Wait, What?

I recently entered a short story competition. I didn't get past the first round but did get some valuable feedback from the judges. A critique on one's writing is always difficult to digest, but as a writer, a thick skin is a necessity along with a good dictionary and copious amounts of tea.

However, one comment irked me somewhat.

One of the characters where I described her anatomy was criticized: "The line about "Kathy's small pert breasts" feels a bit problematic for 2019."

I was a little puzzled. Why should it be problematic? I'm just describing a character. It's difficult to fully convey the various personalities of people in stories in less than 2,500 words and perhaps that is a shortfall of me as a writer, but it's still only a description. A means of describing a person.

With the current 'MeToo' climate, there is certainly more sensitivity and as an advocate of this movement, I do understand the need to be hyper-aware of causing offence. And yet, why should it affect how I write, what words I use?

Surely a writer is 'allowed' to describe its characters using what ever words it deems appropriate? Would I have got the same reaction/comment if I had said 'Kathy's sagging breasts'? Am I not 'allowed' to sexualize a woman? Believe it or not, there are women out in the world who like being seen as 'sexy'. And isn't a follow on from 'Me Too' also advocating that a woman has the freedom to be whom they choose to be?

As a writer, my words should engage my readers. Better still if I make them think and want to discuss what they've read. Not being able to write whether a woman's breasts are pert or not shouldn't cause offence to anyone, it shouldn't be 'problematic'. Obviously this judge has completely forgotten the popularity of 'Fifty Shades' and the hundreds of authors who write steamy romances. If you're easily offended (by sexual references), then don't read the book.

Perhaps I'm reading too much in to the judge's comment. All they want me to know is to be aware of how things are perceived. After all, the written word is a powerful thing (I'm old enough to remember the fatwa being placed on Salmon Rushdie), but I don't see (refuse to see?) how this description is problematic. 

It also begs me to ask: is this comment akin to censorship?

Creating an image of a character with words is what my role of an author is all about. So, whilst I appreciate the critique, I will continue to describe my characters breasts (pert, heaving, drooping...) as I see fit.

It's that day again...

I'm a hopeless romantic. I'll admit it. But, I'm that rare kind that is also prone to cynicism. Not a positive combination with the inevitable Valentine's Day fast approaching. So, I know I'm going to get some backlash on writing this post. But, here goes. 

Every year I get a Valentine's card from Hubby and I get him one. I'll get a bouquet of roses and even a gift. The first year we were married I was over the moon with it. But, as time passes, I

told Hubby to stop buying flowers because they're just too expensive. A $5 rose becomes $10. And, yes you can argue it's the sentiment behind the giving of roses but I'm lucky enough that Hubby buys me flowers regardless of what day it is. And, yes, the gifts given have been particularly nice - surely that's what birthdays, wedding anniversary's and Christmas is for, yes?

I say, leave Valentine's Day for the singles. Isn't that the point of the day? To get a card signed with a question mark or flowers arriving with a note attached saying: "you're a bit of all right!" Where the woman or man in question will ponder who finds them attractive. It will give them a buzz, make 'em stand taller, brush a little more mascara on (some blokes may...) until they realize it's that dodgy looking guy from the post room, or the woman who always seems wear the same cardigan, regardless of the weather.

For those who are single it's probably the worst day of their lives. Another reminder they're not with someone. That they're outstanding wit and charm ain't that attractive, that as much as they primp and preen, they still can't meet that special someone. A day they hate knowing that whilst some are being swept of their feet, they'll be popping into the local supermarket, picking up a meal for one and a magnum bottle of champagne to deaden the neglect. 

It's hard being single on Valentine's Day and it's a slap on the face watching those in a relationship buying a card. Some grabbing the first thing they see, others choosing with a lot of care, or those buying one only because they think it will score them brownie points (and a bit of 'ow's your father). In the recess of a singleton's mind are they secretly hoping a card is being bought for them? When I was single, I hated Valentines Day. I knew no one was going to send me a card or flowers. The day just sucked and I had to work...

February 14th is certainly not a day to buy a pack of cards and give them to all your friends in school. Does a first grader truly know about love? Some will argue it's an opportunity to celebrate the love of friendship. Great, wonderful, pick another day to acknowledge that  - Valentines Day is about fancying the pants of someone, not having to give a card to a kid who's nose just won't stop running. It's not a day to be inclusive.

I'll be the first one to admit that I've been taken in with the commercialism. The hopes of buying a cuddly teddy bear holding a heart, the heart shaped boxed of chocolates, the romantic songs. All of it. I still find some of things quite sweet...some...

Truth is, it's become too commercialized and expensive. Should a business make a profit on emotions?  And, that says it all really. Are we not exploiting love? Are we not making it an obligation to declare our love for someone on one particular day, when in fact, the declaration of love would be just as amazing if it happened on March 14 as it would February 14. 

Love is love - we don't need a day to show it, wax lyrical about it and/or to celebrate it. But...um, Happy Valentine's Day people...enjoy! Ahem...