The question would be whether or not they did it to exploit the advantages that culture and media now afford to women. But then again, that’s the same reason women have historically used male pen names.
IANAP (...Not A Psychiatrist), but a great many people who are enthusiastic readers (especially of novels) seem to imagine close relationships between themselves and their favorite authors, extensively fabricate details of the authors and relationships, and become very emotionally invested in those imagined relationships.
Hence the anger and feelings of betrayal when an actual author's identity, behavior, etc. fail to match those of the reader's close and trusted (but quite imaginary) friend.
It's not about using a pen name. They are free to write under a feminine pseudonym (reverse George Elliot style).
I am not sure if the prize is intentionally limited to women --it sounds like it isn't--but I dont think we want people claiming prizes this way. Consider that there are competitions for eg. high school students, first time authors, etc.
The first rule of high school student contest will be that you need to be in high school. For feminists, they have shot themselves in foot in this regard. They want that everyone to be treated equal(and in many case not even define females) but at the same time they don't.
If the prize is not restricted to female authors, what's the problem?
Your argument would hold if the article actually mentioned anything like that, but all that's being discussed is if it was a marketing strategy or not.
This is peak hypocrisy when we're supposed to believe that women are constantly held back, but accuse men of using a woman pen name to sell more.
Comments
When a woman does it, it's to expose the patriarchy. When men do it it's a scandal.
Pen names have existed for centuries. Who cares?
The question would be whether or not they did it to exploit the advantages that culture and media now afford to women. But then again, that’s the same reason women have historically used male pen names.
IANAP (...Not A Psychiatrist), but a great many people who are enthusiastic readers (especially of novels) seem to imagine close relationships between themselves and their favorite authors, extensively fabricate details of the authors and relationships, and become very emotionally invested in those imagined relationships.
Hence the anger and feelings of betrayal when an actual author's identity, behavior, etc. fail to match those of the reader's close and trusted (but quite imaginary) friend.
It's not about using a pen name. They are free to write under a feminine pseudonym (reverse George Elliot style).
I am not sure if the prize is intentionally limited to women --it sounds like it isn't--but I dont think we want people claiming prizes this way. Consider that there are competitions for eg. high school students, first time authors, etc.
The first rule of high school student contest will be that you need to be in high school. For feminists, they have shot themselves in foot in this regard. They want that everyone to be treated equal(and in many case not even define females) but at the same time they don't.
If the prize is not restricted to female authors, what's the problem?
Your argument would hold if the article actually mentioned anything like that, but all that's being discussed is if it was a marketing strategy or not.
This is peak hypocrisy when we're supposed to believe that women are constantly held back, but accuse men of using a woman pen name to sell more.