Editor of SFWA Bulletin resigns

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by ApK

Is that what Ivan is supposed to look like? Hm.

Tall, dark-haired, good-looking in a generic euro-descended squared-jawed hero way has always been his image. He looks like the stereotypical two-fisted action hero, whereas Miles, who actually is an action hero, looks nothing like it.

The fun with Ivan is that, while he has all the attributes of the stereotypical action hero head to toe, he is more of a party animal lightweight. By choice. He prefers to play the himbo instead of being heroic. Unless forced by events or Miles, whichever catches up to him first.

Domesticity suits him just fine.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

If I, as as self-pub'd author put out a cover that looked like the one on Baen's site for "Miles in Love" or "Miles, Mutants, and Microbes" -- just as two examples, I'd be lambasted for not spending money on a cover and the comments would roll in about how indie authors had terrible covers. I'd hear about the fonts looking plastic and cut and pasted on, etc. I don't even want to imagine the emails I'd get (and I have gotten plenty of them about some of my covers in the past.)

The Vorkossigan books suffer from generic covers and always have.
I wonder if they have a problem depicting Miles himself (a hyperkinetic 17year old that can pass for 30-something would be hard for most artists) since Ekaterin and Ivan do resemble their in-book profiles.

The Honorverse covers also suffer, ocassionally even featuring starships that look nothing like they are supposed to. And the treecats...

The Vorpal Blade series does have appropriate covers, garish though they may be.

In general BAEN covers have been bland and generic which is why the second Vorpatril cover and the Flandry covers stand out. But not in a good way. Maybe I was spoiled by my early paperback experiences back when Michael Whelan was doing covers all over the place.

http://www.paperbackfantasies.jjelmquist.com/whelan.htm

Even when Whelan did the stereotypical cover it worked:
http://www.paperbackfantasies.jjelmq...ersonAgent.JPG

Of course, that was also the time when Frazetta and Boris were all over but, ahem, no need to add gasoline to the fire.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Tall, dark-haired, good-looking in a generic euro-descended squared-jawed hero way has always been his image. He looks like the stereotypical two-fisted action hero, whereas Miles, who actually is an action hero, looks nothing like it.

Right, but I recall Miles saying that had he not been damaged, he'd look like Ivan. I realize he meant as in general type from the same stock, not as in identical cousins, but still, whenever I saw a cover shot of a person I assumed to represent Miles (and there have been a couple different ones that look nothing like each other) I just always assumed that that is what Ivan looked liked, too.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

The Vorkossigan books suffer from generic covers and always have.
I wonder if they have a problem depicting Miles himself (a hyperkinetic 17year old that can pass for 30-something would be hard for most artists) since Ekaterin and Ivan do resemble their in-book profiles.

The Honorverse covers also suffer, ocassionally even featuring starships that look nothing like they are supposed to. And the treecats...

The Vorpal Blade series does have appropriate covers, garish though they may be.

In general BAEN covers have been bland and generic which is why the second Vorpatril cover and the Flandry covers stand out. But not in a good way. Maybe I was spoiled by my early paperback experiences back when Michael Whelan was doing covers all over the place.

http://www.paperbackfantasies.jjelmquist.com/whelan.htm

Even when Whelan did the stereotypical cover it worked:
http://www.paperbackfantasies.jjelmq...ersonAgent.JPG

Of course, that was also the time when Frazetta and Boris were all over but, ahem, no need to add gasoline to the fire.

It isn't just the depiction, it's the overall feel. Like I said, they have a certain branding, and IMO, it just isn't a good one. I know individuals will get hung up on whether a character looks right or has the right dress on and things like that. But there is a general ... lack of overall "attractiveness" to the covers. The blending (when there is any) is odd. The fonts sit on top of the cover. They're blocky. And I'm NOT saying the characters have to be "attractive."

Every culture and period of time has certain characteristics when it comes to art that are "popular" or "conventional." The Baen covers are stuck in the past when it comes to that. I'm not saying they have to have covers like everyone else. In fact, they do have original art which is become more and more rare. I just find the covers somewhat tired.

[BeccaPrice]

I've always imagined Ivan as looking like John Barrowman.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by BeccaPrice

I've always imagined Ivan as looking like John Barrowman.

The voice definitely fits.
"It's not my fault!"

[BeccaPrice]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

The voice definitely fits.
"It's not my fault!"

as does the smile.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

'Lady' as a noun, makes no one frown.

Ah, it's 'lady' as an adjective that is at issue.

Is it the entire idea of differentiating by gender?

Like 'male nurse' should now just be 'nurse?'

If so, I get that. No need to call out the gender of a nurse, or a race car driver, or an editor in passing mention.

Surely though, there are times when the small difference of gender (vive la différence) within an occupation are indeed relevant to a discussion. In those cases, is the word 'lady' as an adjective, still considered condescending?
What's the PC term? "Female?" "X Chromsome-gifted?"


ApK

Well, then you are sexist, Timmy, because you think of Suzy as your 'lady friend' and not just your 'friend.'

[BeccaPrice]

If you wouldn't say "a male author" don't say "a female author" or any variation on that theme. Seems to me that's pretty simple.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by BeccaPrice

If you wouldn't say "a male author" don't say "a female author" or any variation on that theme. Seems to me that's pretty simple.

Right, so there is no issue with "lady?" The issue was with any gender identifier when one isn't needed?
In a situation where you WOULD say 'male author' is 'lady author' OK?
Or is there an issue with "lady" like there is an issue with "girl?"

I ask, because I also hear that some women object to "ma'am" as a term of respectful address, and I find that truly insane confusing.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by ApK

Right, so there is no issue with "lady?" The issue was with any gender identifier when one isn't needed?

That's the way I take it. I've tried and failed to come up with phrases where 'lady' (or 'guy', for that matter) used as an adjective doesn't sound silly, condescending, or downright insulting.

But just like the 'I' before 'E', I'm sure there's exceptions.

[Purple Lady]

Originally Posted by ApK

I ask, because I also hear that some women object to "ma'am" as a term of respectful address, and I find that truly insane confusing.

The only problem with "ma'am" is that it's usually only older women that are referred to that way. When someone calls you "ma'am" for the first time you feel kinda old.

[caleb72]

Originally Posted by ApK

Right, so there is no issue with "lady?" The issue was with any gender identifier when one isn't needed?
In a situation where you WOULD say 'male author' is 'lady author' OK?
Or is there an issue with "lady" like there is an issue with "girl?"

That was it? I assumed it was an issue with the word itself as I've definitely seen objections to that in the past.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by caleb72

That was it? I assumed it was an issue with the word itself as I've definitely seen objections to that in the past.

I think it depends on the person and the circumstances. Some are more easily insulted than others and that is just the way it is. Personally I am not generally offended by "lady" but I've certainly heard it used in a manner to "set aside" a woman. For example, in talking about someone on a project, "So and so in in charge. She's a lady/woman." And you're left thinking...so?? Because her gender shouldn't mean diddly. It's like saying, "So and so is in charge, and he's fat." SO WHAT? It's unnecessary baggage.

In the instances of "she's a female engineer" it's again a "So?" Because it shouldn't matter if she is or not. But sometimes guys feel it necessary to point that out -- almost in warning.

The whole "Girl" and "Girlie" thing is often done as a not-so-subtle putdown.

As for ma'am it could depend on where you live. In the south it's fairly common. I noticed it as soon as I moved here and I was 21 at the time. All of a sudden, it was "yes'm or yes ma'am" by a lot of people. It's less common now, but you still hear it. If they are trying to insult me, it's over my head.

I'm actually more offended by guys who unthinkingly do things like ask questions but ONLY EXPECT HUSBAND TO KNOW THE ANSWER. "Do you guys work in the financial sector and know anything about stocks?" And then naturally assume that it is my husband AND only my husband who knows what a stock is and how to trade it. (We both worked in the industry for a few years) At least 4 guys in our neighborhood have asked that type of question with both of us standing there. I've answered "Yes, we worked in the industry" --and then--TO A MAN--they turned to my husband and asked him their stock question. "Really? Hey, if you have time I'd like to get together with you and pick your brain." OR "What do you think of this market?" And I kid you not--they are looking right at him with me standing there as if I suddenly don't exist. I am no longer in the conversation at all. Completely nullified, completely left out and completely ASSUMED that he has all the knowledge and I'm just there to hold the sidewalk down. On at least two occasions the men invited him over to chat and expressly left me out WITH ME STANDING THERE. Not, "I'd like to have you guys over" but "Hey sometime when you're not busy, do you think you could come over..."

I have no issue with the fact that they may be more comfortable talking with a guy about financial circumstances, but I do have issue with the sudden manner of rudely ignoring me and the express possibility that I might still be able to contribute to the conversation. It's ASSUMED that I am 1. not interested and 2. don't have a clue about the topic.

It isn't just men who do it either. My other neighbor (a woman) has asked my husband for computer help multiple times--and I mean frequently. Most of the time I could just as easily help. Her issues are not that difficult; a lot of people would have the knowledge to get her out of her normal messes. But it has never ONCE occurred to her to ask me. And both my husband and I worked in the computer industry for years (granted, husband has more years in that industry than I do. I spent half of it in technical writing and he spent all of it in engineering.) The neighbor KNOWS I worked at Dell. It has never occurred to her that I might have the answers.

"Sexism" and assumptions are a two-way street. We women do it to other women.

[FizzyWater]

What I managed to read from these posts was that it wasn't just the gender identification. (And I'll admit up front, I've read the reaction to the columns, not the actual columns themselves, although the reaction did include quotes).

My experience with "lady"-anything is that it's just a little to close to "little lady" (pat-pat on the head).

In the quotes I read, Resnick was stressing various things about the fact that the editor, who happened to be a woman, didn't complain about X, Y, or Z.

So his stressing the gender, at least in those comments, made sense. I think the women would have preferred "female" to "lady" (again, think "lady-pat-pat on the head" )

When I was in college and much younger than I am today, I argued with men who told me I had to smile (because I was female) or called me "little lady" or other condescending descriptors. Eventually, though, I decided there wasn't a lot of point arguing with people of a certain generation. The concepts are just too ingrained. (Like arguing with my grandfather about certain racial issues).

But if I was paying money to belong to an organization and part of the point of that organization is to support its members (in this case, to advocate for its members, to offer assistance to new authors, etc.), then I'd want that organization to value my contribution and not pat me on the head, just because I'm in a minority. (Assuming that women are actually still minorities in the SWFA, even). I'd expect there to be a place for discussion.