Oh fandom. Maybe I will quit you.

[browngirl]

So I was trying not to make this post, but I read too many discussions in short order to keep from doing so.

So I read N. K. Jemisyn's Things People Need to Understand, issue 223.2, which excellently states, "We have to shed this idea that SFF is somehow special. That it is perfect. That it is in any way better than the mainstream society from which it derives. It isn’t. And in fact, SFF’s manifest unwillingness to examine itself is one of the things that makes it worse than the mainstream." [And I just deleted a mini-rant concerning my opinions on the statements she was replying to, which isn't necessary considering this post of mine. So, moving right along...]

So I also read jimhines's Crap People Say About Sexual Harassment, which was further illuminating and depressing. A comment led me to this discussion on "taboo songs' in filk, where a bunch of people proudly proclaimed their Hatred of Censorship and Right to Sing Whatever They Want. It reminded me of the discussions about warnings in fic fandom, where one side doesn't want to be triggered as much and the other said, "you can't warn for every trigger in existence so you shouldn't bother warning for any of them, and asking me to warn is censoring me and I won't stand for that." Same thing here, but with filk. I suppose I benefited from the reminder of why I've left, but it was still disheartening.

Also, I came across the Overheard from the Smof Mailing List tumblr, which may go away soon due to the DCMA take-down notices being issued, and which is further illuminating and depressing as to how many in the backbone of fandom view... I was going to say 'the rest of us', but many of those pushing back against sexism and racism in fandom are just as much part of its backbone as those who view themselves as holding the line against the orc horde. ETA: However, in the comments here there's a discussion of that Tumblr, the accuracy and context of its quotations, and the harm it may have done to its seeming goal.

I was going to say more, but my Littlest Roommate requests my attention. So I'll close with a couple more links that warrant signal-boosting:

Things You Should Know About the Fallout
What Conventions Are and Aren't
Pride and Prejudice and Readercon
American Fandom goes to, err, War

Comments

[pickledginger.livejournal.com]

I don't think fandom is better or worse on this front than mainstream society -- just chattier and more ... condensed.

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

Oh fandom's still better than a great deal of mainstream society -- this post is an excerpt from my unwritten essay about how this year's sociopolitics have made me so heartsick tat maybe I should go become a hermit in the desert. *wry smile*

[catsittingstill.livejournal.com]

Oh. I hope you won't quit.

I understand the need to get a little distance, though. I think it's a start that these discussions are going on--I think that the nature of the discussions makes it pretty plain how far we have to go.

[pickledginger.livejournal.com]

*nods*
It's great that the discussion continues -- this stuff needs to be talked about -- but some of the discussion isn't pretty. As I said to one male friend recently, "Step away from the comment thread!"

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

*blushes* Thanks. And yeah, I needed the reminder that these discussions are happenign, even if so much of them are painful.

I dunno. I may yet return to filk -- I decided not to get rid of my LJ category 'filk' -- but right now I can't call myself a filker.

[fjm.livejournal.com]

The tumblr link shows the assholes. As you wrote: SFF is no better than the rest of the world. It is also just as varied.

[filkerdave.livejournal.com]

The Tumblr specifically shows quotes entirely out of context, not always on the same topic. Which has rightfully pissed of the people who's words have been stolen.

[juliansinger.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I've been watching all this with dubiousness.

My basic logic is, stick with the folks who are trying to change, don't stick with those who aren't. s/f fandom isn't a monolith, and not all cons (or conrunners) are the same.

But that's just me.

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

That makes sense, but... I don't know how much I want to keep dealing with/supporting-by-my-presence those who resist change, especially (as in the filk discussion) where the majority do and those who lead them do (madfilkentist is a Big Name Filker of much repute.) This is about my personal choices, though, not criticising others'.

this got long

[redbird]

I think Jemisyn may be giving the mainstream society too much credit for willingness to examine itself, at least on this axis. Almost everyone identifies themselves as part of subgroups, whether that's "fandom" or their specific religious group or "Americans." I see a lot of cases of people labeling that group, over there, which they aren't part of, as having problems and somehow deducing from this that the groups they are part of are okay. (Say, looking at the ongoing scandal of child molestation by Catholic priests, and assuming that their children are safe, because they're Protestant or Jewish.)

Yes, there are people who claim that fandom is somehow special. But that "how dare you censor me, freedom of speech is too important for me to care about the effects of what I say" position is hardly unique to fandom.

If freedom of speech is more than just another idol, it's valuable because what we say does matter, to the listener as well as the speaker. I have the right to say "I want to say this, even if it hurts people," but if someone doesn't care what anyone thinks about my statements, maybe I should ask whether I want an audience. (I don't always: I have paper journals that nobody gets to see.) Most of the time, what such people mean is that they care enough about certain reactions that no others are important (whether that's "I think it's funny, so everyone should" or "pay attention to my vocal skills, not the meaning of the lyrics").

Or they mean they're speaking to a specific group, and don't care about the opinions of people outside that group. This isn't always a bad thing: I think it depends partly on the group, and partly on the context. If I want to talk to only my friends, I'm going to lock/filter the post or send email. If I am specifically addressing other people who identify as queer, I'll say so. (Having done so, I may then be shorter with answers that include "Well, I'm straight, but..." or that clearly assume that I should be addressing straight people.)

The thing is, that choice of audience or in group tells me something about the speaker. Sometimes I'm not in that audience, but I understand and sympathize with the choice. (That would include someone speaking to people of color the way I might to LGBT people.)

Returning to your point, I don't think you are obliged to stay in fandom; the question is whether you would be better off leaving. (I know you from fandom, but seem to see you mostly in your journal, so I don't have a selfish "please stay, I'll miss you" motive here.)

Re: this got long

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

I was hoping you'd have thoughts on this, as your thoughts are always valuable to me. :)

Or they mean they're speaking to a specific group, and don't care about the opinions of people outside that group.

I guess part of what is bothering me is when people assume that the group they're addressing doesn't include certain people, or explicitly say that it shouldn't. Such as the filkers in that discussion assuming that they wouldn't be singing in front of sexual assault survivors (or comparing objecting to songs that excuse rape to songs about talking vegetables), or those who have said that the problem around harassment is that women need to get used to what SF cons are like or stop attending, as if women haven't always been congoers and con-organizers.

The "how dare you censor me, freedom of speech is too important for me to care about the effects of what I say" position is absolutely not unique to fandom, but that doesn't mean fandom should maintain it as a philosophy, I think. And it seems that if fandom is maintaining that particular philosophy I need to consider if I'm supporting it by participating publicly in fandom.

[amaebi.livejournal.com]

I love what you say about freedom of speech. :)

[pickledginger.livejournal.com]

Thank you for the great links! I <3 the Austenish one and am very heartened by RoseFox's posting. (I am becoming a big fan of Hines, as well; he and Scalzi have been wonderful about taking a stand, as men, against abuse of women.)

[edited on account of autocorrect]

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

*blush* You're welcome, I try. :) Thanks to them for writing these!

[mama-hogswatch.livejournal.com]

To say I am not a "joiner" might be possibly understating things, so perhaps my opinion might not be as informed as it could be.

That said, while I do think F/SF/Gamer/Geek/Nerd fandom has and does need to address problems that are extremely serious, I think it is a reflection of society as a whole rather than anything particularly unique to fandom. That we are talking about these issues and hauling them out in the open is AWESOME, sad as the fact of the issues might be.

I think the problem comes in because we are so damn disappointed when people act like... well, people! Many of us in fandom got into with an sense of enormous relief because we stopped being mistreated for our tastes and inclinations. We were so excited to be accepted where we had no been in mainstream society that it came as a shock to find that yes, cliques, bad people, bullying and what have you are here as well.

Thing is, that's not just a fan thing. Think of polymory, political groups or any other group you join with a sense of excitement and relief that you might actually *gasp* belong! The disenchantment of finding out that yeah, those people are people, too, with all those damn annoying peoplelike behavior can be distresssing when you might have thought you were escaping that nonsense.

The cool thing, in my opinion, is that there is now a dialog opening. We're examining our behavior (at least I hope we're examining our own as well as Those Rotten Other People's) and we're talking about who and what we want to be. For all that I'm reluctant to dive in and be an active part of any group, I still applaud this as a paradigm shift.

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

Oh, I'm really, really glad we're talking about these issues. I greatly disagree with those who say that discussing these issues is setting "general egalitarianism in fandom back by decades," as one critic put it. It's just, well, the pushback (such as in that quotation) is dismaying me. These discussions are important, difficult work, and I'm not sure I'm up for it.

That said, thank you for reminding me that just because a place is better doesn't make it a utopia; I shall remind my disappointed feelings of that. :)

Manners

[teddywolf.livejournal.com]

Some people seem to forget that giving a warning to people is a matter not of censorship, but of manners. At our best, we employ manners in our lives to make social interactions easier for the people in our lives, be they total strangers or our dearest loves. Manners can be used as a weapon, but that is something that should be called out for what it is.

This does not mean that people all have the same concept of what good manners are. Leaving aside variability between cultures and subcultures, not everybody learns manners to the same standards even within a general culture. Also, you can have manners that are good in one culture but wrong in another culture, like how close you should be to someone else when having a decent conversation, or whether or not you should belch after a meal.

Look at the Littlest Roommate. She is routinely angry, loud, inappropriate and violent. Yes, she's wee and should not be expected to be as well-mannered as a grown-up. However, her preschool apparently considers her to be a fairly well-mannered child. And they've seen some tantrums.

Lots of adults assume that manners are easily learned, that all adults "should know what's right." I want all adults to know what good manners are, but I know from sad experience that not every adult has actually learned good manners--and some (some!) of us only lack a breadth of experience and a little good guidance.

Manners, like any other social skill, are something to be taught and learned, and not everybody can do so without explicit guidance. This point, I feel, is forgotten at times.

This does not excuse poor manners. When you want to be part of a community, it is incumbent on you to learn what kind of manners are good manners. On the flip side, a community should at least try to make its expectations of behavior and manners reasonably clear. Top diplomats do not learn the manners of their mission's country haphazardly or by simple osmosis. They get a lot of guidance, at least to start.

For all that many of us might snigger or groan at the thought of charm school, some basic education on manners would go a long way.

Re: Manners

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

As I said in person, this is an excellent meditation on manners.

[chienne-folle.livejournal.com]

If all the good people leave fandom, then it really will become a terrible place. Right now, it's a place where we can find People Like Us in greater prevalence than we can in mainstream society. Yes, there are also assholes there, but there are assholes EVERYWHERE, including in our own families. Fandom isn't perfect, but nothing human is. Having a greater prevalence of People Like Us makes it a very valuable thing.

I think the problem for some people is black-and-white thinking: if mainstream society is bad, then fandom must be good. But wait, if fandom is discovered to have flaws, then it must be bad, too. Human life is shades of grey, not black and white. Fandom is better than mainstream society in a lot of ways, while still having a boatload of flaws. That's what real life is like -- it's all grey.

*hug* Sorry to hear that this is all so stressful. Take the good parts and ignore (or stomp on, if you have the spoons for it) the rest.

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

But wait, if fandom is discovered to have flaws, then it must be bad, too.

Or better yet, there's no way fandom can be bad, so the person pinting out the flaws must be bad. *sigh*

Anyway. :) I will try to take care of myself, I promise.
*huggles you*

[karadin.livejournal.com]

Sometimes there is no way to police everyone, or even consult and encourage everyone, so maybe the best thing is to be the personal example of what you'd like fandom to be.

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

Mrrp. I can try, and get told that I'm what's wrong with fandom (seriously, I have both seen essays about how people like me are ruining fandom and been told so personally). I'm a little tired of it.

[caitri.livejournal.com]

:(

NGL, I'm not sure I'd agree with the statement that Fandom examines itself less than mainstream does--I think I'd argue the opposite--but that could just be in the areas of fandom I live in. (Ultra-selective groups can be ultra-selective, e.g. slashers.) I will say that I think all these conversations happening is for the better than not; it means that problems are being identified, analyzed, discussed, and maybe one day, solved. So. My $0.02.

Also **MEGAHUGS** I hope you don't leave, but I think I understand why you want to.

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

Okay, point, maybe fandom doesn't examine itself less than the wider society (although it depends where, as you point out -- slashfic fandom tends to be fairly self-examiney, whereas I'm watching a lot of pushback to that in con-running fandom), but that it needs to examine itself more.

Anyway, I'm glad these discussions are happening, I'm just... tired of the pushback.

*hugs you*

[patgreene.livejournal.com]

Just a note: I reread Pride and Prejudice very recently, and when I hit the entire Mr. Collins proposes to Elizabeth plot, I did think of Readercon. Not that I could have written up that scene so brilliantly.

*hugs*

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

Great minds think alike!

*hugs you back*

[redaxe.livejournal.com]

Speaking strictly here from the filk perspective, partly because it's a narrower field, and partly because I think it presents different issues from, say, behavior at a party. (Conversations may veer widely and suddenly, without warning, while a filk room provides the opportunity for the focus of the room, i.e., the performer, to soften potential problems in advance.)

I said in the thread to which you refer that I DON'T believe any topic should be utterly taboo, but that singers SHOULD provide trigger warnings for commonly triggering subjects (e.g., rape or abuse). I still feel that way.

The issue I keep coming up against is that art is supposed to reflect and illuminate the human condition, and as such, should potentially include references to all of it. It's just not possible to warn on every triggering subject, as some people could be triggered, due to their personal circumstances, by topics that are generally benign (balsa wood, or oranges); even more is it impossible to avoid singing about every trigger. (One of my exes was sent into serious jags of hurt by "Cranes Over Hiroshima" because she'd lost her brother to cancer. I forgot to warn her when I heard it coming (and I was NOT singing), bust still felt responsible.)

It's fair to try to warn when we can, and to avoid glorifying socially unacceptable behaviors (even in songs written when those behaviors may have been accepted). Going above and beyond this may be possible, and I applaud those who can manage it. I'm not one of them, though; I'll do what I can to avoid hurting people, and hope that I receive feedback (i.e., emotion-neutral information) rather than criticism (the same information with negative emotions attached) so that I can better learn how not to hurt people.

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

It's just not possible to warn on every triggering subject

*rolls eyes*

Yes, yes, yes, I know. Logically, your position makes a lot of sense. Emotionally, I kind of want to scream that rape is not like balsa wood, and this entry is about where I am emotionally.

[achinhibitor.livejournal.com]

Hatred of Censorship and Right to Sing Whatever They Want

Of course, that's a brutally hard problem because there is no clear, workable solution. It's very useful to keep control over highly offensive materials, but there's no clear demarcation between that point and sending a hit man after Salman Rushdie. So we constantly have to argue where the boundary should be, and cultures push the boundary back and forth in various places at various times. The pushing is the process by which we settle the boundary (at this time and place). And the pushing has to be hard, because otherwise we couldn't say anything that annoyed any single person.

[browngirl.livejournal.com]

I was nodding in agreement until:

And the pushing has to be hard, because otherwise we couldn't say anything that annoyed any single person.

As I said to redaxe, I don't think this dire prediction is true, and I'm annoyed by it constantly being used against people who just want to participate in things without being gratuitously hurt.