I know what's missing from this science fiction: Gay sex!

[sqbr]

No really, that is my theory :)

Basically I am increasingly sick of male writers justifying(1) their creepy exploitive objectification of women by the fact they're being "thought provokingly shocking" yet consistently shying away from the slightest whiff of m/m(2) sexuality (especially on the part of their protagonists omg) even when the plot would naturally lead there, and even though it's a really easy way to shock a (typical) audience.

Unlike a lot of women people I don't get any particular kick out of m/m sex scenes or romance, but I've read enough slash that they no longer stick out at me as being any more unusual than any other sort of sex/relationships. And as a result I've begun noticing how glaringly absent they are from mainstream science fiction.

The flip side of this problem, and they seem to pretty much always go hand in hand, is men never being seen as sex objects for women either. Women may be enthusiastic about sex, but the camera/narrator lingers on their body and hotness, or at most has them talking about how totally awesome the main character is.

(Another thing these sorts of stories tend to do, as part of their fairly strict gender hierarchy, is not having anyone who doesn't fit into neat male/female boxes. Also I've avoided talking about representations of f/f sexuality since I think that has a whole different slew of problems)

****WARNING: contains discussion of creepy, deliberately shocking writing. Also spoilers for Dollhouse.******

Some examples:

• Wanted: the various "uninhibited" bad guys are shown doing "shocking" things, up to and including raping women and having sex with goats (gender unspecified), but nary a whisper of m/m sex. Or in fact, any of the "bad" women doing anything beyond cheerful serial monogamy.
  
• The works of Iain M Banks (eg The Algebraist). His Culture are in theory this completely free and unselfconsciously fluid and enlightened post scarcity society where everyone changes gender, body type, brain chemistry etc at will. But his plots often seem to revolve around people (mostly men) outside the Culture, or misfits within it, who find themselves drawn to/part of much more sexist, violent, primal societies (ie like ours :)), and it seems to me at least that the reader is expected to be drawn to them too (despite their assumed left liberal, anti sexist etc leanings) While he sometimes writes from a female POV, and several of his male characters have been female at one point or another in their history, from my spotty memory all the (often quite violent) sexualised imagery is of women, and we never see any of his male characters show the slightest signs of attraction to any other men. And the only time I can remember seeing a male character be female "on screen" he was just doing it as a favour to his girlfriend and was still definitely male.
  
• Dollhouse: The female dolls are shown in skimpy outfits (even when it's impractical), do a lot of often fairly degrading sex work, and are shot in an objectifying way. The male doll is mostly shown doing non-sexual stuff like being a government agent, and in his ONE sexual/romantic engagement (with a fairly attractive woman) he spends most of the time in a suit being all James Bond-ish (I'll admit he was objectified or at least shown semi naked a little, but not a whole lot). Most male prostitution is m/m yet it's existence at the Dollhouse is at most vaguely alluded to. I think the questions of consent the show claims to be exploring would be MUCH more effective if straight male viewers imagined being (consentually!) brainwashed into wanting m/m sex.
  

Iain M Banks (in an interview I found trying to see if anyone else had a problem with his books) said that he didn't write gay characters because "He didn't feel he understood the lifestyle". This from a man who has written cults, aliens, child slave owners, kings of small asian nations, psychopaths and AIs.

There's also a lot of sf which ignores the existence of same sex relationships or people outside the m/f binary etc when creating their premise eg the Lillith's Brood series which assumes that everyone wants to be in a m/f relationship and make babies (and thus when aliens force them into the former and get in the way of the latter it's only the lack of babies they complain about) But this doesn't annoy me anywhere near as much (YMMV).

And in case it's not clear: I do not in principle have a problem with sf which doesn't contain m/m sex or relationships because the plot just doesn't end up needing it. There's never been any in any of my stories, after all. And I don't even have a problem (in principle) with stories which are open about being softcore porn for straight men. But don't pretend that the reason I don't like it is because I'm an easily shocked prude or philistine :P

EDIT: The way sf (and most other fiction) avoids LGBT characters and issues is definitely a problem! I was just trying to avoid people saying "So what you're saying is I HAVE to insert a gay character into EVERY STORY or I'm a homophobe?". That said, nix's comment made me poke at the fact I've never written any gay characters (lesbian and bi, yes. But not gay, or for that matter trans) and I think it is to some extent a result of my heteronormativity, in fact my Enchanted fic falls into EXACTLY the same trap as Lillith's Brood. Hmm.

I thought about giving some examples of sf which doesn't elide m/m sexuality when it comes up as a natural consequence of the plot, but this post is already long enough. I will say that off the top of my head I can't think of any written by a straight man :)

1)In a lot of cases I've read interviews with the author, but you can often just tell that's the mindset. That's certainly what their male fans say if you complain.
2)I was going to say "gay" but that seems unfair to bi etc men.

Comments

[nixwilliams]

there *are* stories there, and you should go and check out a queer bookshop if you can access one, because the bigger ones do often have small spec-fic sections.

but perhaps the stories aren't there not because queer writers aren't writing sf/f, but because homophobic (or at least heterosexist) agents aren't promoting them, publishers aren't publishing them, shops aren't stocking them, straight people aren't buying them. or maybe because the sf-reading public is assumed to be so sexist and homophobic that queer writers don't even bother trying to publish what they write.

[ex_peasant441]

Finding a queer bookshop would be a huge and very daunting expedition for me in so many ways. Thankfully there is Amazon :)

but perhaps the stories aren't there not because queer writers aren't writing sf/f, but because homophobic (or at least heterosexist) agents aren't promoting them, publishers aren't publishing them, shops aren't stocking them, straight people aren't buying them. or maybe because the sf-reading public is assumed to be so sexist and homophobic that queer writers don't even bother trying to publish what they write.

Could be. The trouble is this is just speculation (I assume?) and even if it happens to be accurate it just pushes the questions back a level. Why should this be the case in SF when it isn't in most other literary genres? If the mainstream publishers are in fact being homophobic why has the gay press not made a deliberate effort to counteract it? Why would the SF readership be assumed to be sexist and homophobic? And so on.

The problem is that without actual research into these attitudes we are just guessing. This is actually a huge problem in all these conversations - we rely so much on anacdotal evidence, and frequently anecdotal evidence from only one side of the matter (in this case readers). I feel I am always left squinting at the result and asking the same eternal question 'why?'

The 'what' I find depressing and all too familiar. The 'why' nobody seems to even wonder very often, let alone have answers for. Seriously, google 'why are people racist' or 'why are people homophobic'. I would have thought those were entry level questions and yet you have to hunt for a long time before you even begin to find a serious study that tries to answer them. I do have to wonder how the relevant university research departments spend their time.

[nixwilliams]

actually, i was just thinking about the whole 'go forth and find a queer bookshop' line is issue-riddled in itself: why aren't the books available there available in other bookstores?

i agree with you about there not being academic research into this area - and it'd be fascinating. if only i hadn't burnt myself out with my current project . . . perhaps in a few years!

but the other thing is that some of these anecdotes are legitimate evidence. i have seen students in university writing classes told that they shouldn't write sf/f because it's not literary enough (i was one of them), i have heard young writers being told not to make sexuality (by which was meant 'homosexuality') their only "issue" in writing because it's only good for one story or book (because of course heterosexuality is normal, but queer sexuality is a Big Deal and can't just happen in the background, and writing about it would make you a one-trick pony). so, i guess when you have that double bind of being encouraged away from queer texts and away from spec. fic, then that's already drastically reducing the chances that it'll be written. the context of production or non-production is v. v. interesting.

also, you know, there are tonnes of queers writing fantasy and consuming queer fantasy - in fandom. it's an alternative context of production and consumption, and it's one that a lot of people actually prefer. maybe it's inherently friendlier to minority voices because there are fewer people between the writer and the reader to get rid of queerness or to fight to get the writing out (you know, and also, lots of crap writing! which is genius in itself!)

ok, i'm really tired, but this is an interesting discussion!