I’ve posted the official call for submissions for the 3rd Carnival of Feminist Science Fiction and Fantasy Fans, which I’ll be hosting at New Game Plus. Have a post on feminism, video games, fandom, genre fiction, movies, television, comics, novels, fanfiction, or something of those sorts? Submit! Don’t make me crack the whip.

And here I am talking about race… again. I have all these beautiful posts on gaming started, but then I see things like nubian’s interview over at feministing and I feel like I have to say something. Whenever posts from feminists of colour talking about their experiences as feminists of colour get linked, invariably at least one person (sometimes another feminist, sometimes not) turns it into how the feminist of colour is mean, bad, racist, whatever.

I’m ashamed to admit it, but it still surprises me how easily the tables get turned on the feminist of colour. How easy their righteous rage, their justified anger, is presented — and accepted! — as them unfairly attacking white feminists/women/men. I just see the smooth 180 and it boggles my mind. Does no one besides the women being attacked see the ridiculousness of privileged people crying, “help, help, I’m being oppressed!’? Does no one see how it’s used to derail the thread from productive conversations?

In the interest of time (and my sanity) I’m just going to examine two of the many ways this happens, using the feministing thread as a case study. But don’t be fooled — nubian may be the most recent victim of this phenomenon, but she is far from the only one.

Read the rest…

First off, sorry for the lack of posting recently. School has just stepped up a notch and I’m struggling to readjust. Next week my part-time job starts, too, but I’m hoping to get some quality posting time in this weekend. Anyway, onto the main event.

Claire of SeeLight has posted this excellent reading list for people interested in learning more about racial/ethnic issues. In the introduction, she says this:

All of these are sources of my knowledge and understanding, sources of my vocabulary. But, of course, I’ve done some study and reading as well, and I should be able to share some print sources with you. And because it’s amazing how difficult it is for a google search to occur to the ignorant (I’m complaining about myself as well; I’ll go halfway around the world to ask a friend a question before I’ll sit down and do a google search about something I’m ignorant of) here’s a non-threatening reading list of things that might help you share the current common understandings that shape the activist Asian American and Hapa spaces in the US today. Basically, I’m providing this (as my last post for IBAR) so as to give no one who reads this an excuse for not knowing. These are my reading recommendations. You can start here and let the reading itself guide you on.

She actually has a lot of great things to say in her introduction, so don’t just skip it and check out the books. Read the whole thing. I guarantee you’ll be glad you did.

Dear Feminists:

I’d like to propose a truce on this whole “sex wars” thing. It’s a battle that’s been raging since before my time, but that doesn’t mean it has to go on forever. No matter how we define ourselves, at the core of it we all want women to be treated as people, right? We want to end oppression, right? Correct me if I’m wrong, but if feminism had to be summed up in one sentence it would be fair to say that feminists “seek to end oppression” perhaps throwing in a comment on how feminism’s focus tends to be on gender.

So why do we have to tear into each other when it comes to… well, everything, really. But, talking about the sex wars, why is it when one of us makes a post on the sex work industry, it all too often is addressed to the “opposing side” which isn’t, as one would think, the industry itself, but rather the feminists who take a different approach?

I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that women shouldn’t be the focus of this battle. And by that I mean we shouldn’t target them — we should target the sex work industry. When talking to feminists outside of our particular mindset, what’s to be gained by dragging the conversation down into the pros/cons of being a sex worker, or watching porn, or whatever? All it does is make it personal, therefore obscuring any useful conversation that could have taken place about the human rights abuses that do happen.

Listen, when it comes down to it, whether or not women should do sex work is a theoretical debate. The fact is, for good or ill, women do. And, even if you believe that no woman would freely choose that, it’s an ending point, not a starting one. If we want to stop the oppression, we gotta start with the begining, and it’s one I think we can all agree on: our sexual culture is hostile to women. Before we do anything, we have to change that.

So, are we going to sit here complaining about women and each other, or are we going to look into ways of changing the sexual culture so that the sex work industry can’t degrade, dehumanize, and traffic in the women unfortunate enough to not have a choice in how they work? Are we going to address pornography, not in terms of ban/not-ban, but rather in terms of critiquing content and treatment of the actors? What about looking at how popular culture feeds into and is influenced by sexual culture, and how that culture has a different standard for women than for men?

Respecting women starts with respecting each other.

Today’s my birthday. I turn a very (im)mature 24. Birthday wishes are expected, from all of you. Even the lurkers.

What do you do when someone makes a claim of personal experience that just isn’t believable? Specifically, do you accuse them of fabricating the claim?

I’m sure many of you have heard by now about the anti-choice blogger who mistook an Onion article for a serious editorial. In a response to that article, he made the claim that the reason he thought the article was genuine was because he would “meet people like her in the field all the time.” Most readers of feminist discussion forums have encountered other experiences of dubious veracity, such as the tale of the poor man harangued for opening a door, or the malicious women’s studies professor who lowers the grades of her male students.

Read the rest…

I don’t think Joe Quesada’s a bad person. I don’t think he hates women. But I do think that he’s digging himself a deep, deep hole on this whole women in the comic book industry thing. For those of you not “in the know,” Joe Quesada is Marvel Comics’ Editor in Chief. This most recent kerfluffle involves him putting his foot into his mouth about the lack of women in the higher ranks of the comic book industry. Ragnell has the scoop on his mediocre response to the question “why hasn’t a women creator made it into the tight circle of Marvel creators?” in her post, Does This Sound Like An Answer?. More commentary can be found here.

Now, Quesada was clearly unprepared for the question. While it’s kind of an eye-roller, we have to cut him some slack. The rug was pulled out from under him, and he did the best he could. But, really, the slack is gone when he’s predictably asked to follow up on the question by Newsrama, and opens with something like this:

To think that the industry, Marvel, DC, or any publisher isn’t hospitable to female creators is ridiculous.

He follows that up with more excuses and backpeddling. He says everything, it seems, except that maybe, perhaps, possibly, the comic book industry might be a teensy bit, I don’t know… Oh, what word am I looking for?

Oh yeah, sexist!

Anyway, enough with the cheap shots. I don’t think Quesada is a bad person, I just think that he used weak arguments to excuse himself, and his colleagues, from examining the problem of sexism in the comic book industry.

Read the rest…

Filed Under [Adopt a Language of Respect and Equality]:

1. Debunking the “Reverse -ism” Argument

Filed Under [How to Approach Minority Spaces]:

1. All Opinions Are Not Created Equal
2. Trust Needs to be Earned
3. Give Minorities the Benefit of the Doubt

To Do List:

1. Tokenism Sucks
2. Integrating Privileged Spaces

So, my Nice Guy post is making the rounds, just like I always wanted it to. Downside is that I have to actually think about commenters who disagree and look into improving the list.

But, hey, I’m all about spreading the love, so here are discussions on the Nice Guy List (in no particular order):
Hot Links

From They’re just words

Personalised expansion from something stolen from terajjin

From Sunbeam’s Scrawls

granny’s link fest.

From random blatherings and collected snark

Newsflash: Enlightened Modern Men Can Still Be Dicks. [July 15, 2006]

I’m not good about keeping up with carnivals (though I did warn you when I made this category), but here are the recent carnivals:

Bent Attractions [July 10, 2006]

Feminists [July 05, 2006] (Despite the criticism on how this edition was handled, it’s still a good read)

Feminist Science Fiction and Fantasy Fans [July 02, 2006] ~First Edition!~

Against Sexual Violence [July 01, 2006]

On the subject of integrating spaces, Claire of SeeLight has written an interesting article, How To Welcome Outsiders, on what to do when a privileged person enters a minority space that you’re hosting. She tackles topics like determining acceptable versus unacceptable behaviour, being proactive in maintaining a safe space, and the difference between guests and invaders.

Here’s an excerpt from her introduction:

I am not monoracial and I do not live a monoracial life. I also do not restrict my social life to people who share my sexual orientation, age, religion, etc. The circle of my life intersects many, many more or less enclosed circles—in fact, I’d venture to say that I intersect more circles than most people (not my friends, though; they’re just as culturally slutty as I am). My friends, family, colleagues, models, and other loved and respected ones come from all communities. All are welcome in my life, and all are welcome to follow me into circles I belong to that are not their own. But it is up to me to make sure that anyone I invite into my life, into any room of my life, is safe there.

Now if only I can muster up the drive and find the time to write on integrating privileged spaces because, hey, the onus shouldn’t always fall on the shoulder of minority groups.

It is apparently an unending problem for geeky men that their girlfriends, who may or may not be geeks, get upset when their boyfriends jilt them for their geek obsession. So I, in my infinite wisdom, and only parly inspired by this post have decided to make the definitive list on getting your girlfriend into your fandom, whatever it may be. So, boys, please pay attention!

Quit yer whining and realize that it’s okay if your SO doesn’t share all of your hobbies.

I mean, there was a reason that you decided to date her in the first place, right? Like her personality, intelligence, the ability for y’all to click on other levels? Maybe if you, I don’t know, focused on that instead of substituting your geeky hobby for actual quality time, you’d find that geeks can coexist with non-geeks on a romantic level.

So, remember, the world does not end if she doesn’t play games or read comics or whatever.

Really.

This time from IGN.com. It’s a month old, but it’s new to me (thanks, Ragnell). I have my “for ‘her’” category, but I’m really starting to feel like I need one specifically for “The Girlfriend List Idiocy” because this is just ridiculous. People rarely tell us “What Men Want” because it’s assumed to be too diverse in the vast majority of subjects, and yet over and over again these “What Women Want” lists crop up. You, out of my geekdom!

Anyway, here’s what I sent via their contact form:

Articles like these are precisely why I avoid your site. I am an avid geek - a gamer, comics fan, and into reading and writing about said geekery. I am exactly what your magazine/site targets, except for that inconvenient aspect of being female.

Women are not some collective Hive Vagina. You can no more recommend good books for us than you can for men — and the only “Books/Games/Whatever for Your Boyfriend” lists I have seen are parodies of the overabundant stereotyical “Girlfriend Lists”.

Listen, I’m sure the list was made and posted with the best intentions. But, please, from one geek to another: please stop. I’m not some mysterious creature to be tamed with your list of books. I — and every other woman, geek or no — am an individual. A human being.

When you publish lists like that, you erase our humanity by assuming that we’re all the same.

Ragnell, the evil sadist who sent me the link in the first place, has posted her reply here. It’s pithy and to the point, and if you want to laugh instead of cry/fume, go read it.

I was very excited to see Pirates of the Caribbean II: The Dead Man’s Chest Friday night; I loved the first film and used to work at the Magic Kingdom theme park where I frequented the Florida’s abbreviated version of the ride. Beyond watching the trailers, I’d remained spoiler free and didn’t know what to expect from Pirates. While queueing at a small town American theater, I studied the poster for the film and saw three brown-skilled men with jeering and perplexed looks on their faces in the lower left-hand corner. Uh-oh, I thought. What am I getting into?

Here ye be warned, this post contains some mild spoilers for Pirates of the Caribbean II.

Read the rest…

Reading blac[k]ademic, as I am known to do, I came across this excellent post by nubian, did i hurt your feelings?, on (white) feminism and (not) respecting minority spaces. First of all, I’m telling you all to put my post on hold and go read it. Now, not later.

Have you read nubian’s post yet? Yes? Good.

So, aside from thinking that I want to include it in my How to be a Real Nice Guy post, I was struck by this line:

the really upsetting part about this, is that the posting by nio was linked in the (white) carnival of feminists

“White carnival of feminsts??” I cried. Then my mind started inventing all these reasons why Niobium’s post would have been included in the carnival. The one I settled on was that the Feminist Carnival has a duty to be objective. It should include all of the feminisms, even the ones that contradict each other.

But… is that true? Is that true objectivity, and even if it is, is objectivity really useful in a carnival by feminists, for feminists?

Read the rest…

Over at the Feminist SF Blog, Laura Q has written an excellent analysis of Joss Whedon & race.

Here’s a small excerpt of what she says in regards to characterization in Firefly:

The ‘Verse is much more suggestive of Whedon & crew’s take on politics: generally progressive, comfortable with feminism, interested in but a little clueless about class, and deeply uncomfortable with dealing with race and racism. So the racelessness of the people of color is the white boy version of racial utopia: color-blindness, where we can all just appreciate each other for the color/texture of our skin and hair. The color-blindness of not wanting to deal with it.

All I can say is that you need to go read this. Now. No, seriously, you’re taking too long. Stop reading what I’m writing and go read Laura’s post. I mean it.

I am a big fan of science. Studies, statistics, innovations in technology, you name it. Probably because I grew up in a family interested in debate and discussion and opinions only get you so far in those instances. In recent years, my mother in particular has embraced her Inner Skeptic and has encouraged me to do the same.

And, really, I think it’s high time for me to share the love of the Inner Skeptic with the world. Yes, that’s right. I am sharing the love. Sharing it. With you. So you’d better read on to see how this love will be shared.

Read the rest…