Women exist in my imagination. So they are necessarily a type of abstraction. Many women criticise me for this vision, but I explain to them it's to be expected, because I am a man.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
Perhaps women have always been in closer contact with reality than men: it would seem to be the just recompense for being deprived of idealism.
Women are clear-headed, they are more creative and for this reason, sometimes, also more fragile.
Women somehow get portrayed as one type. You're either a feminist or you're not. You're a working woman or you're not. I'm raising two girls, and I say to them, 'I need you to be strong and soft. You can be smart and beautiful... You can be all of these things.'
The main reason why men and women make different aesthetic judgments is the fact that the latter, generally incapable of abstraction, only admire what meets their complete approval.
Everything we see in the world is the creative work of women.
I think a woman can have all of the ideas and mental pictures. She can be a real planner and a motivator. But in the end, I think a woman does best when she responds to a man.
Women think with their whole bodies and they see things as a whole more than men do.
As a male writer, women are always what men pursue, and their world is always a mystery. So I always tried to present as many views as possible on women's worlds.
For a while, I was nervous about portraying women because of the objectification that automatically comes with it, whether the artist intends or not.
I'm a woman designing for women, and there are so many layers to that. On the one hand, it brings an effortlessness, but it also means that I think and overthink every detail, whether it's physical or mental or even - in some sense - spiritual.