theory on the different types of love: http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m4esgsELRN1qisos1.gif The one problem I have with it is that it assumes early relationship infatuation (which can last up to 2 years) is the same as committed passion.
Haha me either! I am still skeptical of it a bit but I realize it can happen because it was like that for me and my bf. We've been together over three years now. We really clicked immediately upon talking and we were friends first but we both later confessed we each felt like the other was the real deal after talking that first night. Just a gut feeling but it turned out to be right. It was complicated because it started out long distance at first. The second I saw him when he came to visit I just knew. He says he felt the same way. In all honesty I find it pretty funny since I was extremely cynical about love and relationships for the first half of my life. I've seen this and I really like it as a quick way to explain love and relationships. At the end of the day any system to explain love in such simple terms will fall short. Love, platonic and romantic, is too nuanced to be simplified in a cut and dry way. I feel at it's core love is commitment and that the warm fuzzies are the gravy on the mashed potatoes of love. The people I hold dearest are people I'd do anything for. I would die to protect them and stay by their side no matter what. Well, okay, amend that, if they were abusive I'd absolutely leave. That is always a deal breaker in any platonic or romantic relationship. I think you get what I'm trying to say. As for the whole love triangle thing that is pretty funny. Especially the part about the butt muscles. haha I was sort of involved in one. It wasn't nearly that serious. haha It was more of unspoken but obvious mutual feelings. He was dating someone else and I wasn't about to get in the middle of that. We had a falling out shortly after he broke up with this other girl. I told him I hated him because I was immature and didn't know how to handle the situation better. I was angry with him for ignoring me one day and then acting like he wanted to be with me the next. We had a long history as we were best friends when we were children. I'm glad it didn't go anywhere because he had some serious issues that I wasn't comfortable with. So I don't know if that truly counts as a love triangle as it never really went anywhere. I was an ugly duckling at that age and he was pretty popular so that was another reason it wouldn't go anywhere. He was more concerned with social climbing and I just cared about art class and being left alone by bullies. It was all very dramatic at the time. Now I just kinda laugh at it.
In order to be able to make a statement like in the first sentence, you should be able to define infatuation and love in such a way that you can, for certain, tell the two apart in cases such as the ones discussed here. I know how infatuation feels and I also know how love feels (to me, that is). Of course I was infatuated with KaTrian when we first met, that goes without saying, but it was also love. The infatuation fades over time or, rather, evolves into something else, but the love has been there from the start. How can I tell this? Because that feeling I call love hasn't changed in any way except it has grown new layers over time. But the basic feeling, love, remains, unchanged. That's exactly like it happened to us: we had 280 miles between us, but, well, when you find the One, something like distance becomes irrelevant; just another obstacle on your way to Happiness. So yeah, true love at first sight is definitely plausible. Have you noticed, btw, that 1f + 2m is acceptable, like in Mercy Thompson (where there were actually... what, four guys in love with her at best/worst) whereas if it's one guy and two girls, the guy is usually labeled an asshole player? Can you imagine a guy making out with a girl, then going off to flirt with another one, and still be portrayed as the likable hero? Or how do you guys feel about this? Have women turned the tables a 180 since it used to be more socially acceptable for a guy two have two love interests? Is it right or wrong?
