![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
megwritesI'm nervous about this topic, because I really feel that I should do like 100000 years worth of listening and learning before I speak, but I felt that I needed to be sure that I stood up and said that I'm not quitting this topic, because I don't want anyone to think I'm participating in Elizabeth Bear's Two Months of Useless Silence or that I agree with it.
Let me be clear:
Yes, I'm talking about this post from Elizabeth Bear and a lot of the events surrounding it. And I do not agree with her at all. I think she was wrong in what she said.
Her post really saddens me and saddens me deeply. It saddens me that she thinks not talking about it, that all of us just "shutting up a bit" will somehow solve anything. I remember her saying something a while back: "entropy requires no maintenance". I wonder if she was thinking about that when she called for ceasefires and silences.
It saddens me that she either didn't consider or doesn't care that while for the white, established people in the SF/F, shutting up for two months is just fine, but for the people who have been hurt, who have been marginalized, saying we should shut up for a couple of months is like telling them to put up with being slapped in the face for another couple of months.
What's worse? I get that sometimes everyone needs to disengage from something going for personal reasons. And I'm wondering why she didn't just silently disengage and let the internet debating go on with out her. After all, it seems like things were better off when she just said nothing at all and continued posting pictures of her feet.
I'm reminded of the old adage: Better to keep quiet and let people think you're stupid than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
All the best and most important social leaps towards equality were made because people refused ceasefires and calls for silence, because people kept digging in and pushing forward until they got what they needed.
What if MLK had decided that he would retire from the cause of civil rights for a while because it got hard? I'm sure a lot of white people, not just virulent racists, but even ones who considered themselves progressive and liberal, would've loved to say, "Hey, Martin, can we just stop all this protesting and troublemaking for a couple of months, it's giving me an ulcer" and probably did say things like that.
And if anyone had reasons to want to just go home and give up, it was him. You think you got it hard because some people said unkind words about you on the internet?
Try getting sprayed with a firehose, or chased by dogs, or arrested for just marching down the street with a sign. Try having the Klan breathing down your neck. Try being beaten up and assaulted. Try having activists on your side murdered and their murders completely ignored by the police.
That's what it really means to get assaulted. That's what it really means when somebody attacks you for your views. That's the kind of history that people of color in America have been living with. And it's not something that's far distant in the past for them, either. This is not a long distant memory that they can discount as part of the past. Just like rape and sexual violence and sexual harassment are not something women can say is part of the past, not while 1 in 4 women in America is still the victim of a sexual assault in her lifetime.
So when a person of color speaks out and a white person tells them to shut up, there's always that awareness that white people are willing to back up their demands for silence with police dogs and batons. There's an awareness that white people, because of their privilege, have power and means to enforce their desires, means that people of color do not have access to.
That's why racism = POWER + prejudice and not just prejudice. Let's say prejudice is a gun. Everyone has a gun. But some people have BB guns and some people have fucking automatic weapons with a ton of ammo for reloading and a high powered scope and a laser sight. The person who handed out the weapons was, apparently, a lunatic with a bad sense of fairness - but that's a whole other post.
Sure, people of color have their prejudices, but they don't have the caliber to enforce them. Because they have the BB guns. They can shoot pellets, and pellets can put out an individual eye, but they can't mow down entire groups of people in one fell swoop the way white privilege can.
Which is why you need to be so careful with white privilege if you're a white person. Because not only is it a powerful, horrible weapon, but it's a got a hair trigger. You can accidentally set it off just by goofing around.
The only wise course of action to prevent people from getting shot is to step away from the gun entirely and not to touch it or use it. Because it's a gun. It's not like a knife that might be used for carving or cutting meat. No, it has only one use. To hurt people.
And if that weren't enough for you, this metaphor is also useful for understand why it is so abysmally stupid to assert that PoC's can be racist, or that there's reverse racism. You just cannot do the widespread, profound damage with BB guns (no matter how many you have) that you can do with automatic assault rifles.
Nor does it make sense to act like you're in as much danger from a bunch of people with BB guns as they are from you when you've got a goddamn Howitzer at your disposal. Oww, you got shot in the ass with the BB gun. It's a bee-sting. Try being on the business end of what you're holding and see how getting gut shot feels.
See how getting gut shot repeatedly feels.
Which, coincidentally, is why outing someone's identity is so heinous. Because it's like taking away their helmet, or their bulletproof vest when you have that high powered weaponry. The only reason you'd do that is so you have a better chance at shooting them fatally. In situation where you really honestly want peace and progress, you may ask people to disarm, but you don't ask them to give up all defenses.
And if your point is so valid, you don't need to know anyone's name. You just need to know their words.
The sad thing is? I don't mean the whole "getting shot" thing all that metaphorically. You don't out someone because you want to reveal their face to the world, you out somebody because you want to paint a target on them. Because you want them to have less security, because you know that if they have to choose between protecting themselves and arguing with you that they'll, very logically, protect themselves. You out them because you want to make it easier for them to get hurt.
It's a very vicious, horrible tactic, and it's a good way to stop arguments when you're losing because you're wrong or because you can't take the heat.
I think I've milked the gun metaphor for all it's worth, don't you?
Anonymity and cowardice aren't actually all that interrelated. If you stayed awake for sixth grade history, you'll remember that most of the people who participated in the Boston Tea Party remained anonymous (or at least tried to, and tried to frame Native Americans for it, BTW). Tank Man, also, is anonymous, but I'd hardly call him a coward because he didn't wear a name tag while standing in front of a tank.
You can be a coward while telling everyone your name.
This long ramble is all to say that the post EBear made is just made not wise and just not right, and I wonder who wrote it. It is not the Bear who's books I once loved, who I once admired. It's not the Bear who reinvigorated my love for SF/F at time when I wondered if I was still into the genre. It's not the Bear I once fan girled over.
I hate looking at my shelf and wondering if I can keep those books there or if it would be too adverse to my beliefs, to the good of PoC's everywhere who have been hurt, to do so. I hate thinking that maybe I supported someone who wasn't as good as I thought they were. I bought all her books new, because I liked her that much once upon a time, and I was once proud of that.
It's kind of a sickening feeling now.
I feel like I'm writing an elegy for a good writer.
What's worse, is that my feelings are nothing. My little white girl crocodile tears are just not even the point or even important. Wah, wah, poor me. What-frakkin-ever.
However bad I feel about this, I can't imagine what the fans, bloggers, and writers of color must feel in this discussion. I'm trying to imagine the frustration, anger, hurt, betrayal, sadness, depression, and utter despair this whole mess is generating for them and it's sort of colossal. Because they are the ones who matter. This is about THEM.
It's not about me or my feelings, because I'm a white, privileged person. I got mine and I got it up front with all the advantages that got handed to me for NO GOOD REASON. I repeat: no good reason. It's time to make sure that they get theirs.
Which is why not talking about this topic is just inviting entropy, it's inviting regression. We either fight for every step forward or we fall back. There is no standing still, because, essentially, we're on a really fast moving treadmill.
The thing that disappoints me most is just how unproductive her entire post was. Nobody was helped, not even herself, certainly not her friends. The things that need to get done, the creating of diversity by encouraging authors of color, the making of safer spaces for fans of color and people of color to talk, the encouraging of people to come together and make things better? That was not done at all.
No practical good was had.
I have very real if not terribly specific goals for what I want for my genre.
I want, one day, to look at a list of the newest SF/F releases and see that at least half, if not more, of the books coming out in a month are by and/or about people of color. Preferably by. Because I know that not only would that be the right thing, but it would mean that the width, depth, and scope of the stories would be better than they are right now. Let's face it, some tropes and subgenres are just tapped out and we need fresh blood. There's always been fresh blood available, but SF/F just doesn't want to tap into that vein, and that's really depressing.
More than that, I want to see that these authors of colors are trendsetters and power players in the genre. I want to see that their words carry as much weight as anyone else's. I want to see them getting the masses of fans and the devoted followings from fans of ALL colors.
I want to see presses and publishing imprints that are dedicated to people of color, and are commercially successful. In Meg's Dream World they're wildly successful and somebody writes something spectacular with a lot of Vampires of Color and a whole other world I hadn't thought of and it sells like hotcakes and I solve two problems in my life at once and finally find The Perfect Vampire Novel and can die happy.
I want to go to a convention where the demographics of the attendees looks a lot like the actual demographics of the place where I live, the place where white folks are quickly becoming a numerical minority (though not a social, economic, or legal one, let me make that clear) and there's so much color it's like a frickin' rose garden of humanity and nobody has to feel unsafe or watch themselves or feel like they're the representative of everyone who is like them. I want to go to a convention where the Open Source Boob Project would never happen, where things like Racefail are unthinkable, because people have changed their thinking, finally.
I want to see a meteoric rise in the amount of fans of color and the safety they feel to discuss things that affect them in their fandom and their lives. I want to attract fans of color who previously dismissed the SF/F genre.
I'd love to recruit as many new fans of color to SF/F as I can, but I realize that I have so little to entice them with. What can I promise them for coming to conventions, for trying to publish books, for writing, for blogging, for taking place in discussions and panels where the opposition and difficulties are legion? I can't say that this an especially safe or open genre just yet, I can't promise them they'll be rewarded or even respected.
I can't promise that if they go under a pseudonym that they won't be outed. I can't promise that they won't spend most of the time on a panel defending themselves when they say they've been hurt instead of getting people to listen to what hurts them and how it can be stopped. I can't promise there will be a big community of others like them. I can't promise they won't be harassed.
How do you convince someone that this really is a good genre when you can't convince them that the people in it are good people? A genre is only as good as it's creators. What kind of message do you think is being sent, especially to the younger folks who are watching this all go down?
Because right now, I'm getting the message that talking about a little bit of diversity and race is fine, as long as everyone is nice and agrees that the white folks are doing a good job. If we make nice little gestures and talk about Octavia Butler every once and a while and maybe invite a few people of color to a panel or a workshop to make ourselves feel better, then we'll play ball with you.
But if you get angry, if you point to something that's been a thorn in your side for a long time say that you want it to come out, if you refuse to be gentle about it, if you refuse to back down or give out cookies or congratulate people on bare due diligence, if you expect more than politeness from people calling themselves allies, if you demand the respect and fair treatment you've deserved all along, if you expect people to come to the party with their pants on or not come at all, well, then things get nasty. Then there are the rants and the outings and the people flouncing off in a spectacular fashion.
What am I supposed to say to someone who sees Elizabeth Bear's post or any of the others which have been so troublesome, when people look at the white editors and writers who are such big deals and have said these things and then looks to me any asks, "This is who you want me to be in the same genre with? This is what you want me to deal with?"
What am I supposed to say to a PoC who's a potential SF/F fan when one of the writers I once thought was one of our best just said that she wishes we'd stop talking about race and racism for two months because she's so uncomfortable?
More than that, what am I supposed to say to make it better for them, to make it hurt less? Because this isn't about whether I look good or bad, it's whether PoC's in SF/F feel safe or unsafe.
And I think the message is clear: PoC's don't feel safe, and there's a group of white editors and writers who are more concerned with staying friends with each other than addressing that.
That, friends and Romans, is the real problem. When you defend a friend or acquaintence who has said and done deliberately and repeatedly racist things, you're not standing up for your friend, not really. It's actually saying: "Look, this subject is not important enough for me to sacrifice the benefit I get from being this person's friend (or at least friendly with them). The benefits of their friendship are more valuable to me than (insert issue). So could you please fuck off now, because you and (insert issue) are less important than this person is to me."
I just want to make sure that people know, above all else, that I won't tolerate racism here or in myself. I want people to know that I'm going to listen, and that I'm going to try my best. I want people to know that they can come to me and say if something is hurting them that I'm doing or saying, and that I will do everything in my power to make it right.
As with this same topic posted about in other journals I have, I would ask three favors:
1) If you're coming to disagree with me about something I've made it perfectly clear that I'm not backing down from, do us both a favor and just don't waste my time. Questions are fine, and even debate on the smaller issues or debate on how best to achieve the goals I want achieved are fine.
2) If you're going to comment, debate, or discuss with other people, please don't just be polite. Be thoughtful. REALLY think about what they're saying and what you're going to say. Consider what it is you want and why you're making that comment in the first place and whether it has any potential to be productive.
3) No cookies. Please. I'm on a cookie free diet. If you want to say you agree with me, I guess that's okay - but honestly? If you want to go give someone kudoes and brownies and goodies, go find the people who have been enduring harassment and ugliness to speak out and give them your support.
Let me be clear:
Yes, I'm talking about this post from Elizabeth Bear and a lot of the events surrounding it. And I do not agree with her at all. I think she was wrong in what she said.
Her post really saddens me and saddens me deeply. It saddens me that she thinks not talking about it, that all of us just "shutting up a bit" will somehow solve anything. I remember her saying something a while back: "entropy requires no maintenance". I wonder if she was thinking about that when she called for ceasefires and silences.
It saddens me that she either didn't consider or doesn't care that while for the white, established people in the SF/F, shutting up for two months is just fine, but for the people who have been hurt, who have been marginalized, saying we should shut up for a couple of months is like telling them to put up with being slapped in the face for another couple of months.
What's worse? I get that sometimes everyone needs to disengage from something going for personal reasons. And I'm wondering why she didn't just silently disengage and let the internet debating go on with out her. After all, it seems like things were better off when she just said nothing at all and continued posting pictures of her feet.
I'm reminded of the old adage: Better to keep quiet and let people think you're stupid than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
All the best and most important social leaps towards equality were made because people refused ceasefires and calls for silence, because people kept digging in and pushing forward until they got what they needed.
What if MLK had decided that he would retire from the cause of civil rights for a while because it got hard? I'm sure a lot of white people, not just virulent racists, but even ones who considered themselves progressive and liberal, would've loved to say, "Hey, Martin, can we just stop all this protesting and troublemaking for a couple of months, it's giving me an ulcer" and probably did say things like that.
And if anyone had reasons to want to just go home and give up, it was him. You think you got it hard because some people said unkind words about you on the internet?
Try getting sprayed with a firehose, or chased by dogs, or arrested for just marching down the street with a sign. Try having the Klan breathing down your neck. Try being beaten up and assaulted. Try having activists on your side murdered and their murders completely ignored by the police.
That's what it really means to get assaulted. That's what it really means when somebody attacks you for your views. That's the kind of history that people of color in America have been living with. And it's not something that's far distant in the past for them, either. This is not a long distant memory that they can discount as part of the past. Just like rape and sexual violence and sexual harassment are not something women can say is part of the past, not while 1 in 4 women in America is still the victim of a sexual assault in her lifetime.
So when a person of color speaks out and a white person tells them to shut up, there's always that awareness that white people are willing to back up their demands for silence with police dogs and batons. There's an awareness that white people, because of their privilege, have power and means to enforce their desires, means that people of color do not have access to.
That's why racism = POWER + prejudice and not just prejudice. Let's say prejudice is a gun. Everyone has a gun. But some people have BB guns and some people have fucking automatic weapons with a ton of ammo for reloading and a high powered scope and a laser sight. The person who handed out the weapons was, apparently, a lunatic with a bad sense of fairness - but that's a whole other post.
Sure, people of color have their prejudices, but they don't have the caliber to enforce them. Because they have the BB guns. They can shoot pellets, and pellets can put out an individual eye, but they can't mow down entire groups of people in one fell swoop the way white privilege can.
Which is why you need to be so careful with white privilege if you're a white person. Because not only is it a powerful, horrible weapon, but it's a got a hair trigger. You can accidentally set it off just by goofing around.
The only wise course of action to prevent people from getting shot is to step away from the gun entirely and not to touch it or use it. Because it's a gun. It's not like a knife that might be used for carving or cutting meat. No, it has only one use. To hurt people.
And if that weren't enough for you, this metaphor is also useful for understand why it is so abysmally stupid to assert that PoC's can be racist, or that there's reverse racism. You just cannot do the widespread, profound damage with BB guns (no matter how many you have) that you can do with automatic assault rifles.
Nor does it make sense to act like you're in as much danger from a bunch of people with BB guns as they are from you when you've got a goddamn Howitzer at your disposal. Oww, you got shot in the ass with the BB gun. It's a bee-sting. Try being on the business end of what you're holding and see how getting gut shot feels.
See how getting gut shot repeatedly feels.
Which, coincidentally, is why outing someone's identity is so heinous. Because it's like taking away their helmet, or their bulletproof vest when you have that high powered weaponry. The only reason you'd do that is so you have a better chance at shooting them fatally. In situation where you really honestly want peace and progress, you may ask people to disarm, but you don't ask them to give up all defenses.
And if your point is so valid, you don't need to know anyone's name. You just need to know their words.
The sad thing is? I don't mean the whole "getting shot" thing all that metaphorically. You don't out someone because you want to reveal their face to the world, you out somebody because you want to paint a target on them. Because you want them to have less security, because you know that if they have to choose between protecting themselves and arguing with you that they'll, very logically, protect themselves. You out them because you want to make it easier for them to get hurt.
It's a very vicious, horrible tactic, and it's a good way to stop arguments when you're losing because you're wrong or because you can't take the heat.
I think I've milked the gun metaphor for all it's worth, don't you?
Anonymity and cowardice aren't actually all that interrelated. If you stayed awake for sixth grade history, you'll remember that most of the people who participated in the Boston Tea Party remained anonymous (or at least tried to, and tried to frame Native Americans for it, BTW). Tank Man, also, is anonymous, but I'd hardly call him a coward because he didn't wear a name tag while standing in front of a tank.
You can be a coward while telling everyone your name.
This long ramble is all to say that the post EBear made is just made not wise and just not right, and I wonder who wrote it. It is not the Bear who's books I once loved, who I once admired. It's not the Bear who reinvigorated my love for SF/F at time when I wondered if I was still into the genre. It's not the Bear I once fan girled over.
I hate looking at my shelf and wondering if I can keep those books there or if it would be too adverse to my beliefs, to the good of PoC's everywhere who have been hurt, to do so. I hate thinking that maybe I supported someone who wasn't as good as I thought they were. I bought all her books new, because I liked her that much once upon a time, and I was once proud of that.
It's kind of a sickening feeling now.
I feel like I'm writing an elegy for a good writer.
What's worse, is that my feelings are nothing. My little white girl crocodile tears are just not even the point or even important. Wah, wah, poor me. What-frakkin-ever.
However bad I feel about this, I can't imagine what the fans, bloggers, and writers of color must feel in this discussion. I'm trying to imagine the frustration, anger, hurt, betrayal, sadness, depression, and utter despair this whole mess is generating for them and it's sort of colossal. Because they are the ones who matter. This is about THEM.
It's not about me or my feelings, because I'm a white, privileged person. I got mine and I got it up front with all the advantages that got handed to me for NO GOOD REASON. I repeat: no good reason. It's time to make sure that they get theirs.
Which is why not talking about this topic is just inviting entropy, it's inviting regression. We either fight for every step forward or we fall back. There is no standing still, because, essentially, we're on a really fast moving treadmill.
The thing that disappoints me most is just how unproductive her entire post was. Nobody was helped, not even herself, certainly not her friends. The things that need to get done, the creating of diversity by encouraging authors of color, the making of safer spaces for fans of color and people of color to talk, the encouraging of people to come together and make things better? That was not done at all.
No practical good was had.
I have very real if not terribly specific goals for what I want for my genre.
I want, one day, to look at a list of the newest SF/F releases and see that at least half, if not more, of the books coming out in a month are by and/or about people of color. Preferably by. Because I know that not only would that be the right thing, but it would mean that the width, depth, and scope of the stories would be better than they are right now. Let's face it, some tropes and subgenres are just tapped out and we need fresh blood. There's always been fresh blood available, but SF/F just doesn't want to tap into that vein, and that's really depressing.
More than that, I want to see that these authors of colors are trendsetters and power players in the genre. I want to see that their words carry as much weight as anyone else's. I want to see them getting the masses of fans and the devoted followings from fans of ALL colors.
I want to see presses and publishing imprints that are dedicated to people of color, and are commercially successful. In Meg's Dream World they're wildly successful and somebody writes something spectacular with a lot of Vampires of Color and a whole other world I hadn't thought of and it sells like hotcakes and I solve two problems in my life at once and finally find The Perfect Vampire Novel and can die happy.
I want to go to a convention where the demographics of the attendees looks a lot like the actual demographics of the place where I live, the place where white folks are quickly becoming a numerical minority (though not a social, economic, or legal one, let me make that clear) and there's so much color it's like a frickin' rose garden of humanity and nobody has to feel unsafe or watch themselves or feel like they're the representative of everyone who is like them. I want to go to a convention where the Open Source Boob Project would never happen, where things like Racefail are unthinkable, because people have changed their thinking, finally.
I want to see a meteoric rise in the amount of fans of color and the safety they feel to discuss things that affect them in their fandom and their lives. I want to attract fans of color who previously dismissed the SF/F genre.
I'd love to recruit as many new fans of color to SF/F as I can, but I realize that I have so little to entice them with. What can I promise them for coming to conventions, for trying to publish books, for writing, for blogging, for taking place in discussions and panels where the opposition and difficulties are legion? I can't say that this an especially safe or open genre just yet, I can't promise them they'll be rewarded or even respected.
I can't promise that if they go under a pseudonym that they won't be outed. I can't promise that they won't spend most of the time on a panel defending themselves when they say they've been hurt instead of getting people to listen to what hurts them and how it can be stopped. I can't promise there will be a big community of others like them. I can't promise they won't be harassed.
How do you convince someone that this really is a good genre when you can't convince them that the people in it are good people? A genre is only as good as it's creators. What kind of message do you think is being sent, especially to the younger folks who are watching this all go down?
Because right now, I'm getting the message that talking about a little bit of diversity and race is fine, as long as everyone is nice and agrees that the white folks are doing a good job. If we make nice little gestures and talk about Octavia Butler every once and a while and maybe invite a few people of color to a panel or a workshop to make ourselves feel better, then we'll play ball with you.
But if you get angry, if you point to something that's been a thorn in your side for a long time say that you want it to come out, if you refuse to be gentle about it, if you refuse to back down or give out cookies or congratulate people on bare due diligence, if you expect more than politeness from people calling themselves allies, if you demand the respect and fair treatment you've deserved all along, if you expect people to come to the party with their pants on or not come at all, well, then things get nasty. Then there are the rants and the outings and the people flouncing off in a spectacular fashion.
What am I supposed to say to someone who sees Elizabeth Bear's post or any of the others which have been so troublesome, when people look at the white editors and writers who are such big deals and have said these things and then looks to me any asks, "This is who you want me to be in the same genre with? This is what you want me to deal with?"
What am I supposed to say to a PoC who's a potential SF/F fan when one of the writers I once thought was one of our best just said that she wishes we'd stop talking about race and racism for two months because she's so uncomfortable?
More than that, what am I supposed to say to make it better for them, to make it hurt less? Because this isn't about whether I look good or bad, it's whether PoC's in SF/F feel safe or unsafe.
And I think the message is clear: PoC's don't feel safe, and there's a group of white editors and writers who are more concerned with staying friends with each other than addressing that.
That, friends and Romans, is the real problem. When you defend a friend or acquaintence who has said and done deliberately and repeatedly racist things, you're not standing up for your friend, not really. It's actually saying: "Look, this subject is not important enough for me to sacrifice the benefit I get from being this person's friend (or at least friendly with them). The benefits of their friendship are more valuable to me than (insert issue). So could you please fuck off now, because you and (insert issue) are less important than this person is to me."
I just want to make sure that people know, above all else, that I won't tolerate racism here or in myself. I want people to know that I'm going to listen, and that I'm going to try my best. I want people to know that they can come to me and say if something is hurting them that I'm doing or saying, and that I will do everything in my power to make it right.
As with this same topic posted about in other journals I have, I would ask three favors:
1) If you're coming to disagree with me about something I've made it perfectly clear that I'm not backing down from, do us both a favor and just don't waste my time. Questions are fine, and even debate on the smaller issues or debate on how best to achieve the goals I want achieved are fine.
2) If you're going to comment, debate, or discuss with other people, please don't just be polite. Be thoughtful. REALLY think about what they're saying and what you're going to say. Consider what it is you want and why you're making that comment in the first place and whether it has any potential to be productive.
3) No cookies. Please. I'm on a cookie free diet. If you want to say you agree with me, I guess that's okay - but honestly? If you want to go give someone kudoes and brownies and goodies, go find the people who have been enduring harassment and ugliness to speak out and give them your support.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-06 01:18 pm (UTC)With all due respect, I think it's clear that I feel exactly the opposite. I think she's handled this really badly. Yes, the firestorm probably did get intense, but she could have just silently moved on, or said something better.
I don't think she's been gracious at all. I feel she's been condescending and hurtful to people, and she's allowed her friends to be hurtful without so much as a "Hey, I don't support them doing this".
And actually, most of the fire was not directed personally at her at all. In fact, after most of the flurry in January, discussion moved on, but it moved on to people who were friends of hers.
If she'd just said nothing and kept posting foot pictures, she would've been a lot better off and hurt a lot less people.
I mean, where does it stop? where are the over-50's characters? the athlete foot sufferers...
I would submit that trying to turn race into a trivial, non-important category is VERY HURTFUL to others. Because a category which has meant that people get less opportunities, worse treatment, less justice in the system is not something that can be equated to being an athlete's foot sufferer.
You spoke earlier of a multicultural story where there were no women. Think about how that made you feel. It made you feel excluded, didn't it? It made you feel hurt, made you resent the story?
Because let's face it, women haven't always gotten their fair share in SF/F.
Well, there are lot of similarities between that and how PoC's have been feelings.
It works the other way around. Imagine a story chock full of strong women, but they're all white women. Imagine being a female PoC who realizes that even though she's a woman, she's still not represented in that story because she isn't white.
I don't care about character race because in a book we're all the same font anyway :-D.
Yeah, but the thing is? I can say that too, because I don't need to go searching high and low for white characters and white authors.
But as a bisexual, as a woman? I do care deeply about gender and sexuality. Doesn't mean I won't read straight or male characters, but it does mean that I want to seek out characters like me, and that I care when it seems like I can't find any.
Imagine if a man, who writes few and very weak female characters, said, "Well, I just don't care what gender a character is". That would seem fishy to you, wouldn't it? Because funny how when he doesn't care about gender, all the good characters are men, just like he is.
Oh, but all that aside, it's her blog, she can block out whoever she wants for whatever reason she wants to, anytime she wants to, too.
You're right, we're all free to say what we want on our blogs, and she can do what she pleases. Free country (mostly). But I'm also free to stand up and say that I heartily disagree with her.
I'm also free to say that I think it's not helping. Because all these comments, and none of them have focused on POSITIVE ACTION THAT HELPS PEOPLE. And we need positive action.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-06 05:05 pm (UTC)Hang in there, run for office if you can, make a difference more and more--however it works out, society needs this.
**Imagine if a man, who writes few and very weak female characters, said, "Well, I just don't care what gender a character is". That would seem fishy to you, wouldn't it? Because funny how when he doesn't care about gender, all the good characters are men, just like he is.**
You're talking about most of my favorite stories, 70s-style. Well, this is what was offered, you know, back then--not exclusively, but quite a lot, and the women were men-appealing, which, imo, was even worse, but we (I) didn't know that. Men had the adventures and women didn't, except for very rare and usually embarrassing cases (I thought so, anyway :)
Anyway, I"m all for positive action and speaking out and uniting, I mean, it's what people do--it just worries me when the spit and bottles start flying, which is generally what starts in when the flamers appear, you know? When is it no longer over fairness and equality and justice, and more about I'm going to beat you up (or whatever) because I can and you can't stop me?
I believe that Ms. Bear is seeing such a line and doesn't want part of that, but I could be wrong. I just, I don't know, I feel sorry for anyone in the middle of a storm of any stripe. No matter what she does, she's in trouble, you know? Either with friends or with f-list readers or drop-by readers. It's just, I don't know, rough. I feel for her, is all.
I'm perfectly fine with our disagreeing, and always feel fine with hearing another pov; well, it's what it's all about, really :)
no subject
Date: 2009-03-06 06:46 pm (UTC)One hopes. Because I'd really love to get to a day when race issues are not issues anymore. When people can have their identities and their safe spaces, as well as having safe and SHARED spaces, and where people are all getting their fair share of things.
I get that radical things are being said, and some things are getting radically misunderstood. I'm not about "kill all the white people!" - because, um, I'm sort of a white person, too. But I do think there are fundamental problems, and we need to address them.
it just worries me when the spit and bottles start flying, which is generally what starts in when the flamers appear, you know?
I do, too. And I think most people that I consider to be positive anti-racists do as well. I won't deny there are some people looking to be incendiary and start fights. But I think, on the whole, most people blogging about this topic want positive change.
I also won't deny that I'm more than a little irritated that it seems like a handful of individuals have pre-empted a topic that affects us all. And honestly, I'd love if, instead of calling a ceasefire on the topic of racism, we said, "we're going to stop talking about these individuals and redirect the topic back to where it belongs, on how to MAKE THINGS RIGHT."
Either with friends or with f-list readers or drop-by readers. It's just, I don't know, rough. I feel for her, is all.
I can't say I feel 100% unsympathetic to her. Because I know that it's kind of hard when you have to ask yourself "do I stand by my friend or my beliefs, and am I a big old hypocrite if I don't defriend someone and ban them and call them ugly names when we disagree on a topic?"
But there's also a part of me that really thinks there IS a line and you do have to say, "Cross it at your own peril", even to your friends. It sucks, and it hurts, but I think it's better to lose a friend than lose part of your own conscience.
And I know, lately, I've had to ask myself very serious questions about what will happen if someone I care about deeply starts doing something really offensive.
Actually, I've had to all my life because - not to get too personal - but I have people in my family who aren't just the "oops I said something bad on the internet" kind of racists, but are the "I'll give you a thirty minute lecture over the dinner table of why the N-----rs are an inferior race" kind of racists. And trust me, trying to shove taters into your piehole while listening to a relative say those kinds and know that they're wrong and evil things to say is really painful. Do you disown your relative for that?
I can't say I've come up with a perfect solution. I do believe in trying to find compromises and diplomatic solutions.
I also can say that I think it is worthwhile to disengage from certain individuals while not disengaging from the topic at large. Which is what I wish Elizabeth Bear would have said. I also recognize that, while I disagree 1000000% with her, that she was probably really emotional and angry and defensive when she wrote that. Not her best hour ever.
I'm perfectly fine with our disagreeing, and always feel fine with hearing another pov; well, it's what it's all about, really :)
I want you to know that I'm fine, too. Because you're no where close to the line. :) You're obviously a very good person who does try to consider everyone's views and tries to be kind and compassionate to others, and I respect and enjoy that in you. So I want that to be said, and I appreciate the very respectful and polite tone you've kept with me here, because this is a discussion I'm still rather nervous and emotional about, but feel compelled not to keep quiet on.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-06 05:25 pm (UTC)You spoke earlier of a multicultural story where there were no women. Think about how that made you feel. It made you feel excluded, didn't it? It made you feel hurt, made you resent the story?
No. No, it didn't. I've read plenty of stories where they were no or no significant women; likewise I've seen plenty of films and TV shows like that. And, frankly, I had no response except to enjoy or not enjoy the media on its own merits. I've also read stories that were very heavily female dominate and, except for one story in which every character ran around screaming about how much better matriarchies are, I didn't give much thought to the gender disparity there either. In the last case, I thought the "yeah women" attitude was so heavy handed as to detract from the story.
So, where you've been deeply hurt by what you perceive as deliberate exclusions, and you're projecting that hurt on everyone else who has been deliberately excluded, and now you're seeking to rectify things in the way you see best, I wasn't and therefore not only have no idea where you're coming from, but also know that a person can be deliberately excluded and not let it define their worldview. And while I can say the last from a position of white privilege, I have been deliberately excluded, silenced, attacked, and discriminated against for my membership (or lack thereof) in a number of categories--and I still don't feel the hurt and pain you describe, nor do I read the causes for it in my media.
Which means that at a very fundamental level, we have no basis for communicating with each other. And what one perceives as helping, the other perceives as either missing the point entirely or as attacking.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-06 06:32 pm (UTC)Which means that at a very fundamental level, we have no basis for communicating with each other.
If you realized that, if you've realized that all along, what is the point of coming here and commenting? I don't expect that you and I will agree totally with each other on this point. If it's something that you don't agree with, fine. Your conscience is yours and I respect that. I respect that you act out of what you think is right.
I don't expect all my friends to fall in line with everything I think or say. But I do expect for there to come a time when my friends recognize that if something is important to me and we don't agree on it, to allow me the space for us to be friends and to disagree.
There have been a lot of friends of mine in this who have said things I don't agree with, but I also recognize that I'm not going to change their minds, so I post what I believe in my LJ, I make sure that I make it clear what I do and do not agree with, and I try not to be unhelpful.
But at the same time? I'm not sure what you're hoping to do, or what your purpose is here in this response. If you feel that between the two of us as individuals, that there can be no constructive dialogue on this top, when why try? Why not just let this topic go, especially if it seems like it doesn't bother you so much. I'll do my blogging, you can ignore the posts on race I make, and we can - between the two of us individually - talk about things we agree on.
You know, this isn't just some idle discussion I'm having, or something I'm putting up because I want to make some waves, or something I'm doing because it's all the cool new thing. This is something I have thought deeply and a long time about, something I've fought with and thought about and read about and read counterpoints to. This is something I'm still in the process of learning about, and it's something that is deeply important to me.
And I know this much: I've seen racism, I've seen how pervasive it is. I've lived in a veritable hotbed of it, and I've seen some disgusting things. And I know that in the things I do and the things I enjoy, I just cannot participate in racism, and if there is any way to make sure that I'm fighting against it, I want to do that thing, even if it ticks off my friends and makes people stare at me like I'm a crazy person. Even if it means personal sacrifice.
Because the thought of racism is just that appalling to me, because it's wrong, because I believe that I have an obligation as a human being to act better than that and to make sure my fellow human beings get treated better than that.
If that's projecting, maybe it is. But I'm not forcing anyone to do anything. I'm not pointing a gun at anyone. I'm not even saying "you disagreed with me, I'm banning you!".
I am saying that I want to take whatever steps I can to make sure my fellow human beings are not being treated badly on account of their race.
And if we can't have any further dialogue on this topic, so be it. Every person's conscience is their own, and if you're satisfied with yours, so am I.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-06 07:43 pm (UTC)First, I didn't realize that all along. I didn't realize it until just about the moment I started to type the words.
Second, Why do I come here and comment? Because that's what a dialogue is. For a dialogue to be productive, it needs to include the parts that you don't agree with. Having a conversation in which everyone sits around and agrees with you (or worse, ignores you) isn't going to lead anywhere useful. And this topic needs, absolutely needs to be lead to places that are useful.
Also, a lot of what I've said, I don't agree with. But someone somewhere does because the ideas have been introduced to me in other branches of the conversation. So I'm making sure they stay in the conversation.
But I do expect for there to come a time when my friends recognize that if something is important to me and we don't agree on it, to allow me the space for us to be friends and to disagree.
Of course.
I fully respect your right to say what's important for you. However, you're the one out there entreating everyone to listen to viewpoints that aren't their own; from trying to forever seeking to understand viewpoints that aren't their own. Does this preclude you from doing the same?
To make a truly persuasive argument, first you need to understand where the other side is coming from. If you can't or won't understand them, then you're not going to be able to develop your points in a way that will convince them.
Since you have flat out said that there are positions you refuse to understand or explore, this undermines your own position. It's digging trenches on an argument, instead of doing anything to resolve it.
Why not just let this topic go, especially if it seems like it doesn't bother you so much.
I will, to the best of my ability. But, I too much enjoy good arguments to let all of them rest.
This is something I have thought deeply and a long time about, something I've fought with and thought about and read about and read counterpoints to. This is something I'm still in the process of learning about, and it's something that is deeply important to me.
I'm well aware of that. I applaud you for that.
So, don't you want your argument to be as well thought out as it possibly can be? I do. If that means deliberately stirring the pot ... well, you wouldn't be the first person to accuse me of doing that.
I think that's what makes me a good teacher.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-06 08:09 pm (UTC)Okay, this MAYBE is where we need to clear up some confusion. I think I may have wrongly been making the assumption that when you comment or question something, that you're doing so because you agree with the thing you're positing to me, rather than proposing it as a devil's advocate type question, or seeking to make sure my arguments are solid.
I should maybe have learned better by now, but you know me. Not the sharpest knife in the drawer.
And it might help, if in future, because I am nothing if not thick as a brick, clarified which points of view you're arguing FOR and which points of view you're just putting forth to place against mine as a way to test the strength of what I'm saying, as sort of a thought exercise, because that would help. Especially since this is a really emotional topic for me, one that I'm nervous about, one that I'm determined to get as right as I can.
When people come to me and say they have this objection or that objection, even if it's something I immediately disagree with, I also realize that a) I have to weigh what my chances of persuading them are and b) that I have to weight the consequences of digging in and getting in a fight with them against what is to be gained, even if I somehow win.
BTW, I don't know if I ever seen someone clearly win an internet argument. Hmm.
Since you have flat out said that there are positions you refuse to understand or explore, this undermines your own position. It's digging trenches on an argument, instead of doing anything to resolve it.
Well, here's the thing. There are some positions you HAVE to dig into or there's no point in any of it. Now, those positions should be few, well secured, and well tested - but there does come a point when you have to, as Ami in the New Series said, "Make a decision and stick to it."
I've made the decision that racism is wrong and that I have a moral obligation to do something about it. And yes, I do need to make it clear that I won't be backing down from that, and I don't see why I should.
I'm willing to talk turkey on a mountain of other issues, but there does come a point where I have to say that there are certain things I cannot and must not surrender or concede. That human beings deserve anything but respectful and humane and compassionate and intelligent treatment and that denying them this due to race is wrong is one of those things.
I also think part of me may actually be too cautious about this, because I do not want to start a mess, because I agree absolutely that messes get us nowhere.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-07 12:19 am (UTC)Fair enough. But, remember, that all testing runs multiple ways. It's not just about finding out if your arguments are solid, but if all the arguments are solid. So introducing a topic as a thought exercise may be because I believe it, may be because I don't and want to know how to refute it, or may be just because it's intereresting. In any case, I'm learning from it, too.
There are some positions you HAVE to dig into or there's no point in any of it.
Firmly believing that racisim isn't bad isn't a trench. It's a position. The trenches I was talking about include your statement (paraphrased) "The damned-if-you-do argument is wrong and I'll never understand it or even try to." Because now you're saying that there's no possible validity to people feeling that way, which means you're no longer open to helping people who do feel that way resolve the dilemna; instead you're just going to scream at them about how they're wrong, which isn't a productive dialogue.
There is too much at stake here to fall in to those kinds of emotional traps, especially since the topic is already so emotionally charged.