Jim Hines, Recruiter of PoC
Yesterday afternoon, Twitter called my attention to the following comment on a listserv of SF/F conrunners:
“Instead of insulting us, [Hines] could be using whatever influence he has in social media to help recruit more PoC into our circles. They need to know they’d probably be much more welcome here than they might be elsewhere. (After all, many of us would love to befriend extra terrestrials or anthromorphs.)”
I’m told that others on the listserv quickly pointed out how messed-up it was to compare people of color to aliens and monsters, and that the individual apologized, so I don’t want to spend much time rehashing that part of the comment. I doubt it was deliberately intended to be racist or offensive. But I think it’s worth emphasizing that this kind of unintentional and unthinking hurtfulness is, in my opinion, a big part of our problem.
I did post a snarky and sarcastic comment on Twitter in response to that “recruiting” comment:
Knock, knock. “Hello, I’ve come to spread the good news about fandom, where we love aliens, monsters, and even PoC!”
For the record, I consider myself part of fandom. I love our community. I love the friends I’ve made here. I love this part of my life. But I’m not going to ignore the serious problems we continue to struggle with when it comes to sexism and racism and inclusiveness and so on. And when individuals made racist remarks, or conventions botch their handling of sexual harassment, or another convention chair congratulates themselves on their “colorblindness” when their convention is 97% white, I’m going to keep pointing that out.
On Twitter, I was accused of driving people from SF/F fandom, and making our community look bad. I admit to being rather baffled by this. I thought things like conrunners making ignorant racist remarks were what made the rest of us look bad, not the acknowledgement and criticism of such remarks.
This bugs me a lot. It resonates with the dynamics I’ve seen in abusive families, where the most serious crime isn’t the abuse, but talking about the abuse outside of the family. So yeah, this hits a big old button for me.
Then there’s the complaint that I’m not using my “influence” to recruit other groups into fandom. Which got me thinking more seriously about the suggestion that hey, maybe I should work to try bring more diverse fans into fandom.
I’m sorry, but what the hell do you think I’ve been trying to do???
There are a lot of ways to try to make fandom and conventions more welcoming, and to try to encourage others to join our community. Which do you think is actually going to make people feel wanted — comparing them to aliens and monsters, or publicly denouncing the people who make such ignorant and hurtful remarks? You’ve got voices in fandom saying black people don’t come to cons because those people don’t like SF/F. Then you’ve got voices in fandom saying, “That’s racist bullshit, we don’t all believe that, and we as a community need to do better.”
I know which category I’d prefer to belong to.
Some of the ways I see to try to build a more welcoming community include:
- Listening to people who feel excluded or unwelcome, and acknowledging their experiences.
- Challenging racist and sexist statements. Even the “unintentional” ones. Both online and in person.
- Encouraging conventions to take steps to be more actively welcoming and inclusive and safe.
- Examining my own racism, sexism, homophobia, and general ignorance, and trying to learn to do better.
- Acknowledging when I screw up.
- Publicly acknowledging and applauding the conventions and people who get it right. (Example: Readercon’s follow-up to their sexual harassment screw-up. Yes, the initial response was a mess. But their follow-up should be a model to conventions everywhere.)
- Using my platform as a moderately well-known fantasy author to encourage others to recognize and push back against sexism, racism, homophobia, and so on.
I’m not asking for cookies, and I’ll be the first to admit I don’t always get it right. I’ve messed up plenty of times. But yeah, my goal is, in fact, to make fandom a more welcoming place, and help it become a community that a broader range of people will choose to be a part of. Not by going door-to-door so I can drag a token black woman to my local con, but by trying to address the underlying problems making so many people feel unwelcome.
You know what isn’t going to encourage people to be a part of fandom?
- Pretending we don’t have any problems, and that things like our “colorblindness” and “genderblindness” have resulted in a utopia where all groups feel welcome.
- Using our own privileged experiences to invalidate the lived experiences of others. (“Well, as a 39-year-old white dude, I haven’t experienced any sexism or racism in fandom…)
- Continuing to make the same mistakes again and again. (How many times do we have to talk about conventions failing to address accessibility or create harassment policies?)
- Reacting to criticism with an aggressively defensive “Us vs. Them” response.
- Worrying more about burying/denying/minimizing evidence of racism or sexism or harassment than about the fact that these things keep happening in the first place.
- Dismissing criticism as ignorance and maliciousness (which provides a convenient excuse to ignore said criticism).
- Pointing to what progress we’ve made to shut down discussion of the work we still have to do.
I’m rather fond of this quote from Antoine de Saint-Exupéry:
“If you want to build a ship, don’t drum up the men to gather wood, divide the work and give orders. Instead, teach them to yearn for the vast and endless sea.“
There are a lot of good people trying to make fandom a better and more welcoming place. Some of them are on that listserv I mentioned in the beginning, where I’m told there has been some good and productive conversation lately. I’ve worked with some great people at cons and on panels. I’ve linked to some of them online. These are folks I believe are working to bring a broader range of people into fandom. Not by dragging or ordering them to attend, but by trying to acknowledge and fix our flaws, and to reshape fandom into a thing more people yearn to be a part of.
Veronica Schanoes
December 5, 2013 @ 5:54 pm
Again, these are not actual examples with context. Judging from your lack of understanding of what white privilege is and how it works, I simply don’t trust your assessments of “because they’re white” and “because they’re fiscally conservative” without detail and context.
People attempting to change pervasive cultures of racism and misogyny have always been mocked; people from subordinated groups demanding to be treated with respect have always been told they’re too extreme.
Why would yet another iteration of this pattern surprise me?
The left is often eminently risible, but usually not for the reasons its opponents think.
Veronica Schanoes
December 5, 2013 @ 5:58 pm
I actually disagree, S.L. Some concerns are reality-based and some are not. Some concerns are about harmful consequences and some are not. I’m not going to validate or help to legitimize the latter kind by taking them seriously.
And certain “concerns” are nothing more than distractions from the problems of marginalized people in order to put the focus back on the group in power.
Veronica Schanoes
December 5, 2013 @ 5:59 pm
Why wouldn’t PoC feel welcome? If not because they feel judged.
Because of a fan subculture based on white cultures that takes whiteness for granted. Because of being made to feel invisible. Because of being made to feel like a curiosity.
None of these are about judgment.
Molly
December 5, 2013 @ 6:00 pm
This! It’s easy to think we know what we’re talking about, when in fact we really and truly don’t. This is the eternal trap of privilege.
Michi Trota (@GeekMelange)
December 5, 2013 @ 6:01 pm
We live in a racist society and have internalized a lot of racism. This leads to people being… wait for it… racist, whether they intend to or not. Racism isn’t just “whites only bathrooms” and burning crosses and anti-miscegenation laws. It’s also microaggressions, the million little ways people who aren’t (straight cis gender able-bodied neurotypical economically-well-off) white men are treated as if they are Other in both social forms and institutionalized discrimination. Intention isn’t always necessary for one’s words or actions to be racist. And because privilege can insulate us and skew our perspectives, yes, we do need to fight everyday to not be racist/homophobic/transphobic/ableist/misogynistic/etc.
I’m a southeast asian/pacific islander woman, so I have most definitely experienced racism and misogyny, but I am also straight, cis gender, have a college degree, am neurotypical & able-bodied and come from a fairly economically well-off background – because of how those things have colored my perception as I have benefited from different kinds of privilege, I have to *work* at being aware at how I may be unthinkingly cissexist or ableist or am being economically blinkered. Which I’ve most certainly done, had it pointed out to me and when I’ve been a defensive ass, was rightfully ripped a new one.
Because if I were more concerned that someone tells me that I’m transphobic or ableist, rather than if I *have* said/done something reflecting transphobia or ableism, even if I didn’t mean to – that’d mean my priorities needed some realignment. It may hurt my feelings & make me uncomfortable, but ultimately being told I’ve said/done something transphobic or ableist doesn’t hurt me or my ability to move through society a whit – it won’t curtail my rights, it won’t change the fact that society is already skewed toward handing me unearned social privileges because I’m cis gender and able-bodied. But if I AM doing/saying something -ist, even if I didn’t mean it? The net result is that I’ve STILL caused harm to people who are already being stepped on.
Those of us who have varying kinds of privilege should be more concerned about how we might be exercising it unthinkingly and causing harm, rather than “false accusations” of being -ist.
Veronica Schanoes
December 5, 2013 @ 6:01 pm
Your anecdotal evidence is interesting, but remains anecdotal. It doesn’t, for instance, show that false accusations never occur.
Right back atcha. Your anecdotal evidence is interesting, but remains anecdotal. It doesn’t, for instance, demonstrate that false accusations occur at a rate worthy of our attention or concern.
XtinaS
December 5, 2013 @ 6:09 pm
This, times a million.
Mary Dell
December 5, 2013 @ 6:11 pm
From what the POC I have listened to say, they are not proportionately invited to be on panels, are not allowed to speak freely on the rare occasions they are on panels, are stared at and even pointed at while they hang out with other congoers. Sometimes people touch them without permission. Sometimes there are panels with racially offensive premises or titles. Sometimes people with a history of saying racist things are guests of honor at cons.
“Feeling judged” implies that there is something about POC that is deserving of judgement, and that making them feel welcome at cons is a matter of tolerance. But I’m pretty sure nobody wants to try to have fun someplace where they are merely being tolerated.
Johnathan Knight
December 5, 2013 @ 6:15 pm
I’m not sure why you feel competent to judge my understanding of what white privilege means. I feel like it might have less to do with substance, and more to do with my perceived status in the conversation: the enemy, the bad person, the one who dissents or fails to echo.
I think it’s important to stress that just because someone disagrees with your conclusion, it doesn’t mean that they dislike you, or that they don’t understand the same basic subject matter that you do.
Johnathan Knight
December 5, 2013 @ 6:18 pm
“…white cultures that takes whiteness for granted.”
Such as?
“…being made to feel…”
Being made to feel like a curiosity is about judgment? To go back to the original quote, we’re talking about a group of people who feel like they’d be happy to include Klingons, which are about as different a race as you can get. Which means, obviously, that they’re totally up for including other humans.
S. L. Gray
December 5, 2013 @ 6:20 pm
I think in the relatively small community of fandom, there’s some validity to not wanting to be falsely labeled as a racist. That sort of thing -could- come back to bite someone later.
I do take your point, though, and no, as harmful consequences go, it’s not very high on the list.
Fair enough.
Johnathan Knight
December 5, 2013 @ 6:31 pm
Mary,
My conversations have led to different anecdotal answers. That said, thank you for sharing your experiences with me. Below, I’ve challenged them somewhat.
1. A lot of folks don’t feel proportionately invited to be on panels. Proof is in the pudding, as they say. Any examples?
2. Not allowed to speak freely? What does this mean? Are their mouths taped shut? I don’t mean to sound dismissive here, but c’mon. I can’t get a word in edge wise in my house unless I speak up.
3. Call me blind, call me stupid, whatever. I’m not so oblivious that I would miss outright gawking.
4. Touched without permission. Welcome to my life. This happens to me at every convention I go to. It sucks. I submit that it happens to everyone and needs to stop, but that it doesn’t have a single thing to do with color.
5. Racially offensive panels. Such as?
6. People with a history of saying racist things. A) Such as? B) Are you suggesting that all guests should go through a background check to make sure they’ve only said things the groupthink agrees with?
Johnathan Knight
December 5, 2013 @ 6:32 pm
Agreed.
I’m mostly just thinking and talking, curious to see what others think. I don’t mean to suggest that what I’m saying is worthy of attention, much less concern.
Kiri Aradia Morgan
December 5, 2013 @ 6:43 pm
Regarding #8:
Ageism is a thing, sure.
But if you aren’t willing to change with the times–if you insist on thinking, talking and behaving in hurtful, bigoted (or even predatory) ways that were tolerated when you were younger, or complaining because people don’t write stories the same way they did when you were growing up and falling in love with SF, and you make it clear that you aren’t interested in learning to appreciate new styles of music or art or writing or fashion, you may mean well, but younger people are going to correctly assume that you’re not interested in the things that interest them AND that you hold opinions that are hurtful to others when acted upon or spoken aloud. (Yes, you are free to think whatever you choose; but, for instance, if you are a man and I should overhear you defending men who hit on women in elevators, I’m not going to get into one alone with you.)
You can call that “ageism” if you want to, but when a young person decides they don’t want anything to do with you because you’ve made it clear that you are “colour-blind” and like people of all races who act like middle-class white people do when they are in the company of middle-class white people, or that you believe all “opinions” must be tolerated in polite discussions even if they are bigoted and mean-spirited, or that you are so invested in preserving the pronoun structure of the English language you learned growing up that you don’t care if you hurt people who don’t fit neatly into the gender binary, they really just think you’re an asshole.
Michi Trota (@GeekMelange)
December 5, 2013 @ 6:45 pm
I don’t know if you realize how callous and flippant that sounds. This makes it sound as if you’re treating this discussion as little more than an intellectual exercise, which is a bit insulting to the fact that much of this discussion relates to people’s lived experiences with discrimination and being Othered. Not everyone gets the luxury of being able to treat discussions about inclusion, discrimination, racism, etc., as something they’re “just curious about” because it’s directly related to what we experience every day. And because fandom means a lot to many people – as social support networks, as professional networks, a field in which they make a living – this is important. So it would be nice to see that treated with a little respect.
Will Shetterly
December 5, 2013 @ 7:07 pm
How do you know the people who say that have all white friends? I believe the color of a person’s skin is irrelevant. I have black friends–that’s why I believe it. I’m with Malcolm X, who said something toward the end of his life that should be better-known: “I believe in recognizing every human being as a human being–neither white, black, brown, or red; and when you are dealing with humanity as a family there’s no question of integration or intermarriage. It’s just one human being marrying another human being or one human being living around and with another human being.”
You seem to be assuming all PoC are identitarians or Critical Race Theorists. That’s not true. I recommend two short pieces on the web by black leftists who reject the middle-class liberal beliefs of modern antiracism theory, Adolph Reed Jr.’s “The limits of anti-racism” and the Rev. Thandeka’s “Why Anti-Racism Will Fail”.
Michi Trota (@GeekMelange)
December 5, 2013 @ 7:26 pm
When it comes to how you treat individuals and their worth and humanity, that’s great!
When it comes to how *society and culture* treats individuals and judges their worth & humanity… actually, a person’s skin color is highly relevant because we still live in a white dominant society and skin color still very much affects how people are treated, both consciously and unthinkingly. Ignoring that fact is part of the problem that Jim and others like him is trying to address.
Sally
December 5, 2013 @ 7:50 pm
Oh hell yes. Jim, you have hit the nail on the head here. Dysfunctional, if not downright abusive.
As a white cis straight person who’s always had some level of financial security, I know I’ve done privileged things, and being called on them does not insult me. I feel bad for hurting someone, and dumb for not knowing better. But I am not insulted, nor do I take it as an affront to my personal conception of myself. I apologize, make a note not to do that again, and move on. If a PoC or LGBTQ person then uses this incident as an anecdote, I don’t mind. Even if I can’t figure out how I was at fault, I take their word that I was. If accusations happen repeatedly, it’s probably my behavior.
Similarly, I don’t presume all men are sexist ass-hats, nor all able-bodied people malicious ass-hats, even though many men have been frighteningly sexist to me, and a number of people not accomodating.
I have speeding tickets, parking tickets, and have probably not been entirely forthcoming on my taxes. These are crimes, I did them, yet I am not a criminal (You may ask the FBI, I passed a background check). I resolve not to do the bad things again.
It’s a fair cop, in all cases.
Jim C. Hines
December 5, 2013 @ 7:56 pm
Veronica – Good point, thank you.
Jim C. Hines
December 5, 2013 @ 7:58 pm
Good points all, thank you!
Sally
December 5, 2013 @ 7:58 pm
Nora, can I put in for an appointment to have Jim talk to you for me? That’s how we have to do it, right?
Johnathan Knight
December 5, 2013 @ 8:11 pm
Michi,
I can’t respond to your comment because the thread is that far down. I can only hope you read this response.
I don’t think expressing curiosity and interest is a sign of disrespect. The insinuation that it is seems like more than a small stretch to me.
Johnathan Knight
December 5, 2013 @ 8:15 pm
Veronica,
I disagree with you. To quote Hines from above:
“I’m willing to have this conversation with you, but not if you intend to be arbiter of other people’s pain. You don’t get to decide that other people haven’t *really* been hurt. You don’t get to dismiss people’s pain as just “some hurt feelings.” You don’t get to tell people they haven’t *really* been damaged by mere words.”
I think that quote fits here. To be consistent, I think it’s important to realize that you can’t apply rules in certain approved situations, but ignore them in others.
You’re clearly dismissing pain here, and you’re clearly trying to decide that other people haven’t *really* been hurt.
Johnathan Knight
December 5, 2013 @ 8:18 pm
Jinian, you wrote:
“Kind of sounds like the hearer’s problem to me.”
To me, this sounds very much like you’re dismissing other opinions and trying to decide that others haven’t *really* been hurt.
To quote Hines from above:
“I’m willing to have this conversation with you, but not if you intend to be arbiter of other people’s pain. You don’t get to decide that other people haven’t *really* been hurt. You don’t get to dismiss people’s pain as just “some hurt feelings.” You don’t get to tell people they haven’t *really* been damaged by mere words.”
I really think this is a strong quote of his. To be consistent, I believe it has to be applied across the board. Not just when it benefits your side of the fence.
Jim C. Hines
December 5, 2013 @ 8:30 pm
Johnathan,
I’ve written about the false accusations issue in the context of sexual assault at http://www.jimchines.com/2010/07/false-rape-reports/
While this isn’t the same situation, there are definite similarities. I think one of the important ones is how it derails conversations. This started out as a blog post about racism and sexism and trying to make fandom a more welcoming place for a more diverse range of people. You’ve very determinedly pulled the conversation away from those topics and onto your fears — perhaps real, perhaps just “devil’s advocate” — about false accusations of racism.
I also find it frustrating when people emphasize the fear of being falsely accused of racism, rape, whatever as more important than *actual* racism, rape, etc.
I’m not saying you think protecting white people from false accusations of racism is a more important problem than racism. I don’t know what you believe. But it seems like you’re spending a lot more energy trying to steer the conversation toward false accusations than you are trying to address the original problem being discussed.
GW
December 5, 2013 @ 8:33 pm
This. The neighborhood I grew up in was a case in point–it was no longer redlined when my parents moved there in the 70s, but we had NO neighbors who weren’t white until almost the year 2000.
This was in Silver Spring, Maryland, right outside Washington DC. In other words, no way in hell was it merely a matter of demographics; a glance at the surrounding communities would be enough to tell you that. And because real estate turnover in that neighborhood is and was very slow, it took a looooong time after that policy was rescinded for things to change.
S. L. Gray
December 5, 2013 @ 8:34 pm
You know, Johnathan. When you claimed to be arguing as devil’s advocate, I thought you were doing so because you had a vested interest in the conversation.
Now that you’ve admitted that you’ve never been on the other side of this argument, i.e. accused unjustly of racism, and that you’re just challenging opinions because you’re curious as to how others will respond, I’m wondering what your ultimate goal here is.
It doesn’t seem to be understanding. When people explain themselves, your response, several times now, is a repetition of ‘you’re being dismissive’. And yet it’s not -you- being dismissed, because as you’ve made clear, you have no dog in this fight, so… what exactly do you want out of your participation?
To answer the question for myself: I like to see other points of view and I always hope that by engaging with people who might differ from me, that we all understand a little more of the people in the world around us and learn to -think- before speaking or acting. I love this stuff, even if it ultimately frustrates or upsets me.
Why did you choose to engage?
Johnathan Knight
December 5, 2013 @ 8:50 pm
I agree that it’s important to, say, tell bullies that they’re bullying. I think it’s important for society to hold folks to high standards, absolutely.
However, personally, I object to any statement that condemns someone for being old. Or for being a particular sex. Or for being a particular race.
“Why” you think someone was motivated to do something bad is, in my opinion, completely irrelevant. If you think what they said was bad or damaging, then argue the instance. “Saying such and such was bad, in my opinion, because…” As opposed to saying, “Old, white men suck.”
Johnathan Knight
December 5, 2013 @ 8:54 pm
Assuming that the pronounced judgment is correct, I agree. There’s no problem in calling a racist a racist. The danger, at least in my mind, is when the accuser has become self-righteous and overly certain that their judgment is infallible.
Sometimes I get this know-it-all vibe from folks who throw the term around. This sense of superiority, as if they alone are privy to what’s acceptable and what’s not. It becomes less of a conversation, and more of a demeaning lecture.
Johnathan Knight
December 5, 2013 @ 9:11 pm
Jim, my apologies for any derailment. I’ll certainly stop the comments; this is your blog, not mine. It’s important to me to honor the etiquette you prefer in your space. To me, I was thinking that this side of the conversation would help in achieving the end goal, help figure out ways to address the problem and communicate the problem to those folks who might not understand where you’re coming from. Thanks for the link; I think I recall reading it, but I’ll check it out again.
***
S. L.,
My reasons for engaging were mostly:
1. To learn. To hear what others think. To challenge my own thoughts.
2. I have a young daughter, and I have several concerns regarding sexism in the world. It’s important to me to fully understand the pulse of where things are because she means so much to me.
3. I think if folks who think much of what I’m writing hear strong counter arguments, well, it might go a long way toward accomplishing the goal we all really want: a happier, more inclusive fandom.
4. I’m convinced that it’s really important that folks from different sides of the political fence talk more. The world is so polarized; it bothers me on a deep level. I really hate seeing that polarization in the speculative fiction world because I love speculative fiction. This genre pretty much raised me as a child. I feel like I owe it a lot.
Veronica Schanoes
December 5, 2013 @ 9:49 pm
Surely you’ve noticed that white people have different cultural traditions than nonwhite people? If you haven’t, I can assure you that people of color have noticed that.
I disagree that being treated like a curiosity has anything to do with judgment.
And no, being willing to include completely imaginary beings who are completely under your control because they don’t exist and so won’t challenge you in any way does not translate to including other humans.
Veronica Schanoes
December 5, 2013 @ 9:58 pm
2) It means being dismissed and treated with massive disrespect that is notably different from the treatment accorded other panelists. It means being interrupted (and yes, conversational analysis has found that men interrupt women, for instance, massively disproportionately–I have not researched any work done with respect to race, but if you’re interested, feel free to) and talked over. It means, as you’re doing here, having one’s experiences dismissed as insignificant and/or inaccurate.
A con isn’t your home.
3) Ah, epistemological solipsism: you haven’t noticed it, so it can’t be happening. Or, hey, here’s a thought: you might accord people the respect of being competent enough to accurately report their own experiences.
4) You can submit what you like, but you’re wrong–grabbing at black people’s hair, for instance, grabs often accompanied by utterly insulting comments, is completely about race.
6) I’m suggesting that if cons want to be places where PoC feel comfortable, they shouldn’t be honoring people who engage in chronic, overt, obnoxious racism. If that’s not something the con-runners want to worry about, that’s up to them, but then they don’t get to throw their hands up and wonder why PoC wouldn’t be comfortable there.
Veronica Schanoes
December 5, 2013 @ 10:00 pm
You don’t have to see it. People are telling you that it comes off as dismissive and trivializing. If you want to continue coming off as dismissive and trivializing, by all means, carry on. If you don’t, though, you’re going to have to accord other people’s views some consideration.
When something is deadly serious to me because it involves issues that batter at me every day, for somebody to come along all “Oh, hey, no big, I just want to shoot the breeze a bit,” yes, it is trivializing.
Veronica Schanoes
December 5, 2013 @ 10:07 pm
Those weren’t my words, Johnathan. Despite your use of the term “groupthink,” you don’t get to take something Jim said and act as though I have said it.
There is a real world, and in that real world, racism has caused vastly more damage of a vastly deeper kind to vastly more people than have “false accusations” of racism. I am according the possibility of this “pain” precisely as much respect as it deserves.
If you want to learn about sexism, I recommend actually listening to what people say and considering it for quite some time, even entertaining the possibility that they might be right, before automatically saying “nuh-uh.”
Veronica Schanoes
December 5, 2013 @ 10:12 pm
By the way, Johnathan, since you say you are interested in learning about sexism, let me point this out:
A few comments up, I noted that concerns about “false accusations” are almost always a way of taking attention away from a subordinated group and putting the spotlight back on the worries of the dominant group.
You dismissed the post that comment was in.
Then Jim came in and made the same point, with the example of how you have derailed this conversation.
Then you apologized for derailing.
Now, you can and probably will play this off as being a result of this being Jim’s blog, or Jim being a nicer person than me (probably; that’s not hard), or reasons. But the fact remains–and is validated by sociologists who study conversation–that repeatedly in meetings, people ignore points made by women only to greet those same points with applause and consideration when they’re restated by men. And I’m sure all those people think they have good reasons, too.
Veronica Schanoes
December 5, 2013 @ 10:17 pm
I don’t feel compelled to judge it; rest assured that this conversation and my decisions with respect to it are completely voluntary and made of my own free will. I am judging it because it is relevant to whether or not I trust your assessment of people being called racist for being white.
Feel what you like; I cannot stop you. But I have read every single one of your comments in this thread, and that is what I am basing my judgment on. You may not like that judgment, but that is no excuse for pretending it is based on anything other than your words.
Why on earth would it matter to me whether or not you dislike me?
Johnathan Knight
December 5, 2013 @ 10:19 pm
Veronica,
Regarding your last three posts, I pretty much disagree. I think the irony embedded in many of your arguments is pretty clear.
Whether you find my curiosity trivializing or not is honestly irrelevant, in my opinion. People aren’t going to stop talking about things because you want them to, or because you think they should do so in a more passionate manner. Simply put, you’re coming across, to me at least, as someone who demonizes anyone who disagrees with you. Talk about trivializing, good grief.
Regarding your comment about epistemological solipsism: it’s not solipsism to point out that the sky is blue when someone is yapping their head off about it being green. You can say all day long that I’m waving away someone else’s estimation of things, but all your doing is waving away mine. Which happens to be a viewpoint shared by others, and happens to be plainly obvious and observable. In other words, show me some video of this gawking. Show me some video of these racists grabbing hair and making vile comments.
The unfortunate problem is that you haven’t shown “chronic, overt, obnoxious racism” and you refuse to do so. Instead you insist that there’s something wrong with me for just not automatically *agreeing* with you. As if you’ve been appointed the self-righteous judge of all that’s right and wrong. It’s almost laughable.
Anyway, I won’t be commenting anymore on this because I believe Jim would prefer that I refrain, and it’s his blog, so it is what it is. But, for what it’s worth, while certain arguments might not have much opportunity to be made here, please don’t convince yourself that they’re not being made out there, in the world with the problems you at least ostensibly want to solve. Out there, they can’t be shoved aside and ignored. Not if progress is actually an end goal.
Johnathan Knight
December 5, 2013 @ 10:27 pm
Veronica,
To respond to your last comment in this chain of comments: I completely disagree with Jim’s thoughts about this topic derailing the conversation. Personally, I think it’s a weak attempt at avoiding the conversation because it shows demonstrable inconsistency in the argument being presented. Thus, or so it seems to me, anyone putting the thought forward is asked to stop.
Perhaps I’m wrong. But it’s what I think. It’s what I think when you say it, and it’s what I think when Jim says it.
However, as you’ve guessed, this is Jim’s blog. His blog, his rules. I would afford you the same respect on your blog, without a doubt. Shrug.
Laura Resnick
December 5, 2013 @ 10:43 pm
Now that you mention it Stacy, I know a number of teens, they’re all readers, and they all read a lot of sf/f. But they’re reading stuff written recently, not 30-40-50 years ago, and when I think about what they routinely tell me they’re reading (and several of them told me at just last week at Thanksgiving what they’ve been reading in recent months), it’s stuff that connects with their generation (I don’t just mean YA, since some of them are also reading adult fiction)
Veronica Schanoes
December 5, 2013 @ 10:49 pm
In other words, show me some video of this gawking. Show me some video of these racists grabbing hair and making vile comments.
Ah, pics or it didn’t happen.
Seriously? You think this is actually a reasonable request? Are you under the impression that black people carry video cameras around during their daily lives in order to capture every racist experience and prove it to you? You demand video proof before you believe that people of color might just have insight into their experiences of racism that you don’t have, and yet you think I’ve set myself up as a self-righteous arbiter of right and wrong?
Now, as to the rest of it:
Whether you find my curiosity trivializing or not is honestly irrelevant, in my opinion.
So, you’re going to carry on. That’s fine. But this is an example of the kind of disrespect that elicits a similarly disrespectful response. You don’t care if I and others find your approach trivializing? Okey-dokey. Well, I don’t care whether or not you think I’m coming across as somebody who demonizes people who disagree with me. (I don’t feel the need to demonize; human beings are wretched enough.)
it’s not solipsism to point out that the sky is blue when someone is yapping their head off about it being green.
Except black people, to take an example, are black all the time. So they are far more likely to be present when someone points or gawks than a white person who may or may not be in the room at the time, and may or may not be talking to somebody else. Somebody saying “X happened to me” is not the equivalent of remarking on the color of the sky. You don’t get to say “No, it didn’t,” unless you have some pretty solid reasons. And “I didn’t see it” isn’t good enough. I’ve never seen any of my students drink till he or she pukes, but that doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened.
The unfortunate problem is that you haven’t shown “chronic, overt, obnoxious racism” and you refuse to do so.
No, that’s not the problem. You didn’t come here and say “Can you direct me to some examples of racism in fandom?” You came in here with deep, loquacious concern about false accusations. I am not sure why you think I should have divined that your secret desire was to see evidence of racism, particularly when you dismiss all reports of racism as statements that the sky is green.
while certain arguments might not have much opportunity to be made here, please don’t convince yourself that they’re not being made out there, in the world with the problems you at least ostensibly want to solve. Out there, they can’t be shoved aside and ignored. Not if progress is actually an end goal.
Why on earth would you think I’m not aware of the kinds of arguments being made outside Jim’s blog? Believe me, nothing you have written is particularly original or novel. And just as you are unconvinced by anything I have said, so too have you failed to convince me that anything you have said has any more legitimacy now than it had the first ten times I heard it.
Progress is made in all kinds of ways, and it needs all kinds of tactics. I’m not worried about the ones I’ve chosen.
Erica
December 5, 2013 @ 11:34 pm
There’s a big difference between saying the color of someone’s skin (or their gender or orientation) should be irrelevant and saying it actually is irrelevant. These things do matter in the world of fandom, just as they do in other segments of society. If they didn’t, we’d see people from all walks of life represented proportionally. Pretending to be color blind (and pretending that color blindness is a virtue given the current situation) seems an awful lot like burying our heads in the sand.
Kiri Aradia Morgan
December 6, 2013 @ 12:12 am
I don’t think you got my point.
Nobody’s condemning old people for being old.
However, when you’re talking about a large group of old white men, a group where they’re the majority and the ones making the rules? You’re talking about a group of people who grew up in a different era and were taught to believe that they just happened to have more power than others because that was how it was supposed to be. Some of them questioned and rejected those ideas but they all grew up marinated in them. The world is still full of sexism and racism and homophobia and transphobia but it’s a lot less socially acceptable to express it in public than it once was and people have more legal protections, which means that younger people are growing up with less of it. More kids feel safe coming out in high school, for instance.
When you take a bunch of people who grew up unconsciously believing that the power they had was supposed to be theirs and put them in an environment where they get to make the rules and where their tastes and interests are dominant, it’s natural for people who are not part of that group to be nervous about being there. Will the stuff they like and relate to be represented at all, and if so, will it be treated with respect? (For instance–from the original Star Trek series to Sailor Moon to Twilight, women in fandom have experienced mockery and derision from general SF fandom when they happen to like things that are just not as popular with men as they are with women.)
And will they be safe? Will they have to put up with a lot of racist/sexist/homophobic remarks? Will people take them seriously if they complain about harassment or will they be expected to accept and even expect that sort of behaviour?
And speaking as a woman, when it comes to baby boomer men who grew up with the “sexual revolution”, a lot of older guys don’t want to accept that some of the dating/mating tactics of their youth are now considered boorish at best if not predatory. I mean, if you’re terrified of facing harassment charges because you’re not allowed to hit on strange women in elevators any more, the problem is not changing times, it’s lack of creativity.
Stephanie
December 6, 2013 @ 4:53 am
Brian – I can honestly say “the color of my friends’ skin is irrelevant”. I have white friends and Chinese friends and black friends and Filipino friends. My roommates have run the gamut from white male to Chinese female, from straight to gay to polyamourous, from Christian to Buddhist to atheist to pagan..
If you can honestly say “In my experience, the people who say this… have all white friends, so of course it’s irrelevant.” perhaps the problem is the people you associate with.
Mary Dell
December 6, 2013 @ 7:09 am
It’s clear that you don’t think people’s own accounts of their experiences are reliable or truthful, so I am done discussing this or anything else with you.
Jim C. Hines
December 6, 2013 @ 7:24 am
Stephanie – Obviously, I don’t know your friends. But I suspect skin color is not irrelevant to some of them, at least in terms of how they’re treated and the challenges they may or may not face.
Stephanie
December 6, 2013 @ 7:36 am
Stephanie – Obviously, I don’t know your friends. But I suspect skin color is not irrelevant to some of them, at least in terms of how they’re treated and the challenges they may or may not face.
I rather thought that the context of a statement such as the color of my friends’ skin is irrelevant, made directly in response to “In my experience, the people who say this… have all white friends, so of course it’s irrelevant.” obviously was that the color of their skin was irrelevant to me not that it was irrelevant to them.
While I cannot ever understand totally what it means to be a non-white person in today’s America I am aware of at least some of the problems and attitudes my non-white friends face.
Jim C. Hines
December 6, 2013 @ 7:44 am
Sorry – Your comment sounded very similar to the claims of “colorblindness” I see from folks. Thanks for clarifying that this isn’t what you meant.
Sabrina Vourvoulias
December 6, 2013 @ 8:42 am
“The world is still full of sexism and racism and homophobia and transphobia but it’s a lot less socially acceptable to express it in public than it once was and people have more legal protections, which means that younger people are growing up with less of it.”
Ummm, it might comforting to think that racism has been generationally diminished, but it just isn’t so. In the newspaper I edit, much of the overt racism (some of it deadly) that we report happening against immigrants and Latin@s is perpetrated by young adults (see Luis Ramirez’s beating death in Shenandoah, Pa. as an example, or Marcelo Lucero’s beating death in Suffolk County, NY) and those in their 30s & 40s. The Twitterverse fills with unselfconscious anti-Latino rants anytime a Latino sings the national anthem at a sporting event (google Marc Anthony or Sebastian de la Cruz and national anthem) or when ESPN or another mainstream media organization allows people to speak or sing in Spanish (see recent American Music Awards) and most of those tweeting out their racist crap aren’t of any “golden age” generation. One of the preferred ways of slurring Latino kids in middle school is to call them illegals (as my daughter was a few years ago).
As a cranky, old WoC, I bristle at the equation of age with racism (sexism, homophobia, etc.) people so casually shore up in language and argument here and elsewhere. And am heartily fed up with the fable that the young are all (or even in their majority in SFF or otherwise) doing the heavy lifting where racial and social justice matters are concerned. Hazme el chingado favor.
Johnathan Knight
December 6, 2013 @ 9:07 am
Personally, I’m a big fan of more female lead characters. I’m a single dad of a young daughter, and it’s important to me to be able to supply her with strong (for lack of a better word) role models.
And as I mentioned, I’m all for calling out obnoxious behavior where it exists, and I’m all for making sure folks are legally protected.
But to say that older folks aren’t trashed for being older, well, I don’t know that I agree. I don’t think it’s the intention of folks who do it to do so, but a lot of the Malzberg/Resnick criticism made me extremely uncomfortable. From my perspective, a lot of it went too far, and the two were attacked for being old just as often as for what they said (which I maintain wasn’t actually sexist given all the details).
I do believe a lot of subtle sexism exists in the fandom, even though I’m not convinced there’s a lot of blatant, systemic sexism happening. But I think the subtle sexism is bad enough, so I don’t want to split hairs over what’s subtle and what’s blatant.
Anyway, when I look at what’s happening around me, I see a whole bunch of mixed signals. For instance, it’s bad to hit on a woman by being persistent or touchy/feely, not just touchy in a vulgar grab sense, but also in a knee or arm sense. But that said, some women (heck, a lot of women) seem to respond favorably to the “alpha” male approach. Frankly, I don’t think most people care how they express interest, so long as however they do produces results. If, for example, men found that their “alpha” game didn’t work, they wouldn’t use it. So: mixed signal.
Consider the old argument: it’s bad to have women in chain mail bikinis on a book cover, but there’s nothing wrong with the objectification of men on book covers. The Conan look, or the unlikely washboard stomach shown on so many covers. I think Jim here put forward the idea that it’s bad because it actually only objectifies women, whereas it empowers men. I always had trouble with that argument, mostly for two reasons. One, it doesn’t empower men with flabby bellies. It makes them feel bad for not having a chiseled body. And two, while at conventions, I happen to see far more women being empowered via cosplay than I do men.
Johnathan Knight
December 6, 2013 @ 9:12 am
You wrote: “Why on earth would it matter to me whether or not you dislike me?”
It’s your choice whether it matters to you, obviously. However, “why” would it potentially matter to you?
Because sometimes it’s worth knowing that everyone you’re talking to isn’t out to get you or hurt you. Everyone you disagree with isn’t twirling a mustache, plotting ways to make your life worse.
Sometimes it’s worth knowing that you can have a calm, logical discussion without trying to bash the other person or turn disagreements into battles.
Johnathan Knight
December 6, 2013 @ 9:15 am
This isn’t true. Well, the bit about what you think is clear about me isn’t true. the bit about you being done discussing it with me may certainly be true.
I accept that some folks lie, however, I also accept that people have accounts, and that those accounts are often true. I question whether those accounts are sufficient examples of a systemic problem though.
Jim C. Hines
December 6, 2013 @ 9:18 am
“I think Jim here put forward the idea that it’s bad because it actually only objectifies women, whereas it empowers men.”
That’s not the argument I made, no. I talk about this a bit here: http://www.jimchines.com/2012/04/posing-like-a-man/
Jim C. Hines
December 6, 2013 @ 9:22 am
“If, for example, men found that their “alpha” game didn’t work, they wouldn’t use it. So: mixed signal.”
If rapists found that their approach to committing rape didn’t work, they wouldn’t do it. That doesn’t make what they’re doing okay.
I don’t believe you’re condoning rape. But your argument here about the “alpha male” approach comes off to me as pretty damn creepy.
Johnathan Knight
December 6, 2013 @ 9:25 am
To respond to: pictures or it didn’t happen.
I’m sure there are honest individual accounts of bad things happening. I’m sure there are some stories that are made up or heavily exaggerated also. That’s life. People are like that.
However, you’re trying to paint a picture of a chronic problem. None of this adds up to a chronic problem. You seem to be pointing to a tiny bit of hearsay, making a big accusation, then huffing and puffing when someone questions you. When you make big statements, sometimes you need big facts backing you up.
As you wrote: black people are black all the time.
Again, Veronica, you’re trying to paint the picture of a chronic problem. But then you’re switching hands and saying that the problem is really more of a secret rendezvous problem that only happens when I’m not around, or any other nonblind person like myself who asks similar questions.
None of this passes the smell test.
You wrote: deep, loquacious concerns.
Clearly, the response to false accusation concerns is proof that the accusations aren’t false. Because there’s a chronic problem.
In no way did I dismiss all reports of racism as the sky being green. That’s a grossly unfair portrayal of my comment.
Paraphrased, you wrote: progress needs people acting like me too!
Shrug. I disagree.
Johnathan Knight
December 6, 2013 @ 9:30 am
Jim,
First, you’re correct. I’m not condoning rape.
Second, I don’t see the similarity. Rape is something that happens without consent.
If this “alpha” game works, it’s not working without consent. It’s completely different. Conflating the two things seems super odd, to me.
Jim C. Hines
December 6, 2013 @ 9:35 am
And that’s one of the reasons I find your argument creepy. Because it treats the whole thing as a game. Because it lacks any consideration for when the “game” doesn’t work, and the effects that has. Because you assume consent, when some of the things you describe about the approach sound like touching people without permission, ignoring boundaries, and playing the “Getting to Yes” game, battering away at the “No” with the goal of wearing down her defenses.
Veronica Schanoes
December 6, 2013 @ 9:43 am
Because sometimes it’s worth knowing that everyone you’re talking to isn’t out to get you or hurt you.
…yes?
Your assumption here, as in other places, that you’re telling me anything I don’t already know is a strange one. Do consider the possibility I have been around the block more than a few times and don’t really care one way or the other about your personal feelings toward me.
Sometimes it’s worth knowing that you can have a calm, logical discussion without trying to bash the other person or turn disagreements into battles.
Again, I find it fascinating that you seem to imply that this is news to me, and the concomitant implication that I need your tutelage in this area. I have not bashed you; any bashing you feel is projection. Your dislike of my arguments is not actually insight into my emotional state, but I have noticed that people who find their political dominance challenged often interpret that challenge as illogical and overly emotional (not “calm”).
Many disagreements do not have to be battles: a preference for tiramisu over ice cream, for instance. But political disagreements about issues that have injured people’s lives are indeed significant–they are not mere thought exercises. Those are battles worth fighting.
Veronica Schanoes
December 6, 2013 @ 9:56 am
You are becoming absurd. You referred to black and white different experiences of racism as “people yapping about the sky being green” and then object to that characterization? Choose your words more carefully, then. You made the comparison, not me.
But then you’re switching hands and saying that the problem is really more of a secret rendezvous problem that only happens when I’m not around, or any other nonblind person like myself who asks similar questions.
I’m saying that I consider people of color reporting on their own experiences with racism to be far more reliable sources than white people who are baffled as to how anything could happen while escaping their eagle eyes. This does not require any secret rendez-vous. It requires only that you be occupied with your own concerns and not paying attention to the experiences of random other people in the room. It requires only that you, as somebody who doesn’t have to worry about racism, not be aware of what other people, who do, go through. Given the surprise with which many men greet women’s experiences of everyday sexual harassment–the kind of thing we take for granted–it is all too likely that white people are similarly ignorant.
The idea that for things to happen that you don’t know about, secret rendez-vous must be in play is so…self-aggrandizing that I’m really not sure how you can seriously advance it.
Clearly, the response to false accusation concerns is proof that the accusations aren’t false.
Ah, you mistake the conversational dynamic. You are under the impression that you set the agenda, and therefore I am responsible for responding to your concerns. No. The concern here, as stated quite evidently in the post, is racist exclusion in fandom. If you wish to demonstrate that false accusations are an issue worth addressing, then you need to provide proof that false accusations occur at some significant rate. You have not done that–all you have done is assert, without details, without context, that you, personally, have seen them.
Go ahead and disagree. Having studied social movements in some detail, I am unmoved by your disagreement re: tactics.
Johnathan Knight
December 6, 2013 @ 9:57 am
That’s fair, I suppose. I see where you’re coming from, and I can appreciate the creepiness. Certainly, it’s not fair to those who don’t want that sort of approach. To be honest, I’m only vaguely familiar with what the “alpha” game is, but as I understand it, a lot of folks consider the whole of mating to be somewhat of a game.
Often, each side works hard to mischaracterize the arguments of the other, so I appreciate this opportunity to discuss the subject matter candidly.
I think the other side of the coin would say that it’s not about wearing down defenses so much as it’s about being the type of person (most) women, by and large, find attractive. Which is to say someone who doesn’t wallow in the “friend zone”, but rather displays confidence, energy, and I suppose interest.
In my mind, this leads to this question: is it fair that everyone who actually enjoys the “game”, both men and women, are no longer allowed to enjoy it anymore because of a handful of people who are creeped out by it? If that’s how men and women are successfully and joyfully mating, well, is it fair to take that away from them?
Or does it make more sense for the person who finds it creepy to shut it down verbally early on? For instance, say you’re in an elevator (do guys really hit on girls in elevators?) and you start working your “game” on someone who isn’t interested . . . should that never happen to those who like it, or should the female who doesn’t like it just say, “Please stop. I’m not interested. You’re making me uncomfortable.”
And isn’t saying that empowering?
We live in a world of free speech, where anybody can ask anyone else out on a date. It’s not illegal, right. Sometimes it makes for some very uncomfortable moments, but isn’t that part of life? Should we enable one another to be delicate snowflakes, or should we empower one another to say what we think and stand up for ourselves when it matters?
Johnathan Knight
December 6, 2013 @ 10:13 am
You wrote: the onus is on me.
I disagree. The topic/concern (racist exclusion in fandom) begs a question.
Michi Trota (@GeekMelange)
December 6, 2013 @ 10:14 am
The fact that you are unable to grok why Jim has pointed out what you’ve been doing is derailing to a conversation – even if you don’t mean to (and I honestly don’t think you did mean to), indicates that you’re missing one of the more fundamental points of how power & privilege in social structures work. Jim wrote about how to make fandom more welcoming to marginalized groups by addressing their concerns and the exclusion we’ve had to deal with, rather than sweeping those problems under the rug. Instead of keeping the focus on those pervasive problems (which you seem to agree are problems that exist and need to be addressed), you ended up yanking the conversation toward “White people can be falsely accused of racism, you know!” thereby shifting the focus toward what you considered important to talk about, which was about protecting an already socially privileged group from what ifs rather than maintaining the discussion about a problem that most definitely affects socially oppressed/marginalized people. Further, this ignores the fact that societal default is that white people are overwhelmingly defended and given the benefit of the doubt already when it’s pointed out something they did or said could be interpreted as racist. It is already an uphill battle in social criticism when pointing out how actions or words reflect racism.
This is problematic because it reflects once again, how easy it is for the fears of the socially privileged to trump and dominate discussions initially focused on addressing the concerns of the socially marginalized. This happens with frustrating frequency – discussions about issues affecting primarily women become about how “it happens to men, too,” for example, and while said issue may (and likely does) affect men, too, it’s immensely disconcerting because it would be nice if, for once, that one space/discussion could remain focused on the concerns of people who are socially marginalized, since out in the rest of the world, we’re often ignored anyway. It’s not that you can’t ever talk about how discrimination can affect white people or how patriarchy hurts men, too, for example, but there are appropriate times and spaces to talk about those things – neither of which includes spaces where the conversation is *focused* on addressing issues that affect socially marginalized groups.
And I’m not saying this is something you are doing *consciously or on purpose*, but again, intent isn’t magic and the fact that the conversation was yanked from discussing the issue of inclusion and making fandom more welcoming to marginalized people by addressing racism and sexism (among other forms of discrimination) is the inescapable result.
As Jim said, “it seems like you’re spending a lot more energy trying to steer the conversation toward false accusations than you are trying to address the original problem being discussed.”
Johnathan Knight
December 6, 2013 @ 10:15 am
Thank you. I was worried I might have misworded you. I should have double checked your position first.
Michi Trota (@GeekMelange)
December 6, 2013 @ 10:21 am
Exactly. Wanting to learn more about these things because you genuinely want to help is fine and encouraged even. No one’s saying that’s wrong, so please put that strawman away. What both Veronica and I are saying is that when you’re coming off as “Well, this is no big deal for me, I’m just curious” when asking about a topic that causes actual harm to people, it’s like you’re treating the problem as an entertaining game, which is insulting to people who actually have to deal with it.
Johnathan Knight
December 6, 2013 @ 10:36 am
Michi,
This is a very smart comment. After reading it, I have a much better idea of where you’re coming from. Thank you.
I’ll give this a lot of thought.
Unfortunately, I don’t know what else can be done to make environments more inclusive, but I will think heavily on the issue. My gut tells me that things like “safe spaces” are really bad ideas. Specifically, because it segregates.
lkeke35
December 6, 2013 @ 10:45 am
You probably want to strike a balance with that though. Too enthusiastic a response is probably going to come off a little Stepford and likely to creep a person out. 😀
The last time I went to a Con, I didn’t feel unwelcome, exactly, but I did spend a lot of time wandering about alone.
I had the impression from the other attendees and co-workers that they didn’t know what to make of me although they weren’t exactly rude. I was friendly and initiatated a couple of conversations but no one approached me and quite a few people looked genuinely puzzled that I was there.
Also, there were no other PoC, although there were plenty of other women (which I sort of took for granted). I haven’t attended a Con since then and that was 20 years ago. I’m not inspired to do so now, after some of the horrific things I’ve read on the ‘net about how people have been behaving.
Elizabeth Mancz
December 6, 2013 @ 11:00 am
Might I suggest the following film clip – by Jay Smooth – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0Ti-gkJiXc It’s rather well known – in it, Mr. Smooth talks about how to tell someone that what they said was racist. He makes the point that this is NOT the same as calling them “racist” – and that to do so is bad strategy in any case. Obviously, the same logic applies to dealing with a person who says something sexist, or homophobic, etc.
I am an archaeologist who teaches anthropology – Cultural Anthropology, evolution and Human Diversity at the university level. I’ve done so for almost 30 years. I think one of the factors confusing this conversation is what I have called to my students “unconscious racism/sexism/homophobia”. One of the commenters actually described the situation (sorry, I forgot your name!). People who are brought up in a culture which holds certain beliefs can take those as the natural order of the world, and so true. Frequently, such people have never really examined these ideas/concepts at all closely – they just accept them. In the Doubleclicks’ song, Nothing to Prove, one of the young women holds up a sign saying “why are you so surprised that I want to be an astronaut?” This is an example of that sort of mentality. Obviously some people do examine the cultural foundations they were raised with and reject those which they find cruel, or biased. Others do not. Speaking as a 58 year old woman, I have to say that those of us who are older have more of these than my students do. My mother, who will be 88 this month, for example, as a non-English speaking child was taught to call Brazil nuts “nigger toes”. She was in her teens before she found out that that was not the correct name (1940s). And it was not for another 30 years that the term “nigger” was recognized as the hurtful term that it is. (She ended up as head librarian in a branch that was pretty evenly mixed in terms of race, and was very popular there, evidence that anyone, no matter what their age, can overcome the teachings of their childhood.)
If many of the offenders are old, does that make person ageist to point that out? I don’t think so. As John Scalzi pointed out in his SWM series, pointing out that SWMs are privileged does not mean that we intend to defenestrate them into a courtyard full of pointy stakes at noon.
I’ll stop now… Sorry about the screed – one of the letters pushed my “teach button”.
Michi Trota (@GeekMelange)
December 6, 2013 @ 11:07 am
This is a concern I’ve seen expressed many times, and the overwhelming majority of the time it comes from people of privilege. I think it comes from a place of good intentions, but I think it discounts how alienating it can be when you’re not part of the majority/power structure, and how important is is to be with people who, like you, deal with microaggressions, systemic discrimination, and so on, in direct ways that people with varying kinds of privilege just won’t get at a gut level because while they may empathize (and that’s good!), it’s still not quite the same.
There’s this comic by Robot Hugs, which I wish I’d included in my previous comment because it illustrates the concept nearly perfectly: http://www.robot-hugs.com/but-men/
Just think about it for a second how tiring it can be as, say, a woman of color, who is discussing how racism and sexism intersect in her life with other women of color, only to have a (oft-times well-meaning) white woman come in and say something that reflects unexamined racism, which leads to the conversation stopping and having to circle back to address the problematic elements in that white woman’s statement. At best, it leads to some progress – at worst, it leads to defensive digging in, flared tempers and one massive headache for everyone involved. This happens on practically an every day basis and those “safe spaces” provide an immeasurable amount of relief and respite from having to always be “on” and having to explain the basics over and over again. In my experience, it also provides reassurance that I’m not the only one who has dealt with problem A or problem B specific to my ethnicity or gender when I talk to people who share those traits with me. It also helps to refine arguments, suss out weak points and deepen one’s understanding of issues *precisely because there’s far less chance of having to divert energy to dealing with derailing or 101-ing the same damn issues over and over.*
Similarly, as a straight cis woman, I would never dream of barging in on a trans woman only safe space, or a queers only space, because the culture we live in is one giant cishetero space, so why would I possibly begrudge trans people or queer people their private corners where they don’t have to worry so much about catering to my cishetero privilege?
Having safe spaces for particular groups of people doesn’t mean that those people will never ever want to interact with anyone else outside of those shared identity groups. That’s damn near impossible, actually. I’m a woman of color living in a white male dominant society. I can’t ever escape interacting with white men because they’re the ones who are overwhelmingly in positions of authority and power. This is the social structure I live in and unless I want to go full on John Galt and take myself to a deserted island where there’s no WiFi or phone access with nothing but a Swiss Army knife, I will never, ever be truly segregated.
Ultimately, I think the concern over safe spaces & segregation rests on a few strawman assumptions: 1) Segregation is always bad; 2) self-selected segregation will inevitably result in total segregation and echo chamber mentality; and 3) segregation & safe spaces aren’t useful.
Jim C. Hines
December 6, 2013 @ 11:07 am
Wait, it doesn’t? Well, crap. What am I going to do with this order of 200 pointy stakes, not to mention my Happy Defenestration Day cake and banner???
Michi Trota (@GeekMelange)
December 6, 2013 @ 11:14 am
We go vampire hunting with the stakes, put some GIANT fluffy mattresses underneath the windows so we can all defenestrate ourselves for fun (no one said it had to be a HIGH window) and then just eat the cake? I mean, we really can’t let that stuff go to waste, now can we?
Jim C. Hines
December 6, 2013 @ 11:15 am
Along the same theme as the comic, I came across a joke yesterday. (And I can’t remember the source, dang it.) Slightly paraphrased:
“Why did the Vulcan cross the road?”
“Who’s there?”
“Wait, what? This isn’t a knock knock joke.”
“But don’t you know knock knock jokes happen sometimes too?”
Melani
December 6, 2013 @ 11:49 am
I don’t even know where to begin. Because you’re just… SO WRONG. I’m gonna start with your example. And interject a hypothetical experience that is far to close to many of experiences that have actually happened to me.
So I’m at a con. And doing it while female. A guy, who attends cons in my area a lot, wants to buy me a drink. I say no. He persists. It’s sexual harassment. I point this out to a friend and he says, that’s not sexual harassment and when I roll my eyes and say, it is but you just can’t see it because YOU’RE NOT IN MY SHOES his response (in your example) would be to say ““What do you mean I can’t see? I see this stuff plenty. Just not here.”-because in this case he’s a harmless dude who just wants to buy me a drink. why am I getting all bothered by it. I should be flattered. This isn’t harassment.
So even though this guy is ACTUALLY HARASSING me. And I know this, because I feel harassed, this friend of mine is dismissing it as non-existent. Because he doesn’t see it and so it doesn’t exist.
And when I tell him to stop being so male-privileged you’re telling me that I HURT HIS FEELINGS by dismissing his opinion? His opinion of an event THAT I EXPERIENCED? Seriously?
What you’re arguing here is that the opinion of an outside observer of an event is more important/relevant then the participants of the event. And when it comes to discrimination/harassment the opinion of the participants who experienced the racism/harassment do matter more then the perpetrator and they CERTAINLY matter more then an observer.
S. L. Gray
December 6, 2013 @ 11:58 am
You wrote:
“I question whether those accounts are sufficient examples of a systemic problem though.”
I can only suppose you question this because you haven’t been provided with the video evidence you asked for. Because you haven’t seen people being touched or pointed at or overheard anyone having their attendance either questioned or commented on.
But the fact that there are accounts from many events, from multiple places, from different people, both those who were personally involved and those who -have- witnessed these events really should be enough. It -is- enough for people who are -genuinely- interested in being allies and participating in the process of moving forward.
Instead, you’ve chosen to believe that these are flukes that only happen once in a while, or aren’t as bad as reported or are being overexaggerated in the retelling or aren’t happening at all. Insert any other handwaving here.
I’m glad you’re interested in trying to make fandom a safe space for your daughter. I do wonder what would happen if she came and reported an incident of harassment to you that you hadn’t witnessed personally. Still, I’m glad.
I just find it disheartening in the extreme that after spending a day+ reading people’s comments and discussion, you’ve chosen to remain willfully ignorant on this issue. Seems I was wrong about that whole ‘ignorance can be amended’ thing.
S. L. Gray
December 6, 2013 @ 12:06 pm
This.
Laura Resnick
December 6, 2013 @ 12:30 pm
You make a good point, Sabrina.
And, indeed, when I think of all the women who getting death threats, rape threats, called whore, c*nt, bitch, slut, get told to suck on the poster’s genitals, etc., etc. on Twitter, on blogs, on message boards, etc… No, these are not mysogynstic (or menacing and vicious) behaviors that I attribute to a particular age group.
Racism exists in any age group, too, of course.
Will Shetterly
December 6, 2013 @ 12:54 pm
A “white dominant society” is a vague term. If you mean it in the way that the Japanese live in an “Asian dominant society”, you’re right. But remember that more white Americans voted for Obama than for any Democrat in the last three decades. Most white Americans support equal rights and equal pay for everyone. Most white Americans support interracial marriage. Sure, there are still white racists, but they’re very much in the minority. Trying to measure the current effect of racism is difficult–studies of the “taxi test” suggest 1-2% of taxi drivers make racist choices in who they pick up. Subtler forms of racism are more common, of course. But if you want to measure them, try the race test at Project Implicit. A large minority of white Americans show no implicit preference or, like me, a preference for African-Americans. And that implicit preference may be irrelevant; the study notes that an implicit preference may not be a deciding factor in what people choose to do, especially if they’re concerned about the factors that go into their decisions. So white people who announce their racism, like Kate Harding, may not be racist in a meaningful way because they’re concerned about racism.
Will Shetterly
December 6, 2013 @ 12:59 pm
Who pretends to be colorblind? It’s only a metaphor. I could say that I’m colorblind when it comes to deciding who has attractive hair, but that wouldn’t mean I didn’t know what color people’s hair is. (For the record, I prefer dark hair and dark skin. But if you looked at my romantic history, you could say I was colorblind in those regards.)
Will Shetterly
December 6, 2013 @ 1:05 pm
What’s odd about identitarians claiming “you don’t think people’s own accounts of their experiences are reliable or truthful” is they also choose whose experiences to accept–they’ll embrace Obama’s and reject those of conservatives like Michelle Malkin or leftists like the Reverend Thandeka. There are religious people who see the working of Satan in everything that happens to them, just as there are antiracists like bell hooks who see the working of racism in everything that happens to her. Ideology shapes our perception. There are, for example, anti-semites who have been hurt by some Jews. That hardly validates their belief that all Jews are exploiters.
Jim C. Hines
December 6, 2013 @ 1:07 pm
Will – It’s quite common in these conversations for people to talk about being colorblind, or basically saying they just don’t see race, which ends up ignoring the very real struggles and problems we’re still dealing with when it comes to race.
If you’re not familiar with the ongoing conversation, there are a number of articles and discussions about the term. http://www.tolerance.org/magazine/number-36-fall-2009/feature/colorblindness-new-racism addresses some of it, and Google will pull up plenty of other reading material.
Jim C. Hines
December 6, 2013 @ 1:08 pm
Will,
This conversation has been derailed a fair amount already. Let’s please not go dragging more hypotheticals into the situation. Please stick with what people are actually saying.
Thanks!
Johnathan Knight
December 6, 2013 @ 1:12 pm
Everything you’ve said is interesting, and I accept that perhaps I’m having trouble understanding because I’m dumb.
For what it’s worth, I’m trying to not further derail any comments, but it only seems polite to respond to comments directly addressing me.
Anyway, here are my thoughts:
1. No. Your friend can not (or rather should not) dismiss the way *you* feel about something that happened to you. You have every right to feel as you do.
2. Your friend does, however, have every right to question whether or not the behavior is chronic and happening all over the place. Isolated incidents are not examples of a pandemic.
3. Your example didn’t show so much as a hint of harassment, as I understand the definition of the word to be. A guy offers to buy you a drink. That’s not harassment, in my opinion. You say no. Guy persists. Now that he’s persisted, maybe something bad is going on . . . but what does that mean? He offers again, like, “C’mon. Are you sure you don’t want a drink? How ’bout we just talk. You seem interesting.” That’s not harassment as I understand the definition of the word to be. That’s an annoying person who has to be told twice. Now, if by persist, you mean he assaulted you or started making very lewd comments, or suggested he’d get you a job if you offered some service in return then I’m seeing harassment, absolutely.
I honestly believe there’s a lot of harassment that goes on, and that harassment is a really bad thing. But I think it’s important to keep perspective on what’s harassment and what’s just normal life. In a pragmatic sense, it’s like The Boy Who Cried Wolf. The more folks feel alienated by being told these small slights deserve hefty accusations, the more they’re probably going to question the egregious examples. Because, and I don’t know another way to put this, suggesting that someone offering to buy a drink is guilty of harassment (an accusation that carries legal consequences), well, that mindset is so alien it’s unlikely most folks are ever going to understand where you’re coming from.
Jim C. Hines
December 6, 2013 @ 1:33 pm
Johnathan,
Could you take a step back for a second and look at what’s playing out here? Reframe the situation a little.
Bob comes to your house and starts kicking your dog.
You tell him to stop abusing your animal.
Bob says, “I’m not abusing him. There’s not even a hint of abuse in what I did, in my opinion.”
You persist in telling him that fine, maybe he’s not *killing* your dog, but this is hurtful.
Bob insists that this isn’t abuse by the definition he uses, and dismisses your concerns.
There’s a problem with lecturing the people on the receiving end of harassment what is and isn’t harassment … especially when you bring that whole privilege thing into the picture, meaning you don’t really know what it’s like to be in their shoes, you’re far less likely to be on the receiving end, and so on.
You’re right that some people will refuse to understand where people like Melani are coming from. But given how much people have tried to explain to you, at this point you’re *choosing* not to understand. Or perhaps you think you understand, but you’ve simply decided to disagree.
Jim C. Hines
December 6, 2013 @ 1:36 pm
Also, you’ve said several times that you wanted to stop derailing the conversation. A friend commented that you’ve made a full 25% of the comments on this post.
If you’re truly interested in understanding where people are coming from on this, I’d suggest trying a different ratio of listening:talking.
The phenoemenon of men coming into conversations of sexism, white people coming into conversations of race, and dominating it to make it all about *them* is familiar and tiresome. And while this may not have been your intention, it’s pretty much what’s happened here.
Thanks.
Michi Trota (@GeekMelange)
December 6, 2013 @ 1:45 pm
I honestly think you do think that harassment is a really bad thing. Most people do, actually. Thinking harassment is “ok” isn’t the problem so much as people’s understanding of what harassment is, how it manifests and how it’s handled. I can’t second Jim’s request that you please think about this and try reframing it a bit. you said that it’s important to keep perspective on what’s harassment and what’s “normal.” Just whose perspective is our culture coming from in determining what is harassment and what is “normal”? If you think it’s women whose perspective is determining what society sees as what is and isn’t sexual harassment, then why is it that we’re being told we’re wrong, we’re over-reacting, we’re “ruining” hetero interactions between men and women who might be flirting? Please do think about this.
Johnathan Knight
December 6, 2013 @ 1:46 pm
Oh, I definitely don’t understand. It’s not because I’ve chosen to disagree. It might be because I’m dumb. It might be because my brain works differently, or because I have a completely different worldview. I don’t know why. But I definitely don’t understand.
In my view, I think there’s danger in accepting any and everything as harassment. I honestly believe there’s some falling off the deep end stuff going on, and as much as I *want* to understand, I just don’t.
(I do understand that I’ve completely missed the point of your blog post and derailed way too much conversation. It took me a while to get it, but I do. Your point was to come up with ways to help places feel more inclusive, not to examine any begging question around the periphery. So I’ve pretty much blown it with all of my comments in that regard.)
Jim C. Hines
December 6, 2013 @ 1:48 pm
“I do understand that I’ve completely missed the point of your blog post and derailed way too much conversation. It took me a while to get it, but I do.”
Thanks for this. I’d appreciate it if you could back out of the conversation at this point. I genuinely think just listening might help you to better understand.
Emily
December 6, 2013 @ 1:51 pm
The color of my friends’ skin is very relevant to me. I know my friend who is an Arab is likely to be stopped at airport security and will get horrible assumptions made about who he is (Muslims hate America, right?). My friends who are Indian-American are likely to be harassed by Indian-American men (if female) and have horrible assumptions made about who they are (working at a call center? can you make Indian food for me? have you ridden an elephant?). My black friends are likely to be pulled over for driving while black. My Asian friends are all good at math, right?
It doesn’t matter that *I* don’t make assumptions based on race/background. Their skin color is important because I AM MAD that they have to live in a country where they are judged by their skin. And I want this to stop.
Will Shetterly
December 6, 2013 @ 2:18 pm
Oh, I stopped using the colorblind metaphor around 2007 when I learned that literalists have trouble with it. Metaphors are tricky.
Will Shetterly
December 6, 2013 @ 2:27 pm
Jim: “This conversation has been derailed a fair amount already. Let’s please not go dragging more hypotheticals into the situation. Please stick with what people are actually saying.”
I quoted Mary Dell to because I was “sticking with what people are actually saying”. Still, if that discussion seems like derailing to you, I’ll happily drop it.
Jim C. Hines
December 6, 2013 @ 2:31 pm
Will,
Not sure why you replied to Emily with this, but your comment said:
“…they’ll embrace Obama’s and reject those of conservatives like Michelle Malkin or leftists like the Reverend Thandeka. There are religious people who see the working of Satan in everything that happens to them … There are, for example, anti-semites who have been hurt by some Jews.”
None of this was quoting anyone. This was you pulling in hypothetical examples and further derailing. Thank you for stopping.
Will Shetterly
December 6, 2013 @ 4:02 pm
I’m not sure why that comment went to Emily either; my apologies to her for whatever happened there.
I quoted Mary Dell, who said, “you don’t think people’s own accounts of their experiences are reliable or truthful” I then spoke in generalities because it would be both unkind and incomplete to speak as if Mary was the only person who was guilty of doing what she was objecting to.
Veronica Schanoes
December 6, 2013 @ 5:07 pm
For instance, say you’re in an elevator (do guys really hit on girls in elevators?)
Yes. You see how you didn’t know this? This is an example of how your privileged standpoint prevented you from knowing an everyday fact of life for women, which is that men hit on us in all sorts of places, however inappropriate it may be. This is exactly what people are talking about.
is it fair that everyone who actually enjoys the “game”, both men and women, are no longer allowed to enjoy it anymore because of a handful of people who are creeped out by it? If that’s how men and women are successfully and joyfully mating, well, is it fair to take that away from them?
Successfully and joyfully for whom? What makes you think that the people who are creeped out are such a small minority and the people who enjoy it are in the majority? What makes you think that there isn’t a gender divide here (“men and women”)? What is up with all your assumptions?
Speaking up can get women assaulted. When a man is transgressing our boundaries, and behaving inappropriately, we have no way of knowing whether he’s harmless or likely to become violent. That’s not even taking into account the myriad ways women are strongly socialized to defer to men and avoid giving offense.
Further, why should the default be set to some dude’s comfort and not mine?
Elizabeth R. McClellan
December 6, 2013 @ 6:28 pm
I love how the comments on any article about racism prove the premise. And by “love” I mean “want to set on fire.” (The observation has been made previously in conjunction with articles about rape, but applies equally here.) 25% of the comments are one white man derailing about omg, false accusations! A significant part of the rest are people’s responses to the derail. And now a known racist misogynist harasser is here to tell people just how wrong they are about racism and to slam critical race theory by quoting the same two articles he always brings up in these discussions. Ugh. Countdown to a derail about classism being the real problem engaged.
Linkspam, 12/6/13 Edition — Radish Reviews
December 6, 2013 @ 6:52 pm
[…] a bit muddled because in the midst of this, there were new leaks from the SMOF mailing list. Then Jim C. Hines posted about being a recruiter of POC and then I got distracted by some other stuff and my […]
Veronica Schanoes
December 6, 2013 @ 8:04 pm
The topic/concern (racist exclusion in fandom) begs a question.
Not the one you think it does. The question it is begging for are “how can we work together to end racist exclusion?”
The fact that you think the most pressing issue to be raised is “what about hypothetical false accusations?” is only evidence of your inability to decenter white people’s worries for even the length of a conversation.
If you want me to take that issue seriously, you will have to provide video evidence that false accusations occur, and then statistical evidence that they occur at a significant rate. Your say-so is not good enough. It’s your job to carry around that video camera.
KatG
December 6, 2013 @ 8:22 pm
So basically, they were asking, “Hey Jim, why can’t you get those PoC to shut up and settle down instead of agreeing with them that we should be doing things to make them feel more welcome, given that they live in a racist society where they can be arrested, hit, grabbed and humiliated every day for the color of their skin?” You’re the PoC wrangler — you should be herding them properly so that they can look at them like exotic zoo animal aliens but not actually ever have to listen to them and feel uncomfortable. Problem solved.
The bright side of this is that it is actually (depressing) progress. Some of them are transitioning into the bargaining stage after denial and anger. They just want you to do the bargaining for them. And a lot of cons have gone much further, past the desire to defend white (male etc.) perfecthood and right to decide how everything is to actually talking to PoC, women, disabled, etc. about their needs and situations to improve their cons.
But seriously now, how many times did you bang your head on your desk after you encountered this? I’m thinking at least ten.
Jim C. Hines
December 6, 2013 @ 8:28 pm
By the end of the week, I think I was up to the triple digits.
Michi Trota (@GeekMelange)
December 6, 2013 @ 8:37 pm
I was imagining your reaction rather like this (because there’s an appropriate Stitch gif for nearly everything): http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lm571n04O61qi05wbo1_500.gif
Jim C. Hines
December 6, 2013 @ 8:38 pm
I think I need to save that one 😀
Will Shetterly
December 6, 2013 @ 8:41 pm
“racist misogynist harasser”? Really? I think my credentials are pretty solid: I have been beaten bloody by white racists for speaking up for equality. That’s literal blood and beating that I’ve endured opposing racism, mind you, not name-calling on the internet. The Feminist SF Wiki said my “work features strong women characters and people of color”. Yes, I’ve disagreed with people on public forums; if that’s your definition of harassment, as many have said before me, meh.
I cite those articles because they’re simple, short, and by people of color. No one can claim “white male privilege” had anything to do with their argument. I’ll happily cite articles by white men and women too, if you would prefer.
And, no, “classism” is not the real problem. I stopped using the word years ago when I realized that’s how identitarians cram class into their ideological framework, for all that it fits oddly there. As Matt Bruenig noted, identitarians do not want their social identity to disappear, but justice for the poor calls for their elimination by sharing the wealth.
Laura Resnick
December 6, 2013 @ 9:33 pm
Oh. I kept thinking it was Society of Jesus… something-or-other, special addition designation. Father Michael Sweeney, SJ; Father Joseph Cain, SJW…
NOW I get it.
LauraR, so not up to date with slang