Hiding/changing one's gender to sell more books?

I was just reading a blog about a writer who submitted the same work to agents but one with a male name and one under a female name and sadly the male had more bites and offers. How disheartening as a woman to see this. I will be stalking this thread. Great topic!!!!

The Bronte sisters had to pretend to be male to get anyone to take them seriously as writers. Their first published work was under the names, Currer (Charlotte), Ellis (Emily), and Acton (Anne) Bell.

I found this blog, not sure if it's the one Jan74 was referring to: Homme de Plume: What I Learned Sending My Novel Out Under a Male Name

But I use caution analyzing an anecdotal study such as Nichol's. Does it apply to all genres, was it specific to the book itself, and is it repeatable?

She links to this, a different Jezebel blogger: ​VIDA Count of Women in Literary Journals Shows Remarkable Improvement

The organization VIDA makes it their job to annually count the number of female bylines and books written by women in U.S. literary magazines. While last year's count was pretty depressing, they feel that this year, there's room for hope.

For 2013, major publications like The Paris Review actually included slightly more women than men between their pages. "The Paris Review's numbers, previously among the worst in our VIDA Count, have metamorphosed from deep, male-dominated lopsidedness into a picture more closely resembling gender parity," notes VIDA. "While such progress is remarkable in one year, we are likewise pleased to note that we haven't heard anyone bemoan a drop in quality in The Paris Review's pages. Turnarounds like the Paris Review's make it clear that with the right editorial effort, putting more sustainable gender practices into action isn't too difficult for these magazines at the top of the major market heap."

Click to expand...

I don't think this is something resolvable with anecdotes. I'd like to see a study looking at a lot of variables such as genre, the denominator of submissions (but that's tricky because we'd need to know which of those authors actually had decent work so maybe that's a variable we'll have to leave out). Further analysis adds to the picture:

In order to properly feature those who are doing it right, this year, VIDA counted smaller publications, seven of which actually featured more women than men. As a contrast however, there are many mainstream journals that are still lagging behind. The New Republic, for instance, had its worst year since VIDA began their count in 2009. Other publications didn't get worse, but they certainly stayed the same. The New York Review of Books has remained at roughly 80% male bylines and authors featured. That's not surprising; last year, the publication's editor Robert Silvers essentially dismissed the VIDA count via a form email he sent to anyone who contacted him with complaints.

Click to expand...

Watch this space....

I've run across people on SF and F forums who openly admit they're biased against female authors. Many others claim no conscious bias but admit most of the books they've read and most of their favorite SFF writers are male, and they assume there are few female writers in this genre (though there are).

There are some (I'm one) who have more female writers on their favorites list than male, however. I suspect the numbers don't balance out. A disproportionate number of books that end up being mentioned in surveys of the best of the genre, and on recommended "must read" lists by fans and authors seem to be by men, as do more of the top bestsellers and best known classics in the genre. Female writers seem to be better known in urban fantasy and in YA fantasy and SF than in epic fantasy or hard SF, but even so, male writers get a lot of attention.

Even without conscious biases, I think an imbalance can be driven by a lack of exposure and a tendency of readers to seek out what they're familiar with and associate with a particular genre. Things like cover art, and (I'm guessing) emphasis of which plot elements on back cover, and the way books are promoted by publishers could also have an effect on whether or not they appeal to some readers, regardless of names. This can happen with literary fiction too. More book reviewers are also male.

Romance and women's fiction is very dominated by female authors, of course, and male authors may have to hide their names, but those genres have the reputation of being primarily "for" women.

It's really hard to find data on all titles published within different genres, the gender of their authors, and on their relative popularity with readers. It's hard to get exact gender breakdowns of readers within most genres and subgenres also, though the RWA does a pretty good job with surveys and statistics. I wish the SFWA did something similar.

Roxxsmom said:

Romance and women's fiction is very dominated by female authors, of course, and male authors may have to hide their names, but those genres have the reputation of being primarily "for" women.

Click to expand...

I've heard of men who write romance under female pseudonyms. The author Madeline Brent, who wrote Gothic Romance in the 1970s, turned out to be Peter O'Donnel, author of the Modesty Blaise novels.

But the Modesty Blaise books are action-packed detective stories. So he used his real name on those.

Roxxsmom said:

I've run across people on SF and F forums who openly admit they're biased against female authors. Many others claim no conscious bias but admit most of the books they've read and most of their favorite SFF writers are male, and they assume there are few female writers in this genre (though there are).

There are some (I'm one) who have more female writers on their favorites list than male, however. I suspect the numbers don't balance out. A disproportionate number of books that end up being mentioned in surveys of the best of the genre, and on recommended "must read" lists by fans and authors seem to be by men, as do more of the top bestsellers and best known classics in the genre. Female writers seem to be better known in urban fantasy and in YA fantasy and SF than in epic fantasy or hard SF, but even so, male writers get a lot of attention.

Even without conscious biases, I think an imbalance can be driven by a lack of exposure and a tendency of readers to seek out what they're familiar with and associate with a particular genre. Things like cover art, and (I'm guessing) emphasis of which plot elements on back cover, and the way books are promoted by publishers could also have an effect on whether or not they appeal to some readers, regardless of names. This can happen with literary fiction too. More book reviewers are also male.

Romance and women's fiction is very dominated by female authors, of course, and male authors may have to hide their names, but those genres have the reputation of being primarily "for" women.

It's really hard to find data on all titles published within different genres, the gender of their authors, and on their relative popularity with readers. It's hard to get exact gender breakdowns of readers within most genres and subgenres also, though the RWA does a pretty good job with surveys and statistics. I wish the SFWA did something similar.

Click to expand...

The weird thing about all this for me is, I never look at the author when picking out a book to read unless I liked a book so much I want to read more by that author.

At most I can see sending out queries with a gender neutral name, but it would bother me not to stand up for my gender. Aaaannnnd then on the other hand, I am proud of the Brontes for using their heads to break down an ignorant barrier.

I have two short stories published as Virginia May, not that that will help when I get that query ready. But I have an author page on Amazon!

I think I'm OK because my novel is more YA than sci-fi. If it were the other way around I'd have to do some serious soul searching.

SwallowFeather said:

I think you mentioned that story in one of the cultural appropriation threads. Reading that made me decide to start the thread as it's something I've been mulling over for awhile.

Click to expand...

That's great

MaeZe said:

The Bronte sisters had to pretend to be male to get anyone to take them seriously as writers. Their first published work was under the names, Currer (Charlotte), Ellis (Emily), and Acton (Anne) Bell.

I found this blog, not sure if it's the one Jan74: Homme de Plume: What I Learned Sending My Novel Out Under a Male Name

But I use caution analyzing an anecdotal study such as Nichol's. Does it apply to all genres, was it specific to the book itself, and is it repeatable.

She links to this, a different Jezebel blogger: ​VIDA Count of Women in Literary Journals Shows Remarkable Improvement

I don't think this is something amenable to anecdotes. I'd like to see a study looking at a lot of variables such as genre, the denominator of submissions (but that's tricky because we'd need to know which of those authors actually had decent work so maybe that's a variable we'll have to leave out). Further analysis adds to the picture:

Watch this space....

Click to expand...

Yes that is the blog I read. When I first read it I thought to myself "I'm definitely going to self publish, what's the point of even seeking an agent." But then when I look at the majority of the books I read, many of them are women authors. When I go on amazon and search a genre like suspense etc, I see many women authors. So I'm thinking, no hoping....its not as bad as it seems.

Articles like the one linked from Jezebel are so upsetting and frustrating; how do you ever know if rejection of a work is really a rejection of the work itself and not a case of bias because of one's gender (or in other cases, one's ethnicity)? Unless you perform an experiment like that author did, of course. I'm torn about it all. I'd hate to hide myself behind a male name to succeed but at the same time I've been tempted to use the initials trick just to sneak past some of those unconscious, automatic biases!

(Though the initials of my first and middle name are "S.M." which always prompts an S&M joke when I mention the initial possibility-- and I write fantasy, so there's S. M. Stirling to consider, a famous author of speculative fiction...)

SwallowFeather said:

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

How will that make it better? Seriously - if women writers erase their gender, how will it get better?

Totally not adopting this idea.

I like to keep my gender ambiguous, because it is.

Night_Writer said:

I've heard of men who write romance under female pseudonyms. The author Madeline Brent, who wrote Gothic Romance in the 1970s, turned out to be Peter O'Donnel, author of the Modesty Blaise novels.

Click to expand...

Fascinating... my wife LOVES Madeleine Brent's books, and I don't think she has any idea of this. I haven't read them, but as a man who wrote a "girl book" (my current MS is a f/f YA love story), maybe I should. I have pondered the pseudonym question myself, but figured the publisher would determine that if it ever gets to that point.

I read mostly SFF growing up in the 70s, and even then I'd say well over half of my favorite writers were women... maybe that makes me an anomaly?

This isn't just about picking a name, but that you have two books in the series under another name. Changing part way through a series is going to be difficult. Readers will think a different author was hired to write the last book for some reason. If you do decide to use a different name, it might be better to use the new name for whatever you write next, and let the series stand under the original name.

As for what name to use, could you live with a new name if it took off? If not, and if you'd really have preferred your original name to be the one people know, stick with that original name. Success isn't something you can guarantee with a name, but you can control whether you're happy with the name.

Out of curiosity I looked up the New York Times best selling combined e-fiction and Print. As of today the list is as follows:
1. "Into the Water" Paula Hawkins
2. "Surrender" Helen Hart
3. "No Middle Name" Lee Child
4. "Gwendy's Button Box" Stephen King and Richard Chizmar
5. "16th Seduction," James Patterson and Maxine Paetro
6. "The Hand Maiden's Tale," Margaret Atwood
7. "Same Beach, Next Year," Dorothea Benton Frank
8. "The Fix" David Baldacci
9. "Night School," Lee Child
10. "Testimony," Scott Turow
11. "Full Wolf Moon," Lincoln Child
12. "Buttons and Pain" Penelope Sky
13. "Golden Prey" John Stanford
14. "The Woman in Cabin 10" Ruth Ware
15 "Lilac Girls," Martha Hall Kelly

So, out of the top fifteen, seven are women, one man appears twice and two are novels plotted out by household names and written by some unknown. One, Penelope Sky is a pen name with no public identity that I can find, but claims to be a woman. The only person who seems to purposefully pick a gender ambiguous name is Lee Childs, who is a man. To me that doesn't suggest that male writers sell better than women, but it's also a small sample.

Anecdotally I've heard it depends on the genre. Like being a male romance writer writing romance books from a male point of view is not the sort of thing that's going to sell particularly well. I've also heard it's more difficult to be a male writer writing a male character in young adult.

Then there's also the conversation about about how much romance you can have in genre fiction before it becomes a Sy-Fy influenced romance, for example. Like there's a world of difference between writers like legit SFF authors like Nancy Kress, D.C. Fontana and Ann Leckie and say writers like Ruby Dixon and Anna Hacket who are writing straight up romance novels (Not that there's anything wrong with that.). It's about what sort of book you're writing and who you're writing for.

Women read more books, or so the common logic goes, so I think it's more a question of how you're marketing the book rather than the name on the cover.

edutton said:

... I have pondered the pseudonym question myself, but figured the publisher would determine that if it ever gets to that point.
...

Click to expand...

Good point. Isn't it required to use your real name in signing contracts? I think I need to know more about using pseudonyms vs real name sending out queries.

My publisher asked me to use my initials instead of first name. The book was a gay romance, and he was aiming it at gay male readers and thought it might sell better if we kept my gender ambiguous. His original idea was to keep it quiet that I was a woman, but either shortly before or after it was published he set me up with an interview he thought was worth outing my gender for.

Since it came out anyway, he apologized for having me use initials in the first place, but it really didn't bother me. My first name is surprisingly (to me!) hard for people to pronounce, and at least people don't stumble over M.J.

I would not change names mid-series. Even just shifting from Name to Initials.

I write under my initials, but pretty much all my bio info makes it clear I'm female. And when I introduce myself on panels it's always "I'm Anna Grace Carpenter, I write as A.G. Carpenter."

The bias is real, if sometimes not recognized. One man suggested I use a pen name because my real name was "too sweet" for the type of speculative fiction I tend to write. He meant to be helpful - it still makes me stabby thinking about it. I've talked to other authors who have had men refuse to look at their book because it had a female on the cover (although she pointed out to them the protagonist was male). I've had men refuse to introduce themselves to me or acknowledge me at particular conventions. (This, obviously, being the more extreme end of the bias spectrum.)

The thing you kind of have to work with is, which readership do you want? Selling books is nice. But if folks aren't buying your books because you're a woman are those really folks you want to cater to? Or jump through hoops for?

SwallowFeather said:

These are good questions. If I did it, I would only be changing my name from Heather Munn to H.E. Munn, not actually choosing a male name--because, as you said, it would sound like a different person finishing the series, and because it just feels like a bridge too far for me, as well. It's possible that's still too much of a switch for the series.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I'd be really hesitant to confuse readers of the series by switching the name at the end.

Additional food for thought, maybe: Most of the time I actually assume an initialed author is female, and am always vaguely surprised when one turns out to be a man. I'm probably over-assuming based on a single data point (and possibly revealing my own middle-aged unconscious bias), but I also wonder if I'm the only one.

Just for funsies, this is a list of initialed authors (limited to SFF) that I can think of off the top of my head - and it splits right down the middle. Balancing that, though, is the fact that with the single exception of SM Stirling, all of the men are from earlier generations and most of the women (excepting only CL Moore and to some extent CJ Cherryh) are more recent.

RA MacAcoy (F)
AA Attanasio (M)
CS Friedman (F)
JK Rowling (F)
CL Moore (F)
CJ Cherryh (F)
DC Fontana (F)
SM Stirling (M)
CS Lewis (M)
JRR Tolkien (M)
HG Wells (M)
HP Lovecraft (M)
AA Milne (j/k )

I don't think I have any prejudice against female writers, but it's hard to be sure. Just being my age, I've got mental habits formed from when the sf and fantasy fields were heavily dominated by male writers (even more so than now). So when I think of the writers I loved in my youth, I'll probably think of Asimov or de Camp or Sturgeon before I think of Joanna Russ or James Tiptree, Jr. (actually Alice "Raccoona" Sheldon) or Anne McCaffrey, although I read them as well.

I've used one male pen name (Manuel Royal) and one neutral (M. Roncevaux); this makes me want to start a female name (let's say, Melanie Heath) to make it even. Not that I produce enough output to justify multiple names; I'm no Edith Pargeter (aka Ellis Peters, aka John Redfern, aka Jolyon Carr, aka Peter Benedict).

Manuel Royal said:

I don't think I have any prejudice against female writers, but it's hard to be sure. Just being my age, I've got mental habits formed from when the sf and fantasy fields were heavily dominated by male writers (even more so than now). So when I think of the writers I loved in my youth, I'll probably think of Asimov or de Camp or Sturgeon before I think of Joanna Russ or James Tiptree, Jr. (actually Alice "Raccoona" Sheldon) or Anne McCaffrey, although I read them as well.

I've used one male pen name (Manuel Royal) and one neutral (M. Roncevaux); this makes me want to start a female name (let's say, Melanie Heath) to make it even. Not that I produce enough output to justify multiple names; I'm no Edith Pargeter (aka Ellis Peters, aka John Redfern, aka Jolyon Carr, aka Peter Benedict).

Click to expand...

Pargeter wrote under multiple names to help distinguish her brands (before that was such a big thing). She didn't want folks used to reading her historical fiction getting confused about her murder mysteries. (And, of course, genre has always had a bit of a stigma, so further reason to separate the identities.)

And, I'll reiterate, that not everyone leans toward male authors as a deliberate or malicious thing. The problem with biases is that they can be hard to ID so we frequently have them without realizing it. My concern is the folks who are made aware of a bias and double down on it. (The folks who don't like women in SF because it takes a man to really understand science. Or who think that women can only write about romance and social issues but not serious things.) And those folks are ones I have no desire to cater to. If they happen to like my work, that's fine. But I won't be hiding anything (well-intentioned or not) to try and attract them to buy my books. They are simply not my primary readership and even if I could somehow make them think I was a male to start off with, chances are they still wouldn't like what I write.

Sat Nam! (literally "Truth Name"--a Sikh greeting)

On the other hand, Terry Gerritsen was asked to change her name to something more feminine, because at the time, she was writing romantic suspense. She kept Tess Gerritsen when she switched to writing thrillers...and it hasn't hurt her sales one bit.

Blessings,

Siri Kirpal

Please, please, PLEASE, don't!

Yes, you're absolutely right: getting yourself a male pen name will probably help your sales. Anyone with half a brain can see there's a strong anti-female bias, sometimes deliberate and sometimes not, in both men and women.

More the reason not to do it. It's on us to take the brunt and try to change things. As someone said here, it's capitulation. And to be blunt, you're being unwillingly recruited by the enemy once you give up.

Sorry for the ranty tone. I just feel very very strongly about this...