http://aikaterini.livejournal.com/ ([identity profile] aikaterini.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] a_sporking_rat 2013-02-07 10:42 pm (UTC)

/They hate her for being a (potentially) better breeder than they are. She is literally reduced to the usefulness of her uterus./

Why is that so common in urban fantasy books with werewolves? Okay, animals are driven by the instinctual desire to procreate, but *humans aren’t.* Humans can *choose* to not have children. And werewolves are *not* completely animal, they’re human too. That’s one of the things that have been so compelling about werewolves: their struggle to maintain their humanity alongside their animal nature. And if werewolves are living in the 21st century with all that that entails (technology, rights, etc.), why are they still behaving as if it’s the Middle Ages when it comes to women? What, so they can vote and drive, but reproductive rights are conveniently not on their radar? Instead of a pack being a family (you know, like it is with *real* wolves) or even just a beneficial social group, why does it always have to be a cult that determines the heroine’s worth by her fertility? Whether it’s because werewolves are rare, male werewolves grossly outnumber female werewolves, or any other number of excuses used to justify this worship of reproduction.

I mean, give vampires some credit, at least most of the time in fiction, *they* don’t care about having kids. Yes, usually it’s because they can’t have them, but at least in that scenario, a woman’s worth isn’t bound to her uterus.

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting