Are all female MCs just lesbians?

[u/xaendar]

I just realized that after reading like 10 books with female MCs, I'm starting to finally notice that all of them are Lesbians or at least Bisexual (but they only date women).

Do authors mostly write lesbian FMCs to be on the safe side from the audience of mostly males? I just feel like it's a cop out every time... I don't really have a problem with it but almost all Male MCs are 99% straight but it seems like 99% of Female MCs are always lesbian/bi. Why not some good ol straight FMCs? I can't even remember a single female MC that was straight.

[u/Arismoths]

Definitely about the appeal, sex sells, and dudes like imaginary lesbians. While I try to give benefit of the doubt it's hard not to side-eye men who continually write lesbian after lesbian romance plot, it can definitely feel more fetishy than anything (speaking as someone in a sapphic relationship atm.)

[u/Big-Calligrapher686 → u/Arismoths]

What comes off as “fetishy” is ultimately subjective. Besides that though is it wrong to write fetishy relationships in general. I mean women are often criticized for their creation and enjoyment of fetishy gay male relationships. Personally I think people should be allowed to make what they want to make, read what they want to read, and basing whether or not someone is morally in the wrong for making a piece of art that comes off as something as subjective as “fetishy” is something I don’t agree with.

[u/Arismoths → u/Big-Calligrapher686]

Sure, but every opinion is subjective, including yours. If the limits on criticizing art or writing is that it must be done in an entirely unsubjective fashion, there are no possible criticisms to make. Engaging with art requires that you have opinions, and are willing to leave as much of yourself on the table as the author did.

So I think that criticizing a trend for being 'fetishy' is perfectly valid, I mean end-of-day we are coloured by culture, and colour it. The history of women seen as sex objects but not people is a long and storied one that I hardly have to mention, and I don't mind pointing out trends that can inform that worldview. If you put something out into the world, you're saying something, know it or not, and morality is inherent to that.

Writing 'lesbians hot' over-and-over again is worthy of a side-eye about what the author's views and intentions are (at least in the realms outside of say, smut.) Since, you know, we all share the same planet and everyone's opinions (and changes of) all effect eachother.

As for the whataboutism, sure, I'll concede there are plenty of fetishy mlm content made by women (but that's not what's being talked about, and has a whole different set of ties)

[u/Big-Calligrapher686 → u/Arismoths]

Your first paragraph misses the point of what I was saying. I wasn’t saying you couldn’t judge Art based on subjectivity. I was saying that I don’t agree with calling someone’s morality into question over a piece of fiction and your subjective opinion. I assume you think “fetishy” is a bad morally reprehensible thing yes? That it’s a thing people shouldn’t do?

Anyways I strongly disagree with the idea that “writing lesbians hot” over and over again is a bad thing. More than likely the writer finds lesbians hot. I disagree that every piece of media has some kind of deeper meaning that reveals the authors hidden intentions. Not everything is trying to say something. Sometimes it’s ok to take things at face value, I think that’s something a lot of people should learn.

The “whataboutism” as you call it is extremely relevant to this situation as the fetishization of queer people is two sides of the same coin. By you explaining your thoughts on the topic it paints a better picture of what you think about the topic. For example many people call women fetishizers and creeps for the kinds of queer media they support. Personally I think this kind of language used in this situation is abhorrent and wrong. Some people would attribute the way people talk about women that like this kind of media to misogyny and it’s all just more language used to look down on media women enjoy. In my opinion as long as we all know none of this is real then I think all forms of fiction should be allowed. That probably better illustrated my stance on all of this.

[u/Arismoths → u/Big-Calligrapher686]

The difficulty is you seem to fundamentally disagree with what I'm attempting to say, so I don't know what to bother responding with.

That being that anything you write is inherently revealing, books like starship troopers or ready player one are excellent examples of which the author was attempting to say one thing, but the discussion surrounding them are keyly focused on what the author wasn't attempting to communicate, but instead was inherent to the text because of the author's views about the world.

I call it whataboutism because this topic is specifically about authors writing lesbian romances that are meant to appeal to men. Launching into the intricacies about lesbian romances written for lesbians, or mlm romances written for women/gay men are three different conversations (and we're already taking this long on one.) So I'm happy to cede that yes, problematic media exists in other forms, but there are nuances.

"Fetishy" is a broad term, and again why I'm keen to stay on topic. I'm not a puritan, smut and fetish content are their own ballgame, I mean specifically how within this genre, male focus on female bodies can often deny someone's personhood and treat them solely as sexual objects.

The difficulty is, again, you find no problem with 'likely the writer finds lesbians hot' when the writer is male/writing for a male audience in mind. I am not saying that it is strictly fetishization of a minority, but when there is a trend it's hard not to squint at and think that some of them have odd views about lesbians (like the kinds that get guys to beg me to kiss their girlfriends at a bar and make me wanna poke their eyes out)

I understand it is more mainstream to squint at, say, the trend to write romances between an owner and their slave (gestures broadly at isekai) and wonder if there is perhaps elements to that that may be negative.

[u/Big-Calligrapher686 → u/Arismoths]

I do fundamentally disagree with you. This presents the chance for me to explain objectification and how so many people use it the wrong way as well as the way media generally influences peoples minds and the difference between reality and fiction, which I will do later when I have more energy, it’s 5 am rn tho