laceblade: (Default)
As 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.
laceblade: (Default)
Zac Bertschy had Chris Haughton (owner/runner of Taskforce Moe) on the show. Here's a link. In the beginning, they discuss Zac's habit of basically trolling moe fans when he reviews moe shows at Anime News Network. I don't hang out on the forums much, & was surprised to hear Zac's been compared to being racist because of disliking moe - fucking seriously? That sucks, and that's stupid.
I found a lot of the discussion boring.

I submitted a few questions via Twitter. So did [personal profile] littlebutfierce.
I'm pretty tired, but there's the Q/A of our questions.

76:something
Zac: [twitter.com profile] ribbonknight asks, 'Many women and others find value in non-explicit moe because it focuses on female relationships. Is this a reason why you like it?"
Chris: That's a reason I like some shows. Like K-ON!, or Lucky Star.
Zac: Right.
Chris: But, it's not the entire reason I like moe. There are several reasons.
Zac: I mean it sounds like your basic argument is, 'I am not this one-dimensional stereotype or straw-man. I am multitudes.' It sounds like that's the chief...that's the core of your argument, here.
Chris: Yeah. Yeah, and I think that, to a certain extent, moe fans - the moe fandom at large - is portrayed as shallow fans, only looking for the next big thing with cute girls with huge eyes and they don't appreciate quality anime, and I don't think that's true for really many moe fans.
Zac: Well, you wouldn't argue that there aren't people who are totally like that.
Chris: There certainly are vocal people like that. I don't want to associate nor represent nor pay attention to those people. But there are certainly people like that. But I'd argue that the majority of moe fans are pretty much just like other fans. They like a range of anime, not just moe but a whole lot of other stuff.

82:00
Zac: [twitter.com profile] ribbonknight asks: Dudes perving on characters can devalue the shows for fandom at large. Do you think your site contributes to this?
Chris: Dudes perving on moe fandoms...no, I don't think my site contributes to...dudes perving on moe fandoms.
Zac: In other words, if there's a huge, outspoken bunch of, let's say 4-chan users, totally obsessing over whoever from K-ON!, everyone's like oh man. Like it's a turn-off for some people, like they don't necessarily want to engage with the material because they think it's just about that.
Chris: If a person looks at 4-chan especially...& says, 'I don't want to engage with this work of media because of what 4-chan says about it. I think that person probably wouldn't have engaged with that work of media in the first place.
Zac: Yeah, I think you're probably right. [laughter]

ME ASIDE: I totally disgaree with that. The disgust with which other people describe moe kept me away from it for years. [personal profile] littlebutfierce had to convince me that K-ON! was worth trying.
I am absolutely influenced by other people's taste/etc.


87:00
Zac: [twitter.com profile] janiinedelleen asks, "Do you think moe's focus on friendships is part of why it's so devalued and scorned in large parts of anime fandom?
Chris: I think that, 1) part of it is the emphasis on girls. I think that 2 is the de-emphasis on story. I think those are the two big things for why it's devalued.
Zac: I mean, I guess I would sort of make the argument that it also seems exploitative. I don't buy for a second that I think people are watching K-ON! solely because they really care about these characters. There's a voyeuristic appeal to that show that...I think a lot of people have a voyeuristic appeal to that show, and it's like, "Oh these cute girls, they like each other so much," and it's kinda like you're...sometimes it feels like you're watching from the bushes. [laughter] You know, you've got your binoculars. It's a little creepy.
Chris: I don't see it that way. At all.
Zac: You yourself, you're not putting yourself into the situation.
Chris: No, not at all. A complete removal of the viewer as an agent in what is going on in the show.
Zac: Okay. So, the attraction to those characters, then, in a moe fashion, you are totally removed from it? Like you as a person, you totally/psychologically remove yourself?
Chris: When I'm watching the show, I'm not watching, I'm not there at all. That's just going on in the show. It's not me watching them, it's just them happening within the context of the show. As far as being moe for a particular girl, that's certainly me inserting myself into that fantasy.
Zac: So that's separate like doujinshi culture. The act of watching i separate?
Chris: Yes. The doujinshis for K-ON, it's notorious for having really disgusting doujinshi.
Zac: Most popular shows that feature little girls have hideous doujinshi.
Zac: Okay.

ME ASIDE: I find Zac's take on the voyeurism in K-ON! kind of fascinating, because I didn't feel that way at all watching it. I think that take is entirely related to the male gaze.
I was absolutely invested in the actual characters, their friendship, and the music they made together. That is the only reason I watched the show.
The fact that Zac thinks that there is NO OTHER POSSIBLE REASON a person could watch that show is exactly what my questions are trying to get at - WHY AREN'T NON-SEXUAL FEMALE RELATIONSHIPS VALUED? Which leads to my next question:

94:00
Zac: [twitter.com profile] ribbonknight asks: dudes hanging out in anime considered artistic & moving, moe shows of girls doing the same are called stupid & pointless. Do you think that some fans oversexualizing characters contributes to dismissive fans not examining their own misogyny?
Zac: Wait, these are two unrelated things [me aside: no they're not]. The first one was a statement, the second one was a question. [nope]
Chris: I am not sure where that's coming from.
Zac: Yeah, that's a weird thing. I guess some...no, okay. That is a two-parter. So, he's saying that I guess there's this blanket assumption that critics love shoes where it's just dudes hanging out and doing nothing, but shows where it's girls hanging out & doing nothing are called stupid and pointless, which I don't...I think your premise is flawed, bro? I don't even, like...that's not true? And I guess he's saying that it's misogynistic to hate on "cute girls doing cute things" shows. Which, to answer that myself, it's not misogynistic to be bored by cute girls doing cute things. [laughter]
Chris: Yeah, it's not sexist to have a preference.

112:00 question also worth listening to: about whether women's reasons for watching are different than men?


I found it a little hilarious that Zac assumed I am a guy, especially given the questions I was asking.

Regardless, my question about internalized misogyny shifted to one about sexism. Both Zac and Chris agreed that, "It's not sexist to have a perference" [between watching plotless shows about girls hanging out vs boys hanging out].
I'd challenge that. If you as a media consumer ONLY enjoy stories about boys/men, and are only capable of identifying with men? Then yeah, I think you have some internalized misogyny going on there.

I started joining in the discussion on the forums, but that was before I heard reading of my last question, and their answer/non-answer. I don't know if I'll check back.

Anyway, I'm pretty disappointed. I've been a fan of Zac Bertschy's commentary for years. :(
laceblade: Angel's Wesley and Fred, making heinous faces (Wesley & Fred: Heinous)
Recently, [personal profile] 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). [personal profile] 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 [personal profile] 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 [personal profile] sasha_feather a citation (I think?!).
The entire comment is so bizarre that even though [personal profile] 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 [personal profile] 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.

Profile

laceblade: (Default)
laceblade

November 2023

S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Apr. 23rd, 2025 04:48 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios