I think she means 'men in the real world' as opposed to 'men that are really men'

It's nice to see a medieval fantasy culture treat having a daughter as good news. : )

Just as an analogy, imagine watching a straight person watch Steven Universe and mention every axis of oppression it touches on... except somehow never seem to bring up systemic homophobia and the harm it does, and barely talk about the discrimination gay people face in their lives and how the show relates to it at all. (honestly there's probably a better analogy that could be used, I just came up with that very hastily). As a woman who only is interested in women, I'd find that very very frustrating.

The problems people had with your first review were never that you attempted to talk about sexism at all, but that you didn't listen when women disagreed with your takes- the takes weren't the problem. And saying nothing isn't better than trying and getting it wrong.

That said, I really enjoyed this re-read and I appreciate that you did it. I appreciate that you're trying. I hope you'll continue trying.

Just to contextualize some of the frustration in the comments- one of the biggest challenges for women fighting institutional sexism and misogyny is the way men treat it like a mythical creature. They don't SEE it, and when we do, we're told we're imagining it if they don't as well. It's invisible. The biggest mainstream discourse around sexism seems to overwhelmingly be convincing people it exists. Even well intentioned men, men who are frequently "good allies" for whatever that means, are prone to it. I've had a man I know literally describe a business acquaintance punish a co-worker for not sleeping with him by attempting to sabotage her professionally, and then later tell me he just doesn't see sex discrimination in the workplace. If pressed, I'm sure he'd acknowledge that the previous instance was an example, but still clarify that he doesn't see it institutionally- suddenly the goalposts are conveniently moved, and the problem is still invisible. Women are IGNORED by men. Even good men.

There were many times during reading this I feel Pratchett included a reminder of the stakes for the women in the regiment- specifically the institutional misogyny they lived under that they were escaping. Every conversation about the fate of Shufti if she didn't find her baby's father- every mention of the Girl's Working School, of Father Jupe, of 'bad girls', even a lot about the scene in the sex-worker's tent where one of the workers mentioned it was better than being under the thumb of a husband. I never heard a comment on those stakes.

I'm not frustrated or upset- we're all human, this isn't something that hurts me not to hear acknowledged even if I was surprised that you didn't seem to pick up on it. But I think it's a natural reaction to be hurt, because going into these kinds of discussions, especially when among men who are frequently good allies, you HOPE they won't look through it, and you HOPE it won't be invisible. I don't know. This isn't to make you feel bad about yourself. Honestly that wouldn't take the frustration away anyway. I just think it might be worthwhile to bring up, to give you some insight on why not commenting on it wasn't maybe... the best strategy?

It would be so easy for Pratchett to depict Jeannie as petty and jealous woman- a woman in power threatened by a girls so she sabotages her. But he doesn't fall into that trap, and honestly? Lots of male authors and some female ones would have. Instead he extends empathy- she's not an antagonist, even though she's 'got it wrong' here. She's far from home, alone, and a bit over her head in the normal way of a new leader- she made a mistake. Anyone could.

Yeah, I was gonna say Joss Whedon for an example of creators that claim they're representing feminist POVs of abuse and sexual violence but seem to fetishize it but Suckerpunch is a way more clear-cut example. I can at least see the argument in favor of Whedon even if his work puts me off.

I'm slowly switching to insta, but as soon as a better platform than tumblr (or "this hellsite") for hosting an art blog becomes viable, I'm out. Can't wait for literally anything else.

Please, this is turning into telling arctic_hare their hurt by the use of that trope isn't legitimate and demanding they defend their hurt, even if that isn't what you mean to do. Please don't do this.

Guys, I know I'm not a mod so I may not have a right to ask this, but can we PLEASE not don't want this to turn into a place where we make arctic_hare defend their reaction to Steven Universe or people in the SU fandom who have behaved badly.

This isn't the time or place to have this discussion, I really regret bringing SU up and arctic_hare should not have to keep justifying their dislike of the use of the human zoo trope as the show used it. If it hurt them, you don't get to tell them it wasn't insensitive because of the creator's intent.

Yeah, the whole SU conversation is pretty far off the topic of this blog post. For what it's worth, I appreciate your perspective. And it's been nice to be able to like... talk about it? With you and siab. Thanks for engaging.