busyThe thing is ... there are people with multiple minority traits. There are gay Asians. There are autistic Pagans. There are poor black lesbians in wheelchairs. And those people sometimes feel overlooked because the stacking effect can change their experiences so much that a single-trait character doesn't feel much like them. I've read essays upholding this end of the debate but couldn't find one to use as an example here.
My stance is that I write characters as they need to be. I have a lot of characters who are female/other trait because roughly half of humanity is female. Other combinations are less common but also appear. Brelig is a normal-sized Duurludirj man (which we'd consider a dwarf) and missing one hand. Maryam Smith is African-British, genderqueer, duoclass, and of illegitimate birth. I'm more likely to focus on minority protagonists than to use them as filler, something my audience seems to enjoy if you look over what's been published. I don't tend to write a lot of straight white Christian men, though, so the core of the mainstream doesn't get a lot of traffic from me. Meh.
Also, if I haven't specified a trait in canon, yes it could fall outside the mainstream. Characters have done this to me often enough, and my cultural awareness is diverse enough, that there's no permanent default. They may pop out an uncommon religion or sexual orientation or invisible handicap or whatnot, and they may do that after two stories or six poems or twenty years. I'm more likely to mention physical features such as skin tone and gender up front, because they're noticeable points of diversity. But I've also had characters refuse to reveal their sex/gender, and not just the ones for whom "I'm not telling" is their gender.
I'm interested in other people's perspectives on the matter of single vs. stacked traits.
June 12 2013, 15:02:32 UTC 8 years ago
Being crippled traditionallly results in poverty: 'crippled beggar' is a stereotype -- or are you trying to avoid stereotypes?
Being in a persecuted minority can result in bearing scars from a beating, or having suffered some permanent injury -- and either the minority status or the injury can result in poverty.
Or, poverty can result in permanent injury -- from having to work in an unsafe job, travel in an unsafe manner, etc, or from lacking the money for proper medical treatment.
And any of these factors can lead the victim to become an activist for that issue -- which may put them in another persecuted group.
Yes...
June 12 2013, 23:14:59 UTC 8 years ago
That's an excellent point, thank you.
>> Being crippled traditionally results in poverty: 'crippled beggar' is a stereotype -- or are you trying to avoid stereotypes? <<
I prefer to avoid stereotypes in my writing. However, trends are different; a handicap does pose a barrier to self-support, which may be minor in one culture and devastating in another, even for the same handicap. Many cultures do a crummy job of integrating people with handicaps, which results in many of them being poor. I'd say, if you throw in a crippled beggar as a bit part without thinking, that's a stereotype; but if you pay attention to why this is going on, how society responds to people with handicaps and without money, then it's social commentary.