Fandom etc

[emmzzi]

Apologies, I have been adjusting security settings on my LJ. If you are on the flocked list it is because I know you in RL and trust you to be kind with my thoughts. This is an open post.

These are not the opinions of the concom. And that is ok because I will not be concom-ing again for quite some time.

So, things I have been reflecting on this morning.

- The bully doesn't get to decide if they are bullying, as a point of general order. The victim does. Always.

- If you are going to insult me you should spell my nom de plume right.

- Actually, trying hard is a good thing. Not trying at all is a bad thing. While we wait for perfection, I will take progress.

- If you are going to criticise a thing you should understand and make clear what that thing is. The trademark? The concom? The members? The panellists? I am not sure I should have to explain "Conventions 101" for people too lazy to educate themselves, or too idle to express their thoughts clearly.

- Emily Pankhurst didn't get anywhere being a keyboard warrior or throwing popcorn from the sidelines. I don't believe Ghandi's modus operandi was moaning a lot or using other's pain to make quasi amusing remarks at the expense of others. If you don't like it, get off your arse and change it. The world is full of people in the "happy to complain" category. Talk is cheap.

Finally, I did enjoy helping to run the event. The vast majority of people were lovely, alerted us to any issues, and let us help them. I acquired a new badger. There was good conversation. I was especially hopeful about some of the plans we have for women in fandom. And although I am annoyed with a small contingent and how they express themselves (note: not the views themselves, and frankly I believe tone debates ARE worth having), I intend to follow through, because I know so many articulate, intelligent women with so much to contribute. They deserve their voice and our world will be richer for it.

Thank you to the small troop of volunteers who made the event run so well and, I believe, be the most inclusive, and most aware, to date, building on the foundations of the events before us.

Now go watch Keith's video again. We can all be amazing. And we can all be excellent to each other.

Em

Comments

[emmzzi.livejournal.com]

Well when the replies are mainly "fuck off", tone matters...in fact, irrespective of the merits of your arguement, you lose when your debate is so angry, you only feel the emotion, not the logic. Unless you are talking only to people who only decide things on emotion. Which is rare.

My belief is that it is not enough to say "I am being oppressed and I will let you guess how to fix it." And to go a step further and insult people for not knowing how, is unproductive.

It is ok to say "I am tired of this discussion, the internet has resources."

It is ok to say "I am tired and I will talk another time."

It is not ok to say "you are stupid, I don't work with idiots" etc.

Because if you are not actively fixing it, with people who genuinely are open to improving things, you're part of the problem.

That doesn't mean you have to DO everything, but it does mean you need to be really clear about who you think owns the problem; what you believe needs to be done about it; and how you would know if it had got better.

It means acknowledging improvement. Because if I have to be perfect to get a break, I'm not even going to start.

I have heard what I believe to be nonsense from people about the feminism this weekend. From people I genuinely like, who I believe mean no malice, but who have not lived the life of the woman in the male dominated world.

Yelling at them will simply entrench their position. Refusing to educate (and yes, I know that's a "derailing for dummies" classic but it depends on MOTIVE) will not help matters progress. Calling them idiots when clearly they are not, they simply have not shared experiences or in some cases know there IS a problem, is a product of their environment. Which is not to say it can remain the status quo. But a giant circle of blame isn't going anywhere.

Sometimes you have to stop yelling and start doing; because the good of all is more important than your anger.

[alexmc.livejournal.com]

Well said.

The specific issue I want to tackle is that "Feminism 101" is not well communicated to people and is treated by feminists as if everyone magically knows it. It is called "Feminism 101" because it is the course that everyone needs to go to first of all when they are starting to learn the subject.

One should not be surprised that people who do not consider themselves feminists don't know what is on that mythical course. It doesn't make them bad persons just to be ignorant and not have the same experience as you.

[tonyn.livejournal.com]

I don't know that there is any Feminism 101 that would help, beyond that women need to be respected & feel respected.

I have a few women friends who identify themselves as feminist, and they clearly have a diverse range of opinions about many issues.

I can hear the egg shells I'm stepping on begin to crack ... shhh!

[emmzzi.livejournal.com]

in my experience some of the men I work with are so accustomed to behaving in a certain way they are unaware it shows a lack of respect.

[tonyn.livejournal.com]

Yes, and that is a hard problem for any convention to fix.

A possibly more general problem is that panel discussions with a Q&A make up a substantial part of an Eastercon programme, but it can be very hard to run them so that panellists all leave feeling that they have had a fair chance to be heard. For example here's a very interesting panel discussion with five knowledgeable astronomy people from last year's TAM, about the near future of space flight: http://io9.com/5851956/must-watch-bill-nye-neil-degrasse-tyson-pamela-gay-and-lawrence-krauss-discuss-our-future-in-space

Whilst Neil deGrasse Tyson is a great scientist & outreach person in many ways, he keeps talking over the other panellists most especially in this case Pamela Gay. Ideally the moderator would tell him to (shut-up &) wait his turn. (No disrepect meant to Phil Plait but he clearly did not respond to the problem at the time.)

[emmzzi.livejournal.com]

a couple of options spring to mind.

one is more assertive moderation

the other is to give other panellists a symbol eg everyone puts on a cowboy hat, when one person dominates. audience laughs, situation diffused. People quickly learn not to be "hatted"

[bopeepsheep.livejournal.com]

A remark IRL this morning: "Is it that I don't see [specific problem] because I'm a man and thus don't need to fight this fight ever?" YES. YES IT IS. Hoorah. We can get there, eventually, man by man...

(Context was a discussion of the concept of "mediocre women [writers]" and why women will/won't volunteer for things, following the - excellent - gender parity panel and resultant conversations. Some interesting thoughts on perfection and mediocrity and how images of both relate to/are shaped by gender came up. narenek's got good ideals, even if there are huge male/white privilege areas of blindness to get past too!)