RaceFail '09: This hurts us all
Wed, Mar. 4th, 2009 05:06 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
oyceterAs I'm sure most people know, ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
coffeeandink was outed by W*ll Sh*tt*rly and Kathryn Cramer. Although they have now removed her legal name, neither of them have prevented others from outing her in their comments, and WS has deleted his LJ1 and Kathryn Cramer has taken down the entries (be warned, the one outing Mely leads to a malware site). WS has noted he will not out anyone, but quite frankly, given that he had apologized to Mely, Willow, deepad, and vom_marlowe only a month before, I do not trust anything he says (the apology was on his LJ, which has been deleted). In interest of full disclosure, I note that Mely is a good friend of mine, as well as an ally I value a great deal.
I am disturbed and frightened by WS and KC's actions, not in the least because they tie directly back in to issues of gender, race, class, and other social injustices.
Here'srydra_wong's timeline of RaceFail '09, so people can decide what they think themselves.
SF media and book fandoms and power
RaceFail has, from the very beginning, had authors and editors on one side and readers and consumers on another. Although authors and editors and readers and consumers are not and never will be mutually exclusive categories, it is fair to say that those who have more power in the SF/F publishing world (Elizabeth Bear, Sarah Monette, the Nielsen Haydens, Emma Bull, W*ll Sh*tt*rly, Kathryn Cramer) were arguing against people who did not have power in that world (Willow, Deepa, Mely2), with the exception of some SF/F authors and editors such as Nora Jemisin, K. Tempest Bradford, and Liz Henry (eta: Nora and Tempest and Liz are also arguing against that power, as they are not as firmly established and are therefore risking more).
veejane has posted about SF book fandom versus SF media fandom. I generally do not agree with posts that hold up media fandom (eta: this circle of media fandom, not all media fandoms) as something to be learned from, as it is not a haven to fans of color or a hotbed of diversity. However, the divide between SF book fandom, particularly the segment that is directly involved in the publishing industry, and SF media fandom exists, and as a whole, SF book fandom has had more professional power in terms of the publishing industry, more men, and probably more white people. It's not some accident or random twist of fate that created this divide. The unofficial nature of media fandom is indirectly responsible for its relatively larger diversity—and I never thought I would say this, because being more diverse than media fandom is not that high of a bar—institutional power makes it that much easier for white people, abled people, male people, middle-aged people, middle-class people to get in and to stay in. There are, of course, disadvantaged people in SF book fandom and in SF publishing, and I personally benefit a great deal from people like Nalo Hopkinson and Tobias Buckell and organizations like the Carl Brandon Society and Wiscon. But the face of SF book fandom is very limited.
This is why WS and KC's attempts to reframe the argument in their own terms is so harmful. They are attempting to force a conversation which started in LJ and make it follow their own rules. WS is doing so after having had an LJ for many years, and both WS and KC are doing so after many people have told them repeatedly about pseudonyms and about the dangers of outing. It is widely agreed upon by nearly everyone in media fandom that outing someone is unacceptable; furthermore, this is not LJ specific. Political and personal bloggers around the internet have lost jobs by being outed, and that's only one consequence. The important thing is not that they are reframing the conversation around pseudonymity and outing, it is that they are reframing the conversation so that it once again leaves that of race and racism in SF fandom. This reframing of the argument is not dangerous simply because of this one incidence of race fail; it is dangerous because it is representative of what happens when a group with more power and a group with less power argue.
This reframing is a cousin to the tone argument (search for "tone"). Both are ways of asserting power, of staking metaphorical ground; they are rhetorical forms of control that deliberately uphold current power structures. Mely writes, "This conviction, in the face of public conversation and well-documented timelines, that a discussion about race in science fiction is about the personal grudges of white people -- this inability to recognize, hear, or speak to the people of color involved in the discussion -- this in itself contributes to the institution of racism and the continuing whiteness of science fiction." Note how frequently WS and KC refer to race and racism in their posts. There has been an amazing moving bar of who has the "right" to speak; first, Deepa and Willow didn't critique Bear's book properly because they were too "emotional;" now we are too educated, not oppressed enough. Furthermore, WS in particular has had a long history of changing the subject. The arguments happening don't start with WS talking about classism; they start with someone else talking about racism. This is power at work, trying to keep itself in power.
SF book fandom, where are you?
Although a few authors and editors have come out against what WS and KC have done, where is the rest of the fandom? Like Jane says earlier, "Where are the con-comms, going apeshit to distance themselves from these serial fails of race and culture? Where are the guests-of-honor, specifically inviting underserved communities to visit at an upcoming con? (Where are the "discount if this is your first con evar" programs?) Why aren't the SF organizations like SFWA (okay, bad example) having a cow and putting out official position statements on outreach? Where are press-releases from the publishing houses, explaining their diversity efforts (in their lists and in their workplaces)?"
Why the resounding silence? Editors, authors, fans—all the people who were not talking about RaceFail and what people in their field were doing: where are they?
If the prior months of RaceFail were "both sides behaving badly" (which I disagree with), what is this, and why has no one said anything?
Mely previously wrote, "Is group protest always right or good? No, it's not. It's a way to establish and enforce community norms, and it's only as right and good as the community norms are. It can be profoundly oppressive and profoundly abusive. But silence in the face of injury is also a way to establish and enforce community norms. You don't opt out of a community by remaining in it and never commenting on its big controversies; you just opt to abide by whatever party wins."
What SF book fandom is telling me—a woman, a person of color, and a long-time fan of SF books and a con-goer—what you are telling me is that you don't care. That these are, in fact, your community norms, that you are all right with people who have more power in your community (by virtue of profession, race, and gender) using that power to harm other, less powerful, members of your community. That you are fine with the erasure of women, of people of color, of those without the same professional privileges you enjoy, and that you are willing to stand by silently and let people be hurt. This is how it affects us. This. And this.
Your silence speaks volumes.
The intersectionality of threats
Even though this started as RaceFail, it does not affect "just" race. For one, that assumes that people of color only suffer from a single oppression. Secondly, as many, many people have noted, outing can be threatening on many levels, and I would like to highlight that it can seriously harm women who are being sexually harrassed, GLBT people who are not out, POC who have been threatened, and etc. Media fandom is a safe space for some people. Again, this is something I never thought I would say, as it has proved time and again that it is not a safe space for all people. But in this particular case, it is more of a safe space than SF book fandom because of media fandom's lack of business deals and money-related matters, because of the general lack of ways to retaliate in the offline world. The act of outing comes out of the attempt to control conversation and thereby acts as an attempt to control the people having the conversation, and it comes from not just from two individuals trying to silence an anti-racist ally, but also from a community with more power in terms of gender and race.
WS and KC did not do this in a vacuum; they did it in an environment in which they could reasonably not fear many consequences (and as far as I can tell, they will not suffer consequences at all, save being banned from some blogs they probably never visited). They may not have knowingly taken advantage of this power, but they did regardless. And right now, that same environment's reaction is saying that it's ok.
This is why I think a threat to one of us is a threat to all of us. It is upholding a social norm that makes it ok to make threats against people talking about issues of social justice, and even more, it is upholding a norm that says these issues of social justice do not exist at all. I do not think feminists or GLBT activists or anti-classists or anti-ablists will be attacked right this second. But I do think the reduction of social justice is something that affects us all. If nothing else, these few years in my communities have taught me that yesterday's classism is today's anti-Semitism and becomes tomorrow's misogyny. And quite frequently, these attacks hurt the same people, because oppressions do not come singly.
What I want
I want to know if this is the norm for SF fandom. I want to know what SF fandom is doing to welcome oppressed groups—actively welcome, because simply saying "Come in" to someone who has just been assaulted in your house is not the same as showing them the precautions you have taken against further assault. I want to know if I and my allies will be safe.
But mostly, I want to know what you who have been silent are going to do.
I say this because it is all too easy for me to stay on the periphery. So don't tell me. Show me. Not via links or comments, but by making changes—in yourself, in one aspect of your life, online or offline, public or private, large or small. Help us all change.
What I'm going to do
I'd like to spend this week focusing on POC; in particular, I will try to catch up on all my backlog of book write ups by and about POC. I am going to read the 12th POC in SF Carnival. I will continue working on making my blog a safe space for oppressed people and issues of social justice. I will work on my pieces for the Asian Women Blog Carnival and the Remyth Project. I am going to continue to deal with these same issues of safety and trust and social justice offline.
eta: Also, any pointers about bringing up these things and dealing with them offline are incredibly appreciated.
Rules of discourse
I have, for the first time, preemptively banned people (WS and Greyorm). Having seen their comments in other places, I have no desire to have them in my blog. If they would like to respond to me, they are perfectly free to do so in the entire rest of the internet. I especially do not care how wonderful WS is offline; this is online, and he has years of history of behaving badly. I will be on- and offline periodically tomorrow, but I will still be moderating comments.
Notes:
1 It was deleted when I wrote this, and he restored it while I was editing this prior to posting. (eta: deleted again as of 3/5)
2 No, I don't think having worked nine months for an SF/F publishing house thirteen years ago is the same as being an editor or an author right now.
coffeeandink was outed by W*ll Sh*tt*rly and Kathryn Cramer. Although they have now removed her legal name, neither of them have prevented others from outing her in their comments, and WS has deleted his LJ1 and Kathryn Cramer has taken down the entries (be warned, the one outing Mely leads to a malware site). WS has noted he will not out anyone, but quite frankly, given that he had apologized to Mely, Willow, deepad, and vom_marlowe only a month before, I do not trust anything he says (the apology was on his LJ, which has been deleted). In interest of full disclosure, I note that Mely is a good friend of mine, as well as an ally I value a great deal.I am disturbed and frightened by WS and KC's actions, not in the least because they tie directly back in to issues of gender, race, class, and other social injustices.
Here's
rydra_wong's timeline of RaceFail '09, so people can decide what they think themselves.SF media and book fandoms and power
RaceFail has, from the very beginning, had authors and editors on one side and readers and consumers on another. Although authors and editors and readers and consumers are not and never will be mutually exclusive categories, it is fair to say that those who have more power in the SF/F publishing world (Elizabeth Bear, Sarah Monette, the Nielsen Haydens, Emma Bull, W*ll Sh*tt*rly, Kathryn Cramer) were arguing against people who did not have power in that world (Willow, Deepa, Mely2), with the exception of some SF/F authors and editors such as Nora Jemisin, K. Tempest Bradford, and Liz Henry (eta: Nora and Tempest and Liz are also arguing against that power, as they are not as firmly established and are therefore risking more).
veejane has posted about SF book fandom versus SF media fandom. I generally do not agree with posts that hold up media fandom (eta: this circle of media fandom, not all media fandoms) as something to be learned from, as it is not a haven to fans of color or a hotbed of diversity. However, the divide between SF book fandom, particularly the segment that is directly involved in the publishing industry, and SF media fandom exists, and as a whole, SF book fandom has had more professional power in terms of the publishing industry, more men, and probably more white people. It's not some accident or random twist of fate that created this divide. The unofficial nature of media fandom is indirectly responsible for its relatively larger diversity—and I never thought I would say this, because being more diverse than media fandom is not that high of a bar—institutional power makes it that much easier for white people, abled people, male people, middle-aged people, middle-class people to get in and to stay in. There are, of course, disadvantaged people in SF book fandom and in SF publishing, and I personally benefit a great deal from people like Nalo Hopkinson and Tobias Buckell and organizations like the Carl Brandon Society and Wiscon. But the face of SF book fandom is very limited.This is why WS and KC's attempts to reframe the argument in their own terms is so harmful. They are attempting to force a conversation which started in LJ and make it follow their own rules. WS is doing so after having had an LJ for many years, and both WS and KC are doing so after many people have told them repeatedly about pseudonyms and about the dangers of outing. It is widely agreed upon by nearly everyone in media fandom that outing someone is unacceptable; furthermore, this is not LJ specific. Political and personal bloggers around the internet have lost jobs by being outed, and that's only one consequence. The important thing is not that they are reframing the conversation around pseudonymity and outing, it is that they are reframing the conversation so that it once again leaves that of race and racism in SF fandom. This reframing of the argument is not dangerous simply because of this one incidence of race fail; it is dangerous because it is representative of what happens when a group with more power and a group with less power argue.
This reframing is a cousin to the tone argument (search for "tone"). Both are ways of asserting power, of staking metaphorical ground; they are rhetorical forms of control that deliberately uphold current power structures. Mely writes, "This conviction, in the face of public conversation and well-documented timelines, that a discussion about race in science fiction is about the personal grudges of white people -- this inability to recognize, hear, or speak to the people of color involved in the discussion -- this in itself contributes to the institution of racism and the continuing whiteness of science fiction." Note how frequently WS and KC refer to race and racism in their posts. There has been an amazing moving bar of who has the "right" to speak; first, Deepa and Willow didn't critique Bear's book properly because they were too "emotional;" now we are too educated, not oppressed enough. Furthermore, WS in particular has had a long history of changing the subject. The arguments happening don't start with WS talking about classism; they start with someone else talking about racism. This is power at work, trying to keep itself in power.
SF book fandom, where are you?
Although a few authors and editors have come out against what WS and KC have done, where is the rest of the fandom? Like Jane says earlier, "Where are the con-comms, going apeshit to distance themselves from these serial fails of race and culture? Where are the guests-of-honor, specifically inviting underserved communities to visit at an upcoming con? (Where are the "discount if this is your first con evar" programs?) Why aren't the SF organizations like SFWA (okay, bad example) having a cow and putting out official position statements on outreach? Where are press-releases from the publishing houses, explaining their diversity efforts (in their lists and in their workplaces)?"
Why the resounding silence? Editors, authors, fans—all the people who were not talking about RaceFail and what people in their field were doing: where are they?
If the prior months of RaceFail were "both sides behaving badly" (which I disagree with), what is this, and why has no one said anything?
Mely previously wrote, "Is group protest always right or good? No, it's not. It's a way to establish and enforce community norms, and it's only as right and good as the community norms are. It can be profoundly oppressive and profoundly abusive. But silence in the face of injury is also a way to establish and enforce community norms. You don't opt out of a community by remaining in it and never commenting on its big controversies; you just opt to abide by whatever party wins."
What SF book fandom is telling me—a woman, a person of color, and a long-time fan of SF books and a con-goer—what you are telling me is that you don't care. That these are, in fact, your community norms, that you are all right with people who have more power in your community (by virtue of profession, race, and gender) using that power to harm other, less powerful, members of your community. That you are fine with the erasure of women, of people of color, of those without the same professional privileges you enjoy, and that you are willing to stand by silently and let people be hurt. This is how it affects us. This. And this.
Your silence speaks volumes.
The intersectionality of threats
Even though this started as RaceFail, it does not affect "just" race. For one, that assumes that people of color only suffer from a single oppression. Secondly, as many, many people have noted, outing can be threatening on many levels, and I would like to highlight that it can seriously harm women who are being sexually harrassed, GLBT people who are not out, POC who have been threatened, and etc. Media fandom is a safe space for some people. Again, this is something I never thought I would say, as it has proved time and again that it is not a safe space for all people. But in this particular case, it is more of a safe space than SF book fandom because of media fandom's lack of business deals and money-related matters, because of the general lack of ways to retaliate in the offline world. The act of outing comes out of the attempt to control conversation and thereby acts as an attempt to control the people having the conversation, and it comes from not just from two individuals trying to silence an anti-racist ally, but also from a community with more power in terms of gender and race.
WS and KC did not do this in a vacuum; they did it in an environment in which they could reasonably not fear many consequences (and as far as I can tell, they will not suffer consequences at all, save being banned from some blogs they probably never visited). They may not have knowingly taken advantage of this power, but they did regardless. And right now, that same environment's reaction is saying that it's ok.
This is why I think a threat to one of us is a threat to all of us. It is upholding a social norm that makes it ok to make threats against people talking about issues of social justice, and even more, it is upholding a norm that says these issues of social justice do not exist at all. I do not think feminists or GLBT activists or anti-classists or anti-ablists will be attacked right this second. But I do think the reduction of social justice is something that affects us all. If nothing else, these few years in my communities have taught me that yesterday's classism is today's anti-Semitism and becomes tomorrow's misogyny. And quite frequently, these attacks hurt the same people, because oppressions do not come singly.
What I want
I want to know if this is the norm for SF fandom. I want to know what SF fandom is doing to welcome oppressed groups—actively welcome, because simply saying "Come in" to someone who has just been assaulted in your house is not the same as showing them the precautions you have taken against further assault. I want to know if I and my allies will be safe.
But mostly, I want to know what you who have been silent are going to do.
I say this because it is all too easy for me to stay on the periphery. So don't tell me. Show me. Not via links or comments, but by making changes—in yourself, in one aspect of your life, online or offline, public or private, large or small. Help us all change.
What I'm going to do
I'd like to spend this week focusing on POC; in particular, I will try to catch up on all my backlog of book write ups by and about POC. I am going to read the 12th POC in SF Carnival. I will continue working on making my blog a safe space for oppressed people and issues of social justice. I will work on my pieces for the Asian Women Blog Carnival and the Remyth Project. I am going to continue to deal with these same issues of safety and trust and social justice offline.
eta: Also, any pointers about bringing up these things and dealing with them offline are incredibly appreciated.
Rules of discourse
I have, for the first time, preemptively banned people (WS and Greyorm). Having seen their comments in other places, I have no desire to have them in my blog. If they would like to respond to me, they are perfectly free to do so in the entire rest of the internet. I especially do not care how wonderful WS is offline; this is online, and he has years of history of behaving badly. I will be on- and offline periodically tomorrow, but I will still be moderating comments.
Notes:
1 It was deleted when I wrote this, and he restored it while I was editing this prior to posting. (eta: deleted again as of 3/5)
2 No, I don't think having worked nine months for an SF/F publishing house thirteen years ago is the same as being an editor or an author right now.
(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 01:34 am (UTC)(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 01:44 am (UTC)Wonderful post, Oyce, and a great call to action.
(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 01:35 am (UTC)(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 01:54 am (UTC)God, these people suck. But I guess it's good we know how much they suck now. Sort of.
Thank you for this post.
(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 02:01 am (UTC)But mostly, I want to know what you who have been silent are going to do.
I haven't been silent, but I haven't been loud, either.
I have made a last-minute edit to the call for info for PW's fantasy & science fiction issue, which now asks specifically for information on non-white and non-Western authors and characters. I'm already getting some great responses, and I'm going to push very hard for a sidebar on them at the very least. I've also asked our editorial director to seriously consider running more articles on race and racism in the publishing industry, in addition to the more common (but still rare) articles on race in the content of books. And I'm going to post a link to this entry in my LJ and challenge the authors and editors who read it to stand up and say "This behavior is appalling and it needs to stop".
I hope you and other fans and writers of color always feel welcome and safe in the comments section of my LJ and of
(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 03:21 am (UTC)(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 02:05 am (UTC)I pretty much just want to point everybody at this post when they ask what I'm thinking about this latest clusterfuck, because you say it so damn well.
(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 02:07 am (UTC)(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 02:10 am (UTC)(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 02:10 am (UTC)(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 02:25 am (UTC)(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 02:33 am (UTC)OMG, THANK YOU.
(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 02:36 am (UTC)(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 02:37 am (UTC)One thing I'm going to do is finish the informal history of the Korean peninsula that I've been writing in tiny pieces, and work on the one of the Japanese islands that I think should go with it. Neither pertains *directly* to SF or fiction, but they pertain to me, and I am a fan of SF since at least 1983. We're all of us complex individuals with multiple interests, some of which dovetail, after all.
In some ways--and I don't know whether this is an unpopular opinion--I think it's important to support
(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 03:03 am (UTC)(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 02:38 am (UTC)Beautifully and brilliantly said, Oyce.
No title
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 02:45 am (UTC)"The only neat thing to do"
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 02:45 am (UTC)(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 03:03 am (UTC)I don't know where anyone else is; I'm not even sure where I am. I am confused, and a little scared.
I don't have the emotional stamina, even if I had the time, to follow the rapidly proliferating labyrinth of links I would have to in order to feel that I was giving everyone a fair hearing before commenting.
I am not trying to invalidate the power distinction you are drawing, but neither my prior experience of the people I know of on both sides, nor my opinion of their various behaviors in this situation (to the extent that I know them), break along those lines.
I strongly suspect I would end up pissing everybody off and making nobody happy if I waded into this mess. Not to mention potentially blowing up a couple of friend- and acquaintanceships that I value on both sides, and shooting my theoretical career in a toe or two. But I would anyway if I thought I might make even one person wiser. I don't. I don't feel I have any light to offer, and I don't want to add any more heat.
I will make what changes I can. But I will make them in private, or at least in planning rather than protest, until I am sure anything I say would be a step in the right direction.
If that feels like a cop-out to you, or an abandonment, or an exercise in privilege, that's your right, and I'm not sure you'd be wrong. But I promise I've thought about it, and discussed it for hours in private, and come to believe this is the best thing I can do.
(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 03:12 am (UTC)I think that is perfectly fair, and that is why I put in that people don't have to tell me or to post or comment (which I really do mean, and I appreciate your commenting when you do not have to). I mostly want people to work on this and think on it and to not let it go by, however they personally choose to do so, and I think the self-education and listening and trying to figure out what is going on that you are talking about is actually an action, and it is a positive one.
(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 03:13 am (UTC)(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 03:15 am (UTC)(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 03:21 am (UTC)(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 03:24 am (UTC)I've been trying to formulate a response to WS and KC's outrageous behavior, because the more voices speaking against them, the better. I'm nobody in the sf/f publishing field, but I can point people at what's happened, people who otherwise might not know. I want to take the field, my field, away from those who are impoverishing it, who are threatening my friends and acquaintances, my authors and audience. I may not know how to look at this selflessly, but I know how to snarl in defense of what's important. This is important.
(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 03:32 am (UTC)Of course I could be completely wrong (I'm not known for beng good at reading people, and I know it), and of course my opinion is entirely subjective and is influenced by my own biases. But this is what I think.
(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 03:43 am (UTC)I am still on the fence re: Sarah Monette and Emma Bull and PNH in terms of politics (PNH for personal reasons, Bull for some things in her books), and when I say I am on the fence, I really am. I haven't yet decided what to think or what to do about them and their books, although right now, I am not counting them as allies until I have more to go on.
I hope that helps clarify, and I also know that impressions will differ.
(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Posted by(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 03:40 am (UTC)My past experience is that silence on the Internet carries *no* information -- the chances are too good that the people whom I think are being "conspicuous by their silence" are in fact not paying attention to the same things I am, or are not paying attention right now. IOW, I have no reason to think the "pro sf community" has even noticed RaceFail -- I don't think most of them are on LJ, or if they are they aren't very invested in it.
(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 03:49 am (UTC)A lot of my issue is with people who I know are online in the community. And although it's impossible for everyone in the pro sf community to be aware or to be online, I also think recognition is important. And that the non-investment speaks for itself.
(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 03:43 am (UTC)I'd been tinkering, now and again, with a post of my own on this very subject -- the fact that SF, where I need to make my living as an artist, is not and never has been safe for me, but has lately begun to feel much less safe. But I couldn't cohere my thoughts. You've said everything I wanted to say, and so perfectly. Thank you. Thank you.
Am still going to try and cobble something together for the carnival and elsewhere, but I'm also going to just point toward this post and say, "What she said, big time."
One quibble:
—and I never thought I would say this, because being more diverse than media fandom is not that high of a bar—
I think you mean SF fandom here, not media fandom, or am I misreading?
(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 03:55 am (UTC)Also, thank you for reading; I did not want to inadvertently insult you or Liz or Tempest or call you out because I think you guys are awesome and you do so much already and should not have to do more.
(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 04:03 am (UTC)I've been thinking about what I could do to improve sf fandom, because I do love the genre and also, there are POC in it, and still will be; somewhere, people who have never heard of LJ are picking up their first sf novel right now. This is a purely personal choice, but I'd rather stick around and try to help fix things than leave.
However, I've never been much involved in sf fandom, don't much go to cons, and don't work in the industry. (As you know, Bob-Oyce, I primarily work in a totally different racist, sexist, ageist industry!) I'm not sure what would be helpful for me to do, other than seek out and review sf by people of color. But I am working on that.
(no subject)
Sun, Mar. 8th, 2009 08:40 pm (UTC)When I returned to lj, rachelmanija, your post linking to the lady with the pig in her mailbox, and to nojojojo's, led me to the stuff I needed to find to begin to understand.
And because of THAT, I can begin to comprehend why a friend took issue at my use of "black market" to describe illicit dealings. I can poke my friends and go "hey. Look at this. Do you see this?" Hopefully they will go on to poke others in their circles, and the conversation will spread.
As to what I'm going to do--I'm going to re-examine my characters of color with new eyes. I'm going to work harder at Getting It Right.
I'm going to stop whining "I don't know what they want from me!" and go find out how to be part of the solution.
I'm going to ask my friends, "Now that you see it, what are we going to do about this?"
And I'm going to keep listening and learning, because you don't turn around thirty-nine years of "But I'm not prejudiced!" with one eye-opening day on the interwebs.
(no subject)
Thu, Mar. 5th, 2009 04:17 am (UTC)