I disagree. I think Helen is making the point that traditional gender roles are a form of D/s
... I'm not sure how that statement makes sense by any definiton of D/s that I know of. D/s is a sexual kink, it's consensual, and it takes place between individuals. How does Helen's story lead you to believe that traditional gender roles are similar to D/s in any of these ways? John clearly doesn't get a sexual charge off of the "sexual harrassment" that happens to him when he steps out of his "traditional sub" role. It's clearly not consensual, and it's societal, not just individual.
and that because of that weight of custom & history it's hard to write toppiness/subbiness without also coding them as masculine/feminine.
Is it, though? You might get somewhere in that argument outside fandom, but I'd say the overwhelming majority of same-sex BDSM stories that I've read (and it's a lot) actually don't equate top/sub with male/female. (At least, no more so than any random slash story feminizes the bottom and masculinizes the top.)
Xanthe does write a very strong and masculine John and a very insecure (at first) and emotional Rodney in her universe, but come on-- that's because it's apparently how she honestly sees the characters (since when AU John and Rodney meet canon John and Rodney, canon John and Rodney immediately fall into line as far as the D/s component of their relationship goes.) And any exaggeration of her perception in the alternate universe of her story is clearly a purposeful choice meant to make the porn more exciting, because it's *her kink* to have a masculine dom and a feminine sub-- not because the BDSM content of the story is somehow uncontrollably affecting her characterization.
And that one of the weaknesses of Xanthe stories is that she lets the two dynamics leak into each other -- so, for instance, John "roars with laughter" and has short hair while Rodney "giggles" and has long hair.
See, you're assuming that because Xanthe feminizes Rodney and Helen doesn't, that Helen is critiquing Xanthe's story. Isn't it also possible that she simply sees the characters differently, and wrote the characters according to her own individual view of them? (I mean, when *I* write a totally random story with manly!Rodney and sensitive!John, am I critiquing Xanthe's characterization? Then why should Helen be, just because she's writing in Xanthe's universe?)
I think it's easy to see that Helen's characterization of John and Rodney in "Take Clothes Off As Directed" is not that different at all from her characterization of John and Rodney in her other SGA stories.So how can it be a critique of Xanthe's characterization? It's not; it's just *different*.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2006-11-17 02:12 am (UTC)I disagree. I think Helen is making the point that traditional gender roles are a form of D/s
... I'm not sure how that statement makes sense by any definiton of D/s that I know of. D/s is a sexual kink, it's consensual, and it takes place between individuals. How does Helen's story lead you to believe that traditional gender roles are similar to D/s in any of these ways? John clearly doesn't get a sexual charge off of the "sexual harrassment" that happens to him when he steps out of his "traditional sub" role. It's clearly not consensual, and it's societal, not just individual.
and that because of that weight of custom & history it's hard to write toppiness/subbiness without also coding them as masculine/feminine.
Is it, though? You might get somewhere in that argument outside fandom, but I'd say the overwhelming majority of same-sex BDSM stories that I've read (and it's a lot) actually don't equate top/sub with male/female. (At least, no more so than any random slash story feminizes the bottom and masculinizes the top.)
Xanthe does write a very strong and masculine John and a very insecure (at first) and emotional Rodney in her universe, but come on-- that's because it's apparently how she honestly sees the characters (since when AU John and Rodney meet canon John and Rodney, canon John and Rodney immediately fall into line as far as the D/s component of their relationship goes.) And any exaggeration of her perception in the alternate universe of her story is clearly a purposeful choice meant to make the porn more exciting, because it's *her kink* to have a masculine dom and a feminine sub-- not because the BDSM content of the story is somehow uncontrollably affecting her characterization.
And that one of the weaknesses of Xanthe stories is that she lets the two dynamics leak into each other -- so, for instance, John "roars with laughter" and has short hair while Rodney "giggles" and has long hair.
See, you're assuming that because Xanthe feminizes Rodney and Helen doesn't, that Helen is critiquing Xanthe's story. Isn't it also possible that she simply sees the characters differently, and wrote the characters according to her own individual view of them? (I mean, when *I* write a totally random story with manly!Rodney and sensitive!John, am I critiquing Xanthe's characterization? Then why should Helen be, just because she's writing in Xanthe's universe?)
I think it's easy to see that Helen's characterization of John and Rodney in "Take Clothes Off As Directed" is not that different at all from her characterization of John and Rodney in her other SGA stories.So how can it be a critique of Xanthe's characterization? It's not; it's just *different*.