Writing with Sensitivity
Being a published author has been a wonderful, fascinating, and at times, surprising experience for me. Recently, these unexpected episodes came in three notes. A few weeks ago, I received an email from a reader suggesting I read an article, How to Make Your Writing More Sensitive–and Why It Matters by a freelance writer, Melissa Haun.
https://www.websiteplanet.com/blog/sensitive-writing-guide/
On the heels of that email, another reader pointed out that my heroine, Cassie, in Stealing Time, called an attempt to pack the family coach a “Chinese Fire Drill.” She wrote:
“Being of Asian descent, this reviewer was taken aback by the use of the dated phrase “Chinese fire drill” which has offensive overtones to me. In rating this book, I have made the assumption that the author had not considered this aspect in language used.”
Which was true. I hadn’t considered that aspect. Within the same week, my writing program, ProWritingAid, added its observation regarding sensitivity. When the hero in my new manuscript characterized the heroine as a “pugnacious, demented female,” a drop down note immediately cautioned, “Inclusiveness: This may imply a bias against those with disabilities.” Obviously, out of context in this case, but still, this effort to be sensitive to reader concerns is now part of writing programs.
Heaven knows I have no interest in ignoring sensitive issues, being insensitive or hurting anyone’s feelings with my writing. If nothing else, ignoring such things is hardly conducive to entertainment—at least the kind I am interested in creating. Clearly, the universe wanted my attention. The reader who sent me Ms. Haun’s article felt following her suggestions would increase my readership. I’m all for that.
Add this need for inclusiveness while avoiding being insensitive to others’ feelings, several readers have given my novels one or two stars for one failing: The complaint has been the novels contain swearing, crass words.
I can understand the confusion over content. Having written sweet/clean novels, and some with a middling-to-fair amount of swearing, violence, and sex, I now specify the ‘heat’ content in each novel as part of their description.
Being sensitive to reader needs and wants in their reading covers a lot of ground, which Ms. Haun acknowledged. She put a huge amount of thought into her excellent article—with diagrams. The article is specifically for writers, so I paid attention. Here is the summary graphic for what she sees are the basic considerations:
Following the graphic, she writes:
Categories & Examples of Sensitive Content
Now that we’ve covered the basics, let’s get more specific. There are several different areas where sensitivity is especially important. We’ve divided them into a few broad categories to give an overview of how to approach each one. These aren’t the only areas where sensitivity matters, of course, but they’re the ones that most commonly come up in our content:
· Race & Culture
· Sexism
· Gender Identity
· Sexual Orientation
· Disability & Ableism
· Appearance
· Age & Lifestyle
· Politics & Religion
In her article, Ms. Haun did a fine job exploring the specifics in each listed area of concern, so there is no need for me to repeat them here. Read the article.
My question is how can or should all this be dealt with in a novel? Ms. Huan’s descriptions and examples focused on narratives, whether fiction or nonfiction. Yet, there are characters too, and their take on the world may be decidedly insensitive, particularly if illustrating different cultures and eras. Let’s use Stealing Time and its main characters as our case in point. The story is about a cat burglar thrust back in time to the Regency period. Between her Brooklyn upbringing as a foster child, criminal activities, and the British culture during the early eighteen hundreds, nearly all of the sensitive areas listed above come into play during the story.
Narrative:
It is comparatively easy to ‘police’ your writing when describing people, places or things. It comes down to what words authors are using either in their adjectives such as ‘demented’ or comparison such as ‘Chinese fire drill.” These are easy to change, deleting the offending words or substituting something less triggering. However, there are more difficult parts of a story.
Ms. Huan notes context and inference can cross the line, suggesting things that amount to insensitive assertions. I can say some situation is ‘worse’ rather than changing, or emphasize a particular detail over another, say a man’s anger over a woman’s irritation, though both emotions are supposed to be of equal intensity. I say these issues are comparatively easy to address only in relation to the characters in the novel.
Characters:
In the cases of demented and Chinese Fire Drill, they weren’t my narrative descriptions. They were in a character’s Point of View, cat burglar Cassie’s and a Regency era ‘gentleman.’
I’ve been in Brooklyn several times, and I can verify that ‘Chinese Fire Drill’ is a common descriptor heard there. It is ‘in character’ for Cassie to use it. That doesn’t mean the author should. The writer can easily scrub it, just like any other insensitive term.
The problem is this: Cassie is an ‘insensitive’ character, from the streets, a criminal, fairly hardened by life. Does Cassie remain the same character if I soften or eliminate her insensitive edges altogether?
I have received suggested answers to this question. One is to smooth rough edges ‘just enough.’ A delicate balancing act. Another is to have other characters correct her behavior, or even the narrator. Depending on the transgression, Regency culture, as patriarchal as it was, may not realistically harbor characters who could chastise Cassie for her poor behavior. As the narrator, I can slap Cassie’s hand when she’s being bad, but that can be rather intrusive in most point-of-view modes other than omniscient.
A third idea is to have her recognize her lack of empathy during the story. While that happens in Stealing Time, she has to have her ‘Chinese fire drill’ moments if she is going to be shown to grow out of them. Of course, part of Cassie’s insensitivity is being dropped into a different culture. In this case, the Regency era, which had its own list of striking insensitivities.
The Environment:
British culture during the early nineteenth century blithely stomped across our culture’s ‘sensitive parts’ with big boots. The prevailing attitudes towards women, sex, the mentally and physically impaired, race, the ‘lower classes’, gender identity, religion, and politics would curl the hair of even marginally aware members of our twenty-first century society.
Obviously, everything can depend on how such insensitivities are avoided or represented, just like any narrative or character descriptors.
Here is a scene from Stealing Time where Cassie is confronted by blatant misogyny and implied racism. Cassie is being lauded for her climbing ability when the hero, Ross approaches the group of men surrounding her at a ball:
***
As he came up behind them, he could hear them praising her climbing performance and her dancing.
A large man, his collar high enough to wedge itself under his large ears, spoke with an authoritative air on women and climbing.
“You must admit, Contessa, that your talent and skill are exceedingly rare among the weaker sex. What other woman could possibly succeed as you have?”
Ross could guess what Cassandra was thinking about the condescension in the compliment, and her reply confirmed his suspicions.
“Why, Colonel Adderhatch, I doubt that many men could either.”
The Colonel cleared his throat, eyeing the other men, who were enjoying his discomfiture. “Yes, rather. Yours was an extraordinary feat.”
Another young buck, sporting an embroidered red vest said, “So, how did you accomplish it? What techniques did you employ?”
Before she could respond, an older gentleman, with the bearing and potbelly of an experienced Parliamentarian, stuck his thumbs in his waistcoat pockets and said, “Tut, tut there, Downey. Quite an unfair question, my boy. You can not expect the woman to know how to explain the technical skills involved. Far outside a woman’s ken. Common knowledge and all that.”
Ross winced, embarrassed for Parliament. For a politician, the man wasn’t particularly politic.
Downey blinked. “But Mr. Stellerby, how did she . . .”
“Instinct, boy, instinct. She is blessed with a natural talent. Can’t be taught, don’t you know.”
Kerrington watched Cassandra’s eyes darken as her lip curled ever so slightly. A set-down was brewing. He was about to intervene when another, more stately man, spoke up.
As though tutoring the now embarrassed Downey, the man said, “A woman’s understanding is limited in many ways. It is unfair to expect more of them than they can provide, particularly from the darker, southern European nations.”
Several others nodded sagely and murmured “Quite right, Lord Litton, quite right.”
Downey appeared totally undone and on the verge of apologizing to Cassandra for his unfair question when she removed her hand from Tate-Murray’s arm and laid it on Downey’s sleeve. She shook her head sympathetically, but Kerrington saw that devilish gleam in her eye and recognized the set of her jaw. He held his breath, bracing himself for what she might say, caught between apprehension and anticipation.
She laughed lightly and said to young Downey, but included the rest of the men, “Do not trouble yourself, Mr. Downey. Adam had much the same questions concerning women.”
The rotund politician chuckled and said, “And how is that, my lady?”
“Well, I guess you haven’t heard the story.” She leaned in and the men leaned closer to hear her. “In the Garden of Eden, Adam went to God one day to ask him why he had made the woman Eve the way he had.” Several men smiled and said they hadn’t heard it. “Well, as they walked in the Garden, Adam asked God, ‘Why did you make women so beautiful?”
“God answered, ‘So you would like them.”
Cassie began acting out the parts. She made Adam a rather vague character. “Then why did you make them so soft and cuddly?” The men chuckled at this, looking at each other with near leers on their faces. Ross kept his face blank and crossed his arms tight to keep from planting some facers. Cassandra grinned as though she was sharing their secrets, which made Ross want to shake her instead.
“God answered,” Cassie said in a deep voice, “’So you would enjoy holding them for your comfort.’”
“’Yes, it is all very nice,’” said Adam, “’but why, why did you make them so stupid?’”
The men roared their laughter, but Cassandra held up a hand and they quieted immediately. She spoke quietly among the crowds, so the men leaned in further to hear her next words.
“‘Well, my boy,’ God said, ‘I wanted them to like you too.”
There was a silence, which was broken by a quiet chuckle from the young Downey, and a coughing guffaw from a couple of men in the back, but the rest continued to frown at each other as though they’d missed the punch line. Ross clenched his teeth to keep from laughing, not only at the joke, but also at the dazed expressions exhibited by several of the blowhards in the group.
***
There is a great deal of insensitivity [i.e. lack of empathy] going on in the scene, perpetrated by several people, including Cassie towards most of the men with her joke. She does reassure poor Mr. Downey, her empathy appearing as a strength. In contrast, Mr. Downey’s was ‘troubled’ by his empathy for Cassie, but comes across as hesitant, and let’s admit it, weak.
The question here is whether the reader will find the scene insensitive. Women readers may have been the target of similar remarks concerning their abilities as women. Am I being insensitive to portray that reality? What about a reader’s feelings about their religion? Have readers felt the scene made light of their beliefs? And of course, there is the punchline of the joke which is pure man-bashing. Those paragraphs are brimming with potential offensive issues.
Referring to the ‘Mental Checklist’ graph above, this one scene hits three of the four issues listed:
#2. “Are my views influencing the way I am treating the topic?” Well, duh. Hard to avoid this one. Being self-aware of one's views is mandatory in this case, as well as the readers' views. But should the hero and heroine be equally self-aware? They were to some degree in the scene, but enough?
#3. Am I minimizing or exaggerating the importance of the topic. The attitudes and relations between men and women are important issues in the above story. It is a romance, after all. The characters may enhance or diminish the topics within the parameters of the story environment, but is that enough ‘balance’ for today’s readers?
#4. Does what I’ve written show respect towards those affected by this issue? How do I tell? Ms. Huan suggests asking others who might be affected. A good idea. There are two complications. One is the number of issues which might surface in a scene, let alone a story. Look at the number in just that one passage I provided. The second is who or how many writers and readers you ask about such sensitive issues. Not all those affected will have the same views, some more representative than others, some more sensitive than others. Just as an author can’t please every reader with their story, a writer will offend someone sometime, regardless.
Ms. Huan writes:
It’s true that this level of consideration and critical thinking requires extra work, but it’s worth it. And the truth is that there isn’t actually any other option. Every choice we make in our content will reflect a certain position.
Yes, extra work and yes, in the end you can only realistically do what Ms. Huan points out: “This is why it’s so important to evaluate everything on a case-by-case basis.”
I agree with her: such considerations are vital. None-the-less, it makes me feel tired at the thought of doing this methodically on top of all the other methodical challenges inherent in writing a story. This is particularly true when she points out that “there’s no such thing as truly neutral language.” (She bolded those words.) Writers can try creating neutral passages at different points in their books, but in making those choices, the purposes are not neutral in intent. Kind of a Catch-22 balancing act.
Conclusions?
Ms. Huan ends with this equation: “Empathy + Flexibility = Sensitivity.
She states, “. . .we recognize that they aren’t all hard-and-fast rules, and the “right” way to write something often depends on the context of each situation. This is why it’s so important to evaluate everything on a case-by-case basis.” Again, that is the only way to deal with the issue in one’s writing outside one’s experience. My family recently reminded of that approach as well as asking the views of others who might be affected.
Ms. Huan concludes,
“If you’re ever in doubt about how you should represent a certain individual or group, the best thing to do is seek out their perspective. How do they prefer to be portrayed? What words and ideas do they find offensive? Not all members of a given group will agree on these things, but you can always try to find a consensus or a recommendation from a trustworthy source. It’s true that this level of consideration and critical thinking requires extra work, but it’s worth it. And the truth is that there isn’t actually any other option.
There are a few other options open to writers. Other writers and editors, more experienced with these issues can also help, on a professional level, regardless of their personal experience with the topics. There are actually editing programs such as the one I use that can mechanically identify sensitive words or ideas. There are writing programs available that are specifically designed to perform this kind of screening. Like all kinds of editing, a writer tries to catch all the problems with content, grammar and line errors. This editing for sensitive issues is just one more type of necessary proofreading.