Wiscon 31: Cultural Appropriation Revisited Part Two

[oyceter]

Description: The panel on cultural appropriation at WisCon last year raised issues that were hotly discussed online, and the panel that this forum follows is likely to do the same. This open forum is meant to give you the chance to explore these issues and how they matter to you. Through passionate discussion we can improve our awareness and find the common understanding that lies beneath our disagreements. The open forum will be facilitated by Alan Bostick, who has been practicing Worldwork since 2003. Worldwork is a process-oriented approach to group facilitation and conflict developed by psychologist Arnold Mindell (author of Sitting in the Fire and The Deep Democracy of Open Forums) and collaborators. Attendees are strongly urged to also attend the immediately preceding panel discussion on cultural appropriation.

Moderator: Alan Bostick

Please see my write up on the first panel for terms and caveats. A further caveat is that I am identifying the race of the speakers here because I think it was very important in the discussion. Please note that I am not advocating racial essentialism, but rather noting that because our society is a racist one, race still matters, much as I wish it didn't. (I think I need to record all my terms and caveats and just replay them every time! Or put them into a separate post so I can just link to it as a shortcut, heh.)

This discussion was very odd. Despite the description, most of the audience for the first part of the panel ended up leaving, so the audience was a) much smaller and b) pretty diferent. Also, as mentioned, this was intended to be a discussion with no panelists. The chairs in the room were rearranged as a circle (or, more accurately, a misshapen ellipse).

Most notably, the racial composition of the room changed dramatically, with maybe 6 or so POC among 20 some people (please correct me on this! I am horrible at estimating numbers in my head), and the lack of POC really affected the discussion.

In general, while the discussion started out with cultural appropriation and covered much of the same Cultural Appropriation 101 territory that the panel did, the discssion largely ended with White Guilt 101. Pretty much everyone in the room tried to be very thoughtful and considerate and non-confrontational, which I very much appreciated, but I got the sense that everyone, POC and non-POC alike, felt extremely uncomfortable and unsafe.

One of the women (black) who had been in the audience of the previous panel wasn't quite sure why we were having this discussion; I tried to give a brief history of the Great Cultural Appropriation Debate of DOOM, but I don't think that helped much. I think Victor Jason Raymond (panelist on the cultural appropriation panel) said something about the general maelstorm surrounding the racialization of cultural appropriation and the discussion of white privilege and white culture. Someone (possibly Raymond) added something about the privilege of being able to assume that white culture is no culture, and how that "no culture" is often used as an excuse for appropriation.

I'm not sure if the woman's questions ever really got answered, though she seemed to be less visibly frustrated after a few minutes of discussion.

There was some more general commentary on authenticity that I didn't quite pay attention to, and the woman mentioned above remarked on cultural essentialism and how she doesn't always identify with the black character or the female character in books she reads. She also mentioned something about not knowing what to tell her son, who is half-black and half-Jewish; she said she told him that he was who he was, but that the outside world would by and large perceive him as a black man. I feel bad writing this up; it was very visceral and I really empathized with her confusion and pain.

Another audience member said that she should tell her son that he was an individual and that the labels that the outside world put on him didn't matter, that he should just be true to himself and be himself. littlebutfierce then countered by saying that while the rhetoric of individuality is all well and good, it was also a sign of privilege: the woman's son needed to know that people would see him as a black man in order to anticipate harrassment by the police, being pulled over for DWBs (driving while black), and etc.

I think the moderator remarked in the beginning that discrimination against whites was a very real feeling; I can't remember if he qualified this with an actual explanation of the feeling of discrimination vs. political and social discrimination.

Another white woman mentioned that whenever discussions of race came up, she felt that there was a lot of anger directed at her. Yet another white woman mentioned that in her work with race, one of the most difficult things was being open and accepting rejection. I can't remember if she said anything about the expectation of POC welcoming help with open arms as being harmful, but I will throw that in there anyway. I also don't know if she said anything about white people possibly not being used to being rejected by POC, so I will also throw that in there.

With regard to cultural authenticity, someone else also mentioned that there is always this tension between self-identification and description by others, particularly for POC, because of how weighted descriptions of POC by white people have historically influenced politics and lives.

There was also some talk about the need for general education and Racism 101, Sexism 101, Homophobia 101 et. al. classes/panels in Wiscon; Debbie Notkin rebutted by saying there always was, but beacuse the attendees for Wiscon was always shifting, there would always be more people to educate. I also forgot to mention that the moderator introduced the discussion with an anecdote about a teacher who kept teaching some subject, and after many years, he yelled, "I've taught them so many times! Why do they still not know it?" He meant for this to illustrate the constant frustration of restating the same things over and over, but I have a problem with the analogy because POC do not sign up to be teachers and yet are asked to teach the same things over and over and over.

I think another white audience member said something about disliking it when littlebutfierce said something like, "White people should sit down and shut the fuck up and listen" at the end of the panel. Raymond said that often, when POC asked for white people to shut up, the emphasis was on listening to POC. He also tried to explain how often white voices got heard (historically and now) and how often POC voices get drowned out or ignored. littlebutfierce commented later that during this, he was interrupted several times by white audience members.

At some other point, someone asked why people felt the need to get cultural appropriation right. A white audience member mentioned that she was a scientist and that as a scientist, she wanted to get things right the first time around. Deb Notkin said that most fans enjoy being corrected (which I disagree with; I tend to think that most people dislike being corrected, particularly in public, most particularly about things like race). She then went on to mention How Not to Be Insane When Accused of Racism, which I think is closer to the point than being a scientist or not; I suspect most people freak out when they think they have offended someone.

At another point, Raymond brought up Peggy McIntosh's White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack as well.

Another white woman asked what the difference between being an ally and a wannabe was; she said her Blackfoot husband referred to her mother as a "wannabe," even though her mother was trying to be welcoming. I can't remember what was said about this. To editorialize, I wanted to say something to the effect that you should ask, because sometimes behavior that one person may see as ally behavior may actually come off as condescending to a POC. And of course all POC are different. But more importantly, I think the designation of ally belongs more with the group you are trying to be an ally to; otherwise the effect is to take away agency and drown out voices.

I think at one point I mentioned something about not being the magical minority fairy -- I cannot speak for all Chinese people or all Asians or all POC; I often get sick of unfamiliar people asking me in comments if I think such-and-such story element is ok or not; I do not want to be the designator of gold stars; and I do not have all the answers. For anyone reading this who is now completely scared off, I will say that I usually appreciate a good-faith effort to educate yourself first, that I do notice what kind of comments you make on my posts on racism, and that I generally do try to be polite and educate. But all this is my own personal decision and that I fully sympathize with any POC out there who chooses not to, for whatever reason.

I am stopping my summary here because I am getting irritated again, which is not a good sign. And again, I did appreciate that everyone tried hard to be civil and thoughtful. But honestly, I was so frustrated that in the end, the entire conversation ended up being on whiteness and white privilege (once more). I honestly can't recall a single question that had to do with how POC might feel about some of this or any POC issues; many of the explanations provided by POC included this, but very few questions from white people did. I am also so sick of going through Racism 101 again and again and again that by the end of the discussion, I wanted to just bash my head against a wall repeatedly. So many props to Nisi Shawl and Victor Raymond, both of whom have a lot more patience than me, or were just as frustrated and hid it much better.

Comments

[telophase.livejournal.com]

Deb Notkin said that most fans enjoy being corrected

It's part of fannish culture that Fans Like To Be Correct About Facts, and I see it on places like rec.arts.sf.fandom where someone will start off a correction with a phrase like "Correcting to be polite." But when it comes to things that are less hard-and-fast facts than the temperature of the sun or Nixon's campaign slogan or the airspeed of an unladen swallow, another fannish tendency, the love of debate and argument, often comes forth. At least, that's how I see it.

[oyceter]

Yeah, I agree that Fans Like to Be Correct About Facts, but I think that's different from liking being corrected -- I suspect most fans (and people) would rather be correct in the first place.

[laurashapiro.livejournal.com]

Oh my GOD I am sorry to read this. I would have thought that, a year later, and with so many cool people involved with/attending the panel, you would *finally* have had a discussion that WASN'T ABOUT WHITENESS.

Dammit. GRAH.

::fume::

[oyceter]

You know what the sad thing is? My first reaction to your comment was, "Oh, it wasn't so bad... they were trying, and I got to see three panels that were all POC or nearly all POC. And really, my head only blew up two or three times."

Heh.

[veejane.livejournal.com]

As I think I told you at the time, I vacated the room too sweet after Part I on the assumption that Part II would be White Guilt Therapy Session.

Which, in some ways, is a hugely necessary thing to do, and it's kind of a big deal that Wiscon is even willing to sit down and have one of those, because most liberal people I've ever talked to are awkward and intentionally vague on white guilt, if not in outright denial. In other ways, white guilt discussions are likely to annoy the everliving crap outta me: it's still a discussion about white people and white people's feelings.

Props for sticking around, I say; I think I would have spent much of the time fumbling around on the floor for my eyes, after they had rolled out of my head.

[buymeaclue.livejournal.com]

>As I think I told you at the time, I vacated the room too sweet after Part I on the assumption that Part II would be White Guilt Therapy Session.

I didn't do much paneling at all at the con, but I was deeply dubious about the Worldwork or whatever it was bit of the panel description.

[oyceter]

I think I would have spent much of the time fumbling around on the floor for my eyes, after they had rolled out of my head.

Heeee! I have to admit, I was tempted to conclude this post with "MERF."

But yeah... I mean, I hope that the session was eye-opening to some people at least, but on the other hand... so frustrating! Especially when the panel wasn't labelled as "White Guilt 101."

[badgerbag.livejournal.com]

I assumed the same thing about the white guilt therapy session. We might could have just labelled it as that on the program so that nobody got surprised.

[dsgood.livejournal.com]

Panel I'd like to see done: "Who's white? Who's Asian? Who's African?"

[oyceter]

I'm sorry, I'm a little confused... would that sort of be on racial identity or something?

[delux-vivens.livejournal.com]

Why?

[(Anonymous)]

thanks for the round-up, joyce! i'm so bummed i couldn't have been there for both of them. i hope the first part was more satisfying for you.

in case you were wondering, the second part was conceived of at some point as "the white panel". we were thinking at one point of having a poc panel on cult approp, and then following it with a white panel on cult approp. but there were a number of objections to this.

the most telling for me (although this wasn't the reason the idea was scratched) was that i thought the white panel would probably not get any panelists, so it would end up being an open discussion anyway. it was strongly suggested that participants would not want to publicly identify themselves as white (ed.: because we wouldn't know otherwise).

so the suggestion that the second panel be an open discussion following the first was actually in part a way to give white audience members a way to let off steam and have a discussion without white guilt hijacking the panel.

i read in someone's blog (god, i wish i could remember where!) a really good description of the concerns a teacher in an ethnic studies-type course had in balancing the needs of poc and white students. it was about making a 'safe space' and 'safe' for whom?

if white privilege is allowed, then poc don't feel 'safe', but if the emphasis is on exposing white privilege, then whites won't feel safe. the latter may sound like justice, but it's not actually conducive to listening and productive discussion.

frankly, i'd be happy about white guilt: the discussion, as long as part one was the panel it really, really needed to be. what say you? was it?

-- claire

[oyceter]

The first part was very satisfying!

Thanks for the explanation on the conception of the panels; though I personally found the second part frustrating, I do hope that it was useful for the people who were there. And it really, really helped to not have white guilt hijack the first panel; most of the people I talked to afterward seemed to agree that the format for the first panel was great and very helpful as well.

[hesychasm]

Another audience member said that she should tell her son that he was an individual and that the labels that the outside world put on him didn't matter, that he should just be true to himself and be himself.

Oh, GOD. So earnest, yet so...not getting the point.

Thanks for these write-ups! It sounds at least like the experience was less frustrating for you this year, even if it's baby steps.

I've been trying to write up something on basic assumptions when talking race theory, because I've been seeing some comments which make me think it might be necessary to just take people straight back to the drawing board. But I feel woefully uneducated myself about some things. And yet I do not want people to argue with me! (Unless, you know, they're right.) So you rock for at least putting it out there and tackling this stuff head-on.

[oyceter]

Oh, GOD. So earnest, yet so...not getting the point.

The entire discussion was sort of like that, which was very frustrating and nerve-wracking. Seriously, that entire hour or so, you could almost taste the tension of everyone in the room.

I've been trying to write up something on basic assumptions when talking race theory

Hey, if you wait another two months, it will be just in time for IBARW!

The experience this year was sooo much better! I mean, yes, my head did explode, but at least even then I spoke up and said something about it.

[minnow1212.livejournal.com]

This really is reminding me of Tatum and her talk about developmental stages, and why she supported the idea of white-only or POC-only discussions on some things. Because yeah, the white guilt/self-examination phase may actually be necessary for us white folks to get through, but...really not so helpful for the POC in the audience.

>even though her mother was trying to be welcoming.<

On a side note: that right there is privilege, isn't it? To assume that you are the greeter, the host, the one with the right to extend welcome--to some extent, extending a welcome marks this as *your* space, with the right to extend (and thus the implicit right to revoke) that to a guest.

[minnow1212.livejournal.com]

(Um, and I feel the need to clarify, because talking about in terms of development stages runs the risk of implying, "Eh, that’s just the stage she’s in, you gotta be patient with it and let it runs its course," as if frustration/anger aren't justified responses. But a common developmental error is still an error; everyone’s got clothes that need cleaning, but if someone’s running around shoving their dirty laundry in your face with protests that everyone’s got stains! and does this look any cleaner to you? And what techniques should I use for cleaning?--well, you’d tell them to go clean their own laundry and get out of your face.

I think that metaphor's probably run its course.)

[badger2305.livejournal.com]

Tatum. Yes. I've used her book in my classes. Very good stuff, and very challenging to white privilege and assumptions.

[jiawen]

Sorry if this is a drive-by. My name's Rachel. I'm the one who lived in Taiwan for a while.

I only went to the second session, because there were four different things I desperately wanted to go to during the hour of the first one. I kind of wished the second session had started with a summary of the first, because it sounded like we ended up doing a lot of rehashing. The description, of course, said that attendance at the previous panel was strongly recommended; but it wasn't possible for everyone.

Can you say more about what you wanted to get addressed in the second session, Joyce? What would a more ideal second part have had?

[oyceter]

Hi! I remember you!

Part 1 really was scheduled against a lot of cool stuff, wasn't it? ;)

I think I just wanted to get a discussion operating at a higher level of understanding, even if that was White Guilt 201.

If it had stuck with cultural appropriation, I think it would have been nice to go over specific works and examine them, since the previous panel hadn't gotten a chance to do that. Or as mentioned in my first panel write up, discuss issues of voice and representation, on how sometimes (or often) dominant cultures end up writing the most-read fictional representations of non-dominant cultures and what to do about that and how that affects people's writing. Or how cultural appropriation changes if it's within racial groups in America or if it's international in scope. Or... a lot of other stuff.

And if it had veered into a general discussion of race, I would have liked to talk about things like building coalitions, on allywork and how to work with allies and how to find allies. Or how to recognize and combat more insidious forms of privilege and racism. Or helpful hints on speaking up. Or how to balance fighting racism with not being exhausted all the time. Or... a lot more stuff ;).

[http://users.livejournal.com/peasant_/]

Hi, I've surfed in via yhlee's journal.

I understand that you may not wish to rehash what was clearly a frustrating experience for you, but if you have the energy to answer I would love to know: If you could rerun the panel again and magically control exactly what happened, what questions would you have liked to see discussed? You mention I honestly can't recall a single question that had to do with how POC might feel about some of this or any POC issues so I immediately wondered what specific questions you had in mind.

[ponygirl2000.livejournal.com]

Seconding this.

Oyce, I'd love to hear more of what you were hoping to get out of the panel.

[badgerbag.livejournal.com]

"White people should sit down and shut the fuck up and listen"

Dude that was my very favorite part of the CA 1 panel and it SO needed to be said. When questions were opened up for the last 10 minutes of that panel the very first thing that happened was a white guy opened his mouth and talked for 5 minutes about how to be a good ally, and while his points were fine, they were Looooooong and no one shut him up, and he didn't seem to realize at all what he was doing.

[oyceter]

Hee! I mean, I appreciated the guy's desire to be a good ally, and I appreciated also that he talked during CA 2 as well, but yes... I felt like in CA 2 particularly, there were very few POC voices.

[delux-vivens.livejournal.com]

Next year, maybe a group of white people should do this amongst themselves (http://learningdiversity.com/), which it seemed like they needed instead.

ps

[delux-vivens.livejournal.com]

i'm sorry you had to deal w/ so much of the crazy. this sort of thing is a big part of the reason i didnt want to go to wiscon. i *know* i dont have the patience for it.

[silk-noir.livejournal.com]

I was the white woman whose husband is part Blackfoot.

I was terribly frustrated too. I wanted to hear what POC wanted to say. (Not to mention I wanted to listen & talk about writing.)

[oyceter]

Hi! I think Victor Raymond has a good suggestion downstream about separate panels for POC and white people and having them meet later or something. Or, I dunno. Something. Because it is so frustrating and tiring explaining Racism 101 to people again and again and again, and I say this as someone who's only really been doing it for a year at the most, unlike other people there, who have been doing it for so much longer.

[nojojojo.livejournal.com]

Most notably, the racial composition of the room changed dramatically, with maybe 6 or so POC among 20 some people (please correct me on this! I am horrible at estimating numbers in my head), and the lack of POC really affected the discussion.

This is why I left after the first panel. I had no desire to do a Racism 101 session; I can't stand the expectation that I'm supposed to teach the white people around me how to deal with me. And something about the way that panel was described in the program book warned me that this was precisely the kind of discussion it would become. Sad to see I was right.

[badger2305.livejournal.com]

I think it was a useful discussion. I also very strongly think there is a need for having two parallel discussions next time we do this. One for white folks, and the other for people of color. And then a session after that to compare notes, etc.

We did this for Wiscon 23. It was useful then, and worth repeating. One of the first things done by the Carl Brandon Society.