Sidetracks - June 8, 2013

[helloladies]

Sidetracks is a collaborative project featuring various essays, videos, reviews, or other Internet content that we want to share with each other. All past and current links for the Sidetracks project can be found in our Sidetracks tag.

---

➝ How Can I Show Feminists That I Am Smarter Than Them? — I found this on tumblr via lifeofkj and liked it, then forgot I wanted to share it. Thankfully, she later reblogged the gifset so I coul reblog it, too. I love this video so much (especially the end) that I'm going to embed it here. Ugh, MRA's. Don't Read the Comments.™

➝ A few months ago I stumbled across an article, Are Romantic Comedies Dead?. I lost the link, but again, lifeofkj continues to remind me of things I once wanted to talk about in depth. I can't count the number of critiques or reviews that look back on the past as if the art we created in the past is somehow "better" than the art we create now, as if we can know the worth and historical value of the work we're creating now, instead of looking at the underlying reasons that the art we're creating now feels so much different than the art we're remembering. The nostalgia for the past is getting in the way of looking at the past more critically. We're always going to be more critical of things we can see more clearly in a cultural context.

The quote KJ reblogged also stuck with me, because I see this language construction in SF/F fandom all the time when discussing paranormal romance or SF/F with a focus on romance or hey, quite a huge part of YA and it drives me up the wall.

What's most profoundly wrong is the terrible, mean-spirited scripts that are getting made, that are making people feel justified in using "rom-com" as an eye-rolling insult, and we've got to stop that first. Stop saying "chick flick" like it's "pile of rotten meat," and stop saying "chick lit" and "chick book" and "chick movie" and anything else that suggests that love stories are less than war stories, or that stories that end with kissing are inherently inferior to stories that end with people getting shot. Or, if you believe they are and you want to continue believing that they are, stop pretending you're open to romantic comedies getting better.

➝ Scott Lynch wrote a statement on fanwork! YES! \o/ This is what I like to see.

➝ Sexism in Science Fiction — a man recognizing the problem and promising to be part of the solution.

So to the few people who have meandered through my blog, I am making a commitment to do a much better job of reading novels by women. Novels by people from different countries. Novels by people from different ethnicities. Stories are created by experiences and it makes little sense to read only the stories by white suburbanites who grew up with a life of privileges.

Sexism doesn't occur just from the comments we make. Sometimes it comes from the comments we fail to make. And I intend on doing a better job in the future.

➝ Female Creators in Science Fiction and Fantasy Television: The Stats



➝ Whose Line Is It Anyway 90210 — I CANNOT WAIT FOR THIS SHOW TO COME BACK. I can't wait for all the sexually suggestive Ryan/Colin shenanigans. :D :D :D

---

➝ It's the week after BEA, so there's no shortage of recap posts out there. But this particular point from Bookshelves of Doom's dispatches caught my attention:

Literary criticism is not something that is 'negative' or a 'positive'. It's looking at a piece of art and attempting to assess its strengths and weaknesses and think about how it explores issues and themes and all that fun (<--not sarcasm, I really think it's fun!) stuff. Hopefully somewhat objectively. (Which isn't to say that there isn't room for cheerleading, or for that matter, pure snark. The book blogosphere is, as Agent Cooper would say, "a large and interesting place".)

YES. Thank you. Whenever I try to discuss the point of blogging with people who don't think of it in these terms I end up feeling like we're speaking completely different languages.

➝ The next link is sort of related, in the sense that it's also about how we sometimes frame discussions about criticism in unhelpful ways: Criticism, Reader Shame, and Problematic Books. The post and the discussion that follows are worth reading in their enterity, but the following comment particularly resonated with me:

I don't think it is fair to *demand* that these readers engage in discussions and account for their enjoyment: "How can you like this! Explain yourself!" I do think it's fair to hope that they either engage productively or walk away, rather than stopping critical discussion by crying "reader shaming!" On the other hand, a lot of critical comments veer perilously close to shaming, or cross right over, because they assume a lot of things about readers who like these books—including that they share the critical person's reading and are too awful to care about the problem (and I think this goes to Jill's point too) or that they are too stupid to see it. So if we have a problem with a book, or haven't read it for good reasons, we need to stop making assumptions if we're going to do our part in creating a space for dialogue.

This is something I try to be careful about: assumptions are dangerous and we can never know why someone enjoys the media they enjoy. It's useful to keep in mind that someone who enjoys a piece of media where we see nothing but problems can in fact be someone who's smart, thoughtful, shares our values, and is very much aware of said problems. Alternatively, they may have read the story in ways that are not intuitive for us but would be interesting to hear about.

➝ I got goose bumps reading Molly Crabapple's brilliant essay on the myth of the meritocracy:

Not talking about money is a tool of class war. A culture that forbids employees from comparing salaries helps companies pay women and minorities less. Ignoring the mercenary grit behind success leads to quasi-religious abundance gurus claiming you can visualize your way to wealth.

Even we successful artists do it. It's easy to ignore luck, privilege, and bloody social climbing when you stand onstage in a pair of combat boots. It's easy to say that if people are just good enough, work hard enough, ask enough, believe enough, they will be like us.

But it's a lie. Winning does not scale. We may be free beings, but we are constrained by an economic system rigged against us. What ladders we have are being yanked away. Some of us will succeed. The possibility of success is used to call the majority of people failures.

Celebrate beating a treacherous system. But remember, there is no god handing out rewards to the most deserving. Don't pretend that everyone can win.

➝ I'm probably the last person on the Internet to find out about the Big Cat Rescue YouTube channel, but nevermind: these videos got me through some awful days of being sick last week.

➝ Jennifer Barnes elaborates on John Green's post about possible reasons for the success of TFioS and makes some excellent points, especially in regards to gender.

➝ And speaking of John Green, this is a thing of beauty.

➝ Trowellblazers: a tumblr about women in paleontology, archeology, and geology :D

➝ Since we're on the subject of women and paleontology, how awesome is it that Emily of the Brain Scoop was offered her dream job? Jodie, I was telling you about these videos recently, so here's a reminder to check out their channel. The videos are short, thoughtful and engaging, and I think you'd enjoy them a lot.

➝ Jeanne got to go to WisCon and had Jo Walton write her what is possibly the coolest dedication ever. Luckily for us, she shared the experience for our vicarious enjoyment.

➝ Hooooooooow did I not know that the Smithsonian had a series of comics about women in science?

➝ Lastly, here's storify for the #HowILearnedAboutIntersectionality tag that was going strong on Twitter in the past few days. As I've explained before, the idea that the concept of intersectionality is inherently exclusive and must therefore be done away with really bugs me. I absolutely believe that intimidation and perceived barriers to access are real problems, but sometimes I get the feeling that people use this argument in manipulative and less-than-intellectually-honest ways: they know that classism and elitism are things the people they're trying to shut down care about, and so they throw this idea out there as a way to stifle debate. But how patronising is it to suggest that certain ideas will forever be beyond your grasp unless you had a prestigious and expensive education? I didn't have a particularly prestigious education myself, and neither did many of the people I admire the most. And yet their willingness to listen, to learn and to challenge themselves got them far. We are none of us helpless, and learning is always an option. It doesn't have to happen in traditional settings to count.

Comments

[owlmoose]

That Jennifer Barnes article is great. Did you see her follow-up, where she takes on a snarky commenter about the theoretical domination of YA by female authors? It's even better. She breaks out the statistics! I do love John Green (and that video is amazing -- why was I not following the Lady Business Tumblr already?), but I wish he were more open to examining the benefits he gets from male (and white and other) privilege.

[nymeth]

I hadn't seen that, no - thank you so much! I agree; it's even better than the first post.

And sigh, I know. But over the years he's shown he's not someone who's unwilling to listen, so hopefully posts like this will help him get there.

[owlmoose]

It was particularly frustrating in that post, because he even acknowledged that he benefits from male (and white, heterosexual, cisgender) privilege. And then went on to deny that it had *any* bearing on this particular situation, which... come on. I get that he wants to give his editor and his publicist credit, which I'm sure they deserved, but not even the slightest realization that their jobs were easier because he was a cis white male? I agree, though, that he's shown some willingness to listen before, so let's hope it's a process.

[nymeth]

"And then went on to deny that it had *any* bearing on this particular situation, which... come on."

Yep, I know :\ Fingers crossed that Barnes' posts will make him pause and think.