When Gatekeepers Remix Reality
May. 29th, 2013 05:21 pmAs those of you who read my Twitter know, there was some excitement last week when a local news station contacted the WisCon 37 co-coordinators to ask about our interest in a TV interview.
I responded enthusiastically.
The first option, for a live segment in-studio on Saturday, 5/18, wasn't possible because I was going to be out of town with my family.
Instead, we were offered a taped segment at the con itself, which would air on Saturday.
I emailed the convention-planning committee to see who else was willing to be filmed.
K. Tempest Bradford responded almost immediately, which pleased me quite a bit.
In email, I emphasized more than once that when filming Tempest &/or I, the reporter needed to ask permission of anyone appearing on camera, to comply with WisCon's photography/filming policy (which requires that the people on film be asked their permission). She agreed.
Tempest was delayed by travel plans. At karaoke on Thursday night, I cast about to find a replacement, and asked Cabell, who was very comfortable being interviewed.
On Friday, I said several things on camera. I was surprised by the question about the WisCon troll incident.
The reporter asked something to the effect of, "You've mentioned those who take pictures of your members, post them online, and make fun of them. What do you say to those people?"
My response was a hesitation, and then, "What I have to say probably isn't suitable for network TV."
I witnessed most of Cabell's comments on-camera, which were great. When asked about the speculative fiction aspect being paired with feminism, Cabell talked about the ability to create different realities in fiction, and I thought that was just awesome.
I spent the weekend trying to find the segment on Channel3000.com's shitty website, and couldn't. I had to ask the reporter directly.
In case the embed doesn't work, here is a link.
My initial reaction was fury, because the reporter did not ask permission from approximately half of those who appear in the background shots of this segment.
The TV segment's title refers to WisCon as the "state's" leading feminist science fiction convention. I am unaware of any OTHER feminist sf/f conventions in the state of Wisconsin. We certainly bill ourselves as the world's leading feminist sf/f. So far as I'm aware, that is accurate.
After interviewing me & Cabell on Friday, the reporter apparently went off to find a convention attendee who refers to himself as Orange Mike. This is due to the exclusivity of his wardrobe, which only contains fluorescent orange garments. I think it's safe to say that the reporter found the most outlandish-looking convention attendee (which is saying something, as Cabell dyes her hair Atomic Pink).
In the segment, Orange Mike refers to the members of WisCon as his "tribe," and thus so does the reporter.
Later in the segment, Orange Mike refers to the convention itself as "our tribal pow-wow," a culturally appropriative reference with which I am uncomfortable.
The reporter says that we discuss today's "most popular" science fiction, which is sometimes true. We also discuss things that are cast aside by popular fandom to focus on things written by women, by people of color, etc., and the latter is way more important to me.
It isn't hard to find people who read George R. R. Martin's Game of Thrones.
It isn't hard to find people who like Star Trek.
I wouldn't spend much time or energy running a convention just "for geeks." In fact, I co-founded a con just like that and then almost immediately abandoned it.
It is hard to find people who will critique the things they love - people who will point out that it's fucked up that in a 21st century reimaginging of Star Trek, all but one member of the crew are cis men, or that Game of Thrones incorporates white savior narratives & fails to problemetize its representation of race.
It is also hard to find conventions that proactively provide spaces for wheelchairs in all rooms, that encourages its members not to wear scented products so as to provoke the allergies of some members.
It is hard to find a science fiction convention that provides a separate room as a safer space for people of color.
The reporter in this segment says, "For people like Orange Mike, [WisCon] is home."
I'm not going to bar him at the door & I'm glad he had a great time, but I don't give a fuck about Orange Mike or his ilk.
I don't spend time wondering which aspects of the convention will attract more cis older white men.
There are plenty of science fiction conventions that cater to them.
I wish that, for all of the years he's gone to WisCon, Orange Mike would have better internalized the messages communicated by his fellow attendees.
I wish that when he was asked to speak on camera about WisCon, he could have said, "Well, this is a feminist science fiction convention and maybe you should speak with someone who doesn't identify as male."
I wish that this segment didn't erase the feminism from the statements that Cabell and I made.
I wish that instead of cutting my comment to just say, "We try to be welcoming to everyone," the reporter had included what preceded it, in which I said that many science fiction conventions are very white and very male, and that WisCon tries to make it a safer space for people of color, for women, for people who identify outside the gender binary, for PWD.
I wish that instead of this segment being about "geeks finding other geeks and being happy," it was about people coming together to critique the representations of society that appear in speculative fiction.
I wish that the segment itself didn't privilege the perspective of an aging man over the perspectives of two younger women.
Mostly, I feel angry with myself. I really don't know what I expected.
ETA: A commenter has noted that while I refer to Mike as white in this post & dissect his use of the words "tribe" and "pow-wow," he is in fact a member of the Cherokee nation. Rather than alter what I originally posted, I'm putting this note here.
Mike also commented on a different post to correct me, also.
I responded enthusiastically.
The first option, for a live segment in-studio on Saturday, 5/18, wasn't possible because I was going to be out of town with my family.
Instead, we were offered a taped segment at the con itself, which would air on Saturday.
I emailed the convention-planning committee to see who else was willing to be filmed.
K. Tempest Bradford responded almost immediately, which pleased me quite a bit.
In email, I emphasized more than once that when filming Tempest &/or I, the reporter needed to ask permission of anyone appearing on camera, to comply with WisCon's photography/filming policy (which requires that the people on film be asked their permission). She agreed.
Tempest was delayed by travel plans. At karaoke on Thursday night, I cast about to find a replacement, and asked Cabell, who was very comfortable being interviewed.
On Friday, I said several things on camera. I was surprised by the question about the WisCon troll incident.
The reporter asked something to the effect of, "You've mentioned those who take pictures of your members, post them online, and make fun of them. What do you say to those people?"
My response was a hesitation, and then, "What I have to say probably isn't suitable for network TV."
I witnessed most of Cabell's comments on-camera, which were great. When asked about the speculative fiction aspect being paired with feminism, Cabell talked about the ability to create different realities in fiction, and I thought that was just awesome.
I spent the weekend trying to find the segment on Channel3000.com's shitty website, and couldn't. I had to ask the reporter directly.
In case the embed doesn't work, here is a link.
My initial reaction was fury, because the reporter did not ask permission from approximately half of those who appear in the background shots of this segment.
The TV segment's title refers to WisCon as the "state's" leading feminist science fiction convention. I am unaware of any OTHER feminist sf/f conventions in the state of Wisconsin. We certainly bill ourselves as the world's leading feminist sf/f. So far as I'm aware, that is accurate.
After interviewing me & Cabell on Friday, the reporter apparently went off to find a convention attendee who refers to himself as Orange Mike. This is due to the exclusivity of his wardrobe, which only contains fluorescent orange garments. I think it's safe to say that the reporter found the most outlandish-looking convention attendee (which is saying something, as Cabell dyes her hair Atomic Pink).
In the segment, Orange Mike refers to the members of WisCon as his "tribe," and thus so does the reporter.
Later in the segment, Orange Mike refers to the convention itself as "our tribal pow-wow," a culturally appropriative reference with which I am uncomfortable.
The reporter says that we discuss today's "most popular" science fiction, which is sometimes true. We also discuss things that are cast aside by popular fandom to focus on things written by women, by people of color, etc., and the latter is way more important to me.
It isn't hard to find people who read George R. R. Martin's Game of Thrones.
It isn't hard to find people who like Star Trek.
I wouldn't spend much time or energy running a convention just "for geeks." In fact, I co-founded a con just like that and then almost immediately abandoned it.
It is hard to find people who will critique the things they love - people who will point out that it's fucked up that in a 21st century reimaginging of Star Trek, all but one member of the crew are cis men, or that Game of Thrones incorporates white savior narratives & fails to problemetize its representation of race.
It is also hard to find conventions that proactively provide spaces for wheelchairs in all rooms, that encourages its members not to wear scented products so as to provoke the allergies of some members.
It is hard to find a science fiction convention that provides a separate room as a safer space for people of color.
The reporter in this segment says, "For people like Orange Mike, [WisCon] is home."
I'm not going to bar him at the door & I'm glad he had a great time, but I don't give a fuck about Orange Mike or his ilk.
I don't spend time wondering which aspects of the convention will attract more cis older white men.
There are plenty of science fiction conventions that cater to them.
I wish that, for all of the years he's gone to WisCon, Orange Mike would have better internalized the messages communicated by his fellow attendees.
I wish that when he was asked to speak on camera about WisCon, he could have said, "Well, this is a feminist science fiction convention and maybe you should speak with someone who doesn't identify as male."
I wish that this segment didn't erase the feminism from the statements that Cabell and I made.
I wish that instead of cutting my comment to just say, "We try to be welcoming to everyone," the reporter had included what preceded it, in which I said that many science fiction conventions are very white and very male, and that WisCon tries to make it a safer space for people of color, for women, for people who identify outside the gender binary, for PWD.
I wish that instead of this segment being about "geeks finding other geeks and being happy," it was about people coming together to critique the representations of society that appear in speculative fiction.
I wish that the segment itself didn't privilege the perspective of an aging man over the perspectives of two younger women.
Mostly, I feel angry with myself. I really don't know what I expected.
ETA: A commenter has noted that while I refer to Mike as white in this post & dissect his use of the words "tribe" and "pow-wow," he is in fact a member of the Cherokee nation. Rather than alter what I originally posted, I'm putting this note here.
Mike also commented on a different post to correct me, also.
Recently, ![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
sasha_feather started a good post about accessibility at WorldCon. In her own words, the purpose of the post is "not to pick on WorldCon or to cause drama, but rather to say, here is a problem, at this convention and at others. What can we do to work on addressing this problem?"
Most of the comments are on-topic.
I would like to frame this thread. It starts with someone mentioning that sometimes in fandom, people use "insider knowledge" (in this case, an entire track of fake programming that had some people wandering all over an inaccessible convention hotel looking for non-existent rooms).sasha_feather notes that insider knowledge is A Thing in fandom, and "what is needed are ways to welcome people into that."
Someone anonymously responds with, "There's insider knowledge in fandom, but there isn't a lot of it, and it's not secret. Everyone who knows it, learned it on their own. If the process had been difficult or unpleasant, fandom would be a much smaller place.
If you don't find that satisfactory, consider joining the N3F."
To whichsasha_feather eloquently responds, "My response to this entire comment can be summed up by, "citation needed.""
Then, Teresa Nielsen Hayden shows up to givesasha_feather a citation (I think?!).
The entire comment is so bizarre that even thoughsasha_feather hilariously responded with, "Cool story, bro" and froze the thread, I MUST BLOG ABOUT IT.
Firstly, TNH's comment seems to assume thatsasha_feather is not already "in" or a "part of" fandom, despite the post making it clear that she organizes Access at WisCon.
Her pompous introduction is also useless. I do not understand its purpose; she could have simply said, "I have imposter syndrome, too." Regardless of the back story, can we not just make fandom more accessible? Must Big Name Fans always trot out their personal Horatio Alger stories to prove how they EARNED their way into fandom, as if to say, "And damn it, if it worked for little ol' me, it will for you, too!"
I tried to pick apart TNH's entire comment, but she seems not to have read the post on which she's commenting. None of it is relevant or meaningful to the ongoing conversation.
I'd really just like to draw attention to this quote: "If you want fandom enough to not care that you're a neo, enough to get you to wade straight in, you'll discover that there are practically no barriers."
It is actually hilarious to me that, IN A POST ABOUT ACCESSIBILITY, she would say, "If you want fandom enough....you'll discover that there are practically no barriers."
IN A POST ABOUT THE LACK OF ACCESSIBILITY AT CONVENTIONS.
I CANNOT.
For those looking for amusement, we did start a fannishCV hash-tag mocking TNH's ludicrous "fan credentials" with our own.
sasha_feather started a good post about accessibility at WorldCon. In her own words, the purpose of the post is "not to pick on WorldCon or to cause drama, but rather to say, here is a problem, at this convention and at others. What can we do to work on addressing this problem?"Most of the comments are on-topic.
I would like to frame this thread. It starts with someone mentioning that sometimes in fandom, people use "insider knowledge" (in this case, an entire track of fake programming that had some people wandering all over an inaccessible convention hotel looking for non-existent rooms).
sasha_feather notes that insider knowledge is A Thing in fandom, and "what is needed are ways to welcome people into that."Someone anonymously responds with, "There's insider knowledge in fandom, but there isn't a lot of it, and it's not secret. Everyone who knows it, learned it on their own. If the process had been difficult or unpleasant, fandom would be a much smaller place.
If you don't find that satisfactory, consider joining the N3F."
To which
sasha_feather eloquently responds, "My response to this entire comment can be summed up by, "citation needed.""Then, Teresa Nielsen Hayden shows up to give
sasha_feather a citation (I think?!).The entire comment is so bizarre that even though
sasha_feather hilariously responded with, "Cool story, bro" and froze the thread, I MUST BLOG ABOUT IT.Firstly, TNH's comment seems to assume that
sasha_feather is not already "in" or a "part of" fandom, despite the post making it clear that she organizes Access at WisCon.Her pompous introduction is also useless. I do not understand its purpose; she could have simply said, "I have imposter syndrome, too." Regardless of the back story, can we not just make fandom more accessible? Must Big Name Fans always trot out their personal Horatio Alger stories to prove how they EARNED their way into fandom, as if to say, "And damn it, if it worked for little ol' me, it will for you, too!"
I tried to pick apart TNH's entire comment, but she seems not to have read the post on which she's commenting. None of it is relevant or meaningful to the ongoing conversation.
I'd really just like to draw attention to this quote: "If you want fandom enough to not care that you're a neo, enough to get you to wade straight in, you'll discover that there are practically no barriers."
It is actually hilarious to me that, IN A POST ABOUT ACCESSIBILITY, she would say, "If you want fandom enough....you'll discover that there are practically no barriers."
IN A POST ABOUT THE LACK OF ACCESSIBILITY AT CONVENTIONS.
I CANNOT.
For those looking for amusement, we did start a fannishCV hash-tag mocking TNH's ludicrous "fan credentials" with our own.
Tags:
George R.R. Martin, fucking really?
Apr. 16th, 2011 02:20 pmI've always kind of ignored George R. R. Martin because, until a few months ago, I'd never read anything by him. I knew of him as Author Who Hates Fanfiction and Gets Harassed by Readers to Write Faster.
As-you-know-Reader, Martin's epic, A Song of Fire and Ice, is getting turned into an HBO series, starting with Game of Thrones, and will start airing this Sunday.
The New York Times published a review [doesn't Arya look adorable/awesome?!] that basically purported that there is nothing in the series for women to watch - except for the sex, which is apparently thrown in just to make women want to view.
Understandably, fans have had a negative reaction to this review.
An example response is here, and also included are some links to other fan reaction.
But hey! George R. R. Martin decided to respond, too. His post is here. He opens by noting that he doesn't typically respond to negative reviews of his work, thereby setting up the post as Something Special.
But his big reveal is this.
It's George R. R. Martin's big moment to acknowledge his non-male fans! To thank them for their support! And what does he do?! HE DEFINES THEM BY THEIR BREASTS.
And also refers to them as girls.
But, you know, I've read the goddamn books, so I am not surprised.
As-you-know-Reader, Martin's epic, A Song of Fire and Ice, is getting turned into an HBO series, starting with Game of Thrones, and will start airing this Sunday.
The New York Times published a review [doesn't Arya look adorable/awesome?!] that basically purported that there is nothing in the series for women to watch - except for the sex, which is apparently thrown in just to make women want to view.
The true perversion, though, is the sense you get that all of this illicitness has been tossed in as a little something for the ladies, out of a justifiable fear, perhaps, that no woman alive would watch otherwise. While I do not doubt that there are women in the world who read books like Mr. Martin’s, I can honestly say that I have never met a single woman who has stood up in indignation at her book club and refused to read the latest from Lorrie Moore unless everyone agreed to “The Hobbit” first. “Game of Thrones” is boy fiction patronizingly turned out to reach the population’s other half.
Understandably, fans have had a negative reaction to this review.
An example response is here, and also included are some links to other fan reaction.
But hey! George R. R. Martin decided to respond, too. His post is here. He opens by noting that he doesn't typically respond to negative reviews of his work, thereby setting up the post as Something Special.
But his big reveal is this.
I am not going to get into it myself, except to say
(1) if I am writing "boy fiction," who are all those boys with breasts who keep turning up by the hundreds at my signings and readings?
and
(2) thank you, geek girls! I love you all.
It's George R. R. Martin's big moment to acknowledge his non-male fans! To thank them for their support! And what does he do?! HE DEFINES THEM BY THEIR BREASTS.
And also refers to them as girls.
But, you know, I've read the goddamn books, so I am not surprised.
About that.
Jun. 23rd, 2010 06:10 pmAt the end of this post by Kathryn Cramer, she requests that "con committee members should do a lot more listening and a lot less defending when concerns like these are raised."
While I do not speak for the WisCon Convention Committee, I am a member, and I have yet to hear why Jay Lake, or any other person felt "unsafe," specifically. I also have yet to hear what exactly is meant when they say "unsafe." What the fuck should I be listening to, exactly? References that are so vague that they are useless? The reason you can't name it is because the "lack of safety" to which you refer is better described as "uncomfortable when privilege is challenged." Sorry, but the WisCon ConCom is not the place to turn to if this is your problem.
Also? Word.
While I do not speak for the WisCon Convention Committee, I am a member, and I have yet to hear why Jay Lake, or any other person felt "unsafe," specifically. I also have yet to hear what exactly is meant when they say "unsafe." What the fuck should I be listening to, exactly? References that are so vague that they are useless? The reason you can't name it is because the "lack of safety" to which you refer is better described as "uncomfortable when privilege is challenged." Sorry, but the WisCon ConCom is not the place to turn to if this is your problem.
Also? Word.
The last couple of days have been filled with anger, for me.
One involves a situation beyond my control, but leaves me feeling vulnerable and cheated by a faceless bureaucracy. Of course it will get sorted out for my personal situation, but it only reinforces my adamant belief that health care should be a right for every single person, and not a classist privilege accessible only to those who manage to find a full-time job or can afford to pay for their own health care out of pocket. What does it say about our society, if you can only gain access to medicine and technology that will make/keep you healthy if you have the money to pay for it? Isn't it bad enough for the unemployed or under-employed that they make very little money? Must we punish them further, by telling them that they don't deserve to be healthy? That, in some cases, they deserve to die?
And people truly argue about this? Fail.
I've also been thinking a lot about people in positions of power.
If you are in a position of power, and you see that the people over whom you exert power - the sheep of your flock, if you will - are not doing what they're supposed to be doing, which of the following do you think is the proper response to make your flock more functional?
A) Blame them for not knowing better (and be sure to blame other people for not teaching them better, willfully ignoring your own position of power at the moment).
B) Mock them while surrounding yourself with people who agree with you.
C) Ostracize them by making them feel ashamed or guilty, so as not to taint your tiny Type A flock of "true sheep."
D) Complain about them and how they are the reason that the group is failing as a whole. Make sure to not actually speak to them, tell them what you think what went wrong, or perform any action items to rectify what went wrong.
E) Point out to them what went wrong, and ask them what you can do with your position of power to ensure that it does not happen again.
On a lighter note, a friend of mine recently told me that she thought my Internet alias was "My Stick Eeper." I've had this alias for 8 years, and I never thought about it that way. It's supposed to be "Mystic Keeper," by the way; huzzah for aliases created at age 14.
If people want to start calling me "The Stick," though, I am okay with that.
One involves a situation beyond my control, but leaves me feeling vulnerable and cheated by a faceless bureaucracy. Of course it will get sorted out for my personal situation, but it only reinforces my adamant belief that health care should be a right for every single person, and not a classist privilege accessible only to those who manage to find a full-time job or can afford to pay for their own health care out of pocket. What does it say about our society, if you can only gain access to medicine and technology that will make/keep you healthy if you have the money to pay for it? Isn't it bad enough for the unemployed or under-employed that they make very little money? Must we punish them further, by telling them that they don't deserve to be healthy? That, in some cases, they deserve to die?
And people truly argue about this? Fail.
I've also been thinking a lot about people in positions of power.
If you are in a position of power, and you see that the people over whom you exert power - the sheep of your flock, if you will - are not doing what they're supposed to be doing, which of the following do you think is the proper response to make your flock more functional?
A) Blame them for not knowing better (and be sure to blame other people for not teaching them better, willfully ignoring your own position of power at the moment).
B) Mock them while surrounding yourself with people who agree with you.
C) Ostracize them by making them feel ashamed or guilty, so as not to taint your tiny Type A flock of "true sheep."
D) Complain about them and how they are the reason that the group is failing as a whole. Make sure to not actually speak to them, tell them what you think what went wrong, or perform any action items to rectify what went wrong.
E) Point out to them what went wrong, and ask them what you can do with your position of power to ensure that it does not happen again.
On a lighter note, a friend of mine recently told me that she thought my Internet alias was "My Stick Eeper." I've had this alias for 8 years, and I never thought about it that way. It's supposed to be "Mystic Keeper," by the way; huzzah for aliases created at age 14.
If people want to start calling me "The Stick," though, I am okay with that.
