Need Gay/Lesbian Perspective (writerly)

[slyc_willie]

I've had this idea for a novel for quite a while now, at least a good two or three years. It sort of popped into my head while watching Logan's Run one night, and has simmered on the back burner of my brain since then. Over the last few weeks, however, it has jumped to the forefront and begun to really boil.

The basic premise is of an enclosed, self-sufficient society in the relatively near future. Say, a few generations from now. The background is that at some point in the 21st century, there was an epidemic that wiped out the majority of the human population. The trick is that it was only transmuted through heterosexual sex. Obviously, those who survived were mainly gays and lesbians.

I bet you can see where this is going already.

Jump forward a good three or four generations. Imagine a large city-state totally closed off from the outside world, a sort of Utopian society a la Logan's Run or Brave New World. Through whatever means, everyone is provided for as far as food, luxury, entertainment, comfortable living conditions, etc., are concerned. The only hitch is that homosexuality is mandated by the government, and hetereosexual relations are criminal, punishable by death.

The essential story involves character A, a man, and character B, a woman. Both happily content with their existence and positions in society (I'm thinking of making A a history teacher and B some kind of engineer -- their occupations will be important to both explain the culture in which they live as well as assist them later on in the story), they nevertheless find themselves inordinately attracted to one another. In time, they fall in love and begin a hidden relationship, which eventually compels them to escape.

I've discussed this idea with several straight and gay friends I work with, and they all agree it's an interesting premise. The SO brought up a good point, however, when she mentioned that some readers, primarily gay and lesbians may view it as some kind of hidden denouncement of homosexuals.

Somehow, I don't think a simple disclaimer ("This is a work of visionary fiction. It is not a diatribe against homosexuality") would be enough, however, to quell such reactions. It is more about the dangers inherent when any government attempts to regulate a private citizen's sexuality or sexual practices.

By the end of the story, of course, the hunted lovers escape (or do they? I haven't figured that part out yet) despite everything their oppressive government tries to stop them. Along the way, many friends get hurt or even killed protecting them.

So, what I want to pick your brains about is how I could go about representing the government as being oppressive and dominating without making it a negative tie-in to homosexuality. Or am I just going to have to weather the negative feedback from those who won't catch my original meaning?

 

[KarennaC]

I don't have any thoughts to offer on your idea, but I have to wonder how reproduction occurs in that society?

 

[sadangel]

I don't have any thoughts to offer on your idea, but I have to wonder how reproduction occurs in that society?

That's what I was wondering as I read that. Otherwise, I think it is interesting. There will always be naysayers to every story no matter how unique.

 

[slyc_willie]

I don't have any thoughts to offer on your idea, but I have to wonder how reproduction occurs in that society?

I was going to go with tried-and-true sci-fi devices: either test tubes, or cloning.

 

[rgraham666]

Artificial insemination is the first thing that comes to mind. Perhaps with the powerful in the society getting 'first dibs' on 'higher quality' sperm.

Or perhaps they have the technology to create children and gestate them outside the womb. In this case again there could be politics involved with the powerful trading genes as tokens in the game.

One thing that comes to mind is how are the children raised? In 'nuclear families' with two parents of the same sex? In extended families of both sexes? In neighborhood creches where every one in a building or on a street has responsibility for the children? In government run creches and schools?

 

[Stella_Omega]

You can make your government de facto gay, rather than oppressively gay. That totalitarian thing was overdone decades ago, really.

Show lots of gay couples; some happy, some not so.

Show your straight couple against that backdrop-- struggling with their identities hating themselves for being so abnormal-- and you will have a nice little ironic comment going. Do not make your couple be Magic Hets That Are Better Than Everyone. Do not make them be the Only Hetero-desiring People On The Planet, please. One in ten!

And please my love, let me and at least one other person look it over, because there is many a pitfall to writing like this. The LGBT minorities are feeling mighty fucking battered-- and mighty fucking warlike. You can make friends or enemies, depending.

 

[slyc_willie]

Artificial insemination is the first thing that comes to mind. Perhaps with the powerful in the society getting 'first dibs' on 'higher quality' sperm.

Or perhaps they have the technology to create children and gestate them outside the womb. In this case again there could be politics involved with the powerful trading genes as tokens in the game.

One thing that comes to mind is how are the children raised? In 'nuclear families' with two parents of the same sex? In extended families of both sexes? In neighborhood creches where every one in a building or on a street has responsibility for the children? In government run creches and schools?

I had only just begun to imagine the society itself. I like the idea of babies being born in "batches," so to speak, and kept to their own sex throughout initial schooling. That gives the state enough time to effectively brainwash them against their natural instincts to be attracted to the opposite sex (of course, naturally, there are those who will already be attracted to their own sex).

The overall theme is that of government control. I want to emphasize that as much as I can, but without going too overboard.

 

[slyc_willie]

You can make your government de facto gay, rather than oppressively gay. That totalitarian thing was overdone decades ago, really.

Show lots of gay couples; some happy, some not so.

Show your straight couple against that backdrop-- struggling with their identities hating themselves for being so abnormal-- and you will have a nice little ironic comment going. Do not make your couple be Magic Hets That Are Better Than Everyone. Do not make them be the Only Hetero-desiring People On The Planet, please. One in ten!

And please my love, let me and at least one other person look it over, because there is many a pitfall to writing like this. The LGBT minorities are feeling mighty fucking battered-- and mighty fucking warlike. You can make friends or enemies, depending.

I pretty much ahd that idea, too. I do want to show happy couples and unhappy ones. And my fear about it being taken the wrong way is what's kept the idea in the back of my mind for so long.

 

[TE999]

Here's an idea...men and women get together and mate periodically under state supervision to keep mankind going...you aren't supposed to like it, just do it...and most don't...but your man and woman do in spite of themselves.

The developing embryo is raised in a jar...the state maintains it until it's 'born' then it goes into a state school and assigned surrogate parents...using a state mandated lottery...like getting picked for jury duty.

 

[slyc_willie]

Here's an idea...men and women get together and mate periodically under state supervision to keep mankind going...you aren't supposed to like it, just do it...and most don't...but your man and woman do in spite of themselves.

The developing embryo is raised in a jar...the state maintains it until it's 'born' then it goes into a state school and assigned surrogate parents...using a state mandated lottery...like getting picked for jury duty.

I was thinking more along the lines of children being raised in groups, without individual parents. Thus, they grow up thinking of the government -- or it's figurehead -- as their parent.

And Stella, I didn't mean to gloss over your reply earlier. the little one was acting up and I had to cut it short. You're right about the oppressive government thing. De facto gay would work better and sit better, but how to work in the element of heterosexuality = evil and have it be convincing?

 

[Stella_Omega]

Here's an idea...men and women get together and mate periodically under state supervision to keep mankind going...you aren't supposed to like it, just do it...and most don't...but your man and woman do in spite of themselves.

The developing embryo is raised in a jar...the state maintains it until it's 'born' then it goes into a state school and assigned surrogate parents...using a state mandated lottery...like getting picked for jury duty.

Why not women's wombs? Some lesbians actually like to have babies.

 

[rgraham666]

If you want to read an interesting take on how artificial child creation works try the Blood of Kerensky series. For gamefic they were surprisingly good reads.

You can read all about it here.

 

[TE999]

Why not women's wombs? Some lesbians actually like to have babies.

Yep! They make excellent mothers too. Hence, another aspect of the retrograde CalProp indignities.

I was going for a soulless state form of procreation...a mandated mating period...no woman would carry a child for long...just until it could be transferred to a jar and it's development monitored.

 

[slyc_willie]

If you want to read an interesting take on how artificial child creation works try the Blood of Kerensky series. For gamefic they were surprisingly good reads.

You can read all about it here.

Thanks, Rob. I'll check it out.

Regarding the dynamics of child-rearing, then, so far there are two options: brought to term and given birth normally, but with an anonymous sperm donor as the father, then taken into nurseries and raised by the state, -- or -- conceived and raised in an entirely artificial environment and raised by the state.

The idea of women either volunteering or being drafted to serve as mothers for the state has nice Big Brother overtones to it. Maybe Character B is one such mother . . . .

 

[TE999]

The idea of women either volunteering or being drafted to serve as mothers for the state has nice Big Brother overtones to it. Maybe Character B is one such mother . . . .

The Nazi's had the Lebensborn project wherein suitably Nordic women would mate with Nordic men to produce perfect children for the Reich. You could build on that concept. The state raised the children too.

 

[sr71plt]

I haven't read anything but the initial posting. I don't see any "political correctness" problem with it for anyone who is creative (which pretty much defines the gay community). It's a creative idea, and I think anyone who takes umbrage at it being used as a device could just go screw themselves. Sorry, but this worrying about what flies with the lowest common denominator doesn't mean much to me. I think it's a very interesting theme.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Yep! They make excellent mothers too. Hence, another aspect of the retrograde CalProp indignities.

I was going for a soulless state form of procreation...a mandated mating period...no woman would carry a child for long...just until it could be transferred to a jar and it's development monitored.

That's awfully heavy-handed, really. Much spookier to have the uterine environment monitored. A little hand-waving about the right additives at the right times... Just to make sure, you know. The babies can be raised jointly by their dual-household parents. Mommies and daddies can be gay and still dote on their opposite-sex children! Needless to say, there will be more or less able parents, just as there are now.

All of this makes the whole setup different enough from our current society so the issue of your Magically Hetero Couple will seem a little more personal and less political...

 

[slyc_willie]

I haven't read anything but the initial posting. I don't see any "political correctness" problem with it for anyone who is creative (which pretty much defines the gay community). It's a creative idea, and I think anyone who takes umbrage at it being used as a device could just go screw themselves. Sorry, but this worrying about what flies with the lowest common denominator doesn't mean much to me. I think it's a very interesting theme.

I appreciate the input, but I'm not as worried about the backlash as I am the main gist of the story being clouded. But there really isn't much I can do about that. I suppose maybe I am being too cautious. Maybe.

 

[TE999]

That's awfully heavy-handed, really. Much spookier to have the uterine environment monitored. A little hand-waving about the right additives at the right times... Just to make sure, you know. The babies can be raised jointly by their dual-household parents. Mommies and daddies can be gay and still dote on their opposite-sex children! Needless to say, there will be more or less able parents, just as there are now.

All of this makes the whole setup different enough from our current society so the issue of your Magically Hetero Couple will seem a little more personal and less political...

Yea, verily. The concept is more of a world turned upside down...predicated on societal mores' of a real world society in about 1950...when Gay anything was taboo. Hell, Lucy couldn't say she was preggers on her tv show.

Less a political allegory and more a defiance of convention in the name of love.

 

[slyc_willie]

All of this makes the whole setup different enough from our current society so the issue of your Magically Hetero Couple will seem a little more personal and less political...

And that's another thing I wanted to concentrate on with the story. At its core, this is just a love story about two people who fall in love when they shouldn't. Classic Romeo and Juliet.

Just, with cool sci-fi stuff thrown in.

 

[slyc_willie]

Less a political allegory and more a defiance of convention in the name of love.

Regardless of how I spin it, there will be those who see it either way or as a combination of the two.

Ah, screw it. Forget the reactions. I should just concentrate on the story.

 

[TE999]

Regardless of how I spin it, there will be those who see it either way or as a combination of the two.

Ah, screw it. Forget the reactions. I should just concentrate on the story.

Try to offend no one and you offend everyone.

Go for it and let the chips fall where they may. Only hacks write to please an audience, true artists create an audience.

 

[Safe_Bet]

I think it sounds like a cool premise.

As far as the artificial insemination goes, the way it is done now seems to work (for my kids anyways ).

Regarding your primary question, you should simply exchange Homo with Het and use our existing government as a model. They ain’t exactly gay/lesbian friendly, even though they do mouth pretty little platitudes every now and then.

I would suggest that you do let someone like Stella read it before presenting it. You will be hitting pretty close to some issues that ARE real sensitive to many of us right now (and into the foreseeable future) and I’d hate to see you catch a lot of crap over things that could have been worded differently to express the same intent, but not cause even more consternation.

 

[slyc_willie]

Try to offend no one and you offend everyone.

Go for it and let the chips fall where they may. Only hacks write to please an audience, true artists create an audience.

I see I need to be reminded of that from time to time.

I think it sounds like a cool premise.

As far as the artificial insemination goes, the way it is done now seems to work (for my kids anyways ).

Regarding your primary question, you should simply exchange Homo with Het and use our existing government as a model. They ain’t exactly gay/lesbian friendly, even though they do mouth pretty little platitudes every now and then.

I would suggest that you do let someone like Stella read it before presenting it. You will be hitting pretty close to some issues that ARE real sensitive to many of us right now (and into the foreseeable future) and I’d hate to see you catch a lot of crap over things that could have been worded differently to express the same intent, but not cause even more consternation.

It was the current political backdrop that got me on the original track, actually. I have several friends who have been very concerned with recent legislation regarding same-sex partnerships, and their reactions have been very enlightening.

Seeing as how I plan to submit this to eXcessica rather than going through Lit (although I may be interested in seeing how Lit's readers react), I will have it edited a few times. Be interesting to send it to a straight editor and a gay or lesbian editor and compare the two edits.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Try to offend no one and you offend everyone.

Go for it and let the chips fall where they may. Only hacks write to please an audience, true artists create an audience.

The question isn't to try to offend no one, but to decide who you'd prefer to please.

And there ain't too many of them there "true artists" around, really-- some of us get to "truly art" in one category or another.

It would be really interesting to submit it to someone straight, and a gay man, and a lesbian and see the three differences...