Quote:
Originally Posted by astrangerhere
It is more the way the Ekumen views homosexuals. While homosexuality is a strange oddity on Gethen (and implicitly falls into the category of the Perverts), what bothers me more is how it is viewed by the Ekumen. Genly Ai has no experience with anything but an incredibly simple from-birth binary. Is this how the glorious Ekumen has evolved?
|
Where are you getting this from? The phrase "pervert" is used by the Gethenians for those always in kemmer and they apply it to all people like Genly Ai; homosexuality or heterosexuality would not matter (in terms of phrase applicability), what makes us perverts to them is that we are always sexually active.
There is this in chapter 5:
Quote:
|
They are not excluded from society, but they are tolerated with some disdain, as homosexuals are in many bisexual societies.
|
It says "many" but there is no sense of whether that many is using a historical perspective or not. It seems a fairly small thing to hang all the Ekumen with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by astrangerhere
I'm not blaming her for not going the one step further in being radical on heteronormative issues. I agree with others that it likely would have narrowed her audience further and risked shelving the book. But it is one of the reasons why it does not age well for me.
(It does irk me a little that she went into recovery mode a bit in response to criticism. This sounds much like JK Rowling's insistence after the completion of publication that Dumbledore was gay.)
|
Her defensive response only makes her human.
I'm not at all convinced that homosexuality (ETA: or heterosexuality) is even applicable to the Gethenians. In kemmer their sexuality is partly driven by the company that they keep, so it could be difficult for a couple turn their sexuality toward the same gender - and I would question whether that is even relevant. It's why I think the book is wrong to emphasise the Gethenians as "manwoman", they are not either, they are something different.
One aspect of the book I did question was why the Gethenians formed strong pair-bonds. This does not seem necessary for their situation, and may actually be contrary to evolutionary drives ... although, as I noted earlier, Le Guin gets to cheat and not need an evolution-safe species, because these were artificially created. And so perhaps it is their innate humanness that makes them inclined to form pair bonds.