(no subject)

[iniquiticity]

cattlaydee asked
One of the things I've always loved about Greenhouses is how seamless the gender equality is written. Like you write women and men the same, serving in the Army & stuff, & it's just the way it is. I hope this makes sense lol. I just really like it.

actually, you know i regret that i did not make MORE characters women. if i could do it over again, washington’s military family would be more women. probably green and sullivan or something. so the way i try to make up for that is make sure i’m extra inclusive in any ficlets that i write, or make sure they always say people instead of “men,” even though “men” sounds more of the age that i’m shooting for. thanks patriarchy! you guys (! guys!) suck! also why maybe i’d just swap out sullivan for d. sampson. well you get the point. but yes.

although gender equality was a pretty early element of the world, becuase it important as part of the original adoption agreement with alexander. so having a variety of genders and sexualities of children actually INCREASED your status, becuase your children (and as an extension, you), were capable of all these different combinations. i think this comes up in the story? so following this thread, if it’s a mark of pride/class/statue that you have a variety of genders and sexualities, then genders and sexualities have to be equal.

i think in greenhouses, the default assumed gender is to be bi (this is how arranged marriages, to all kinds of genders, work). is assumed sexuality problematic no matter what the sexuality is? yes, because complex social hierarchies are inherently problematic. is it less problematic than being assumed straight? who the hell knows. are people probably married to people they’re not attracted to in greenhouses? seems likely. i mean arranged marriages as a social institution have all kinds of problems! and free marriages do too! society is complicated.

i actually had several whole storylines and backstories about assumed sexuality vs true sexuality that i worked through with @aethersea​ (and maybe @scioscribe​ ?), most of which were discarded. even recently one came up with assumed gender vs true gender with @tooeasilyconsidered​.

but yes. all of that is intended. you probably didn’t want this giant answer but i’ve been drinking and i’m grateful people notice.