#writing this out because the way people talk about woman hood and feminism is different when you are thin

[spankedbyspike]

Teaching people to be anti-racist doesn't necessarily address the structure of racism itself.

Jan. 2, 2019, 1:58 PM ‎PSTBy Noah Berlatsky (in NBC News, Think segment)

This past October, my son and his classmates lobbied their small private school to change the official holiday of Columbus Day to Native People's Day. My son wrote a short letter to the faculty explaining why they shouldn't celebrate white imperialism, and that native peoples were too often ignored or erased or pushed to the side in discussions of American history. Some parents didn't like the change, but the teachers and administration were supportive, and they changed the name.

As you'd imagine, my wife and I were very proud. We’d hoped to teach our son anti-racism, and here he was doing anti-racist activism in his own small way. We were glad we'd sent him to a school that encouraged kids to speak up, and was open to change.

One of our ongoing societal challenges will be figuring out ways to move beyond individual education and address the root issues of inequality — and our role in upholding them.

At the same time, though, the school is a private school. Sending kids to private school is an option you only have if you have a certain amount of money. In paying for him to go to that school, we were at least partially abetting a system that benefits more affluent people. And affluent people in the U.S. are often (though not always) white. We sent our son to a school that taught and encouraged anti-racism. But teaching people to be anti-racist doesn't necessarily address the structure of racism itself. In fact, racist structures often determine who does and does not have access to these kinds of educational opportunities. One of our ongoing societal challenges will be figuring out ways to move beyond individual education and address the root issues of inequality — and our role in upholding them.

Margaret Hagerman, a sociologist at Mississippi State University, talks about these difficult contradictions in her book, “White Kids: Growing Up With Privilege In a Racially Divided America.” Hagerman spent two years with 30 families in a midwestern city observing affluent white parents and their children and interviewing both groups about race and racism. She babysat, took kids to activities and listened in the car as they gossiped. Some kids claimed that black students in their schools sold drugs and were dangerous. Others talked about ways in which black friends were unfairly singled out for punishment, or even had their bathroom access restricted.

Hagerman found important differences in the ways that parents talked to their children about race, and important differences in the ways that kids responded. But she also found that white parents — even anti-racist white parents — actively reproduce inequality.

Hagerman found important differences in the ways that parents talked to their children about race, and important differences in the ways that kids responded.

It may seem like there's already more than enough writing about white children. After all, the vast majority of children's literature is about white kids. But, Hagerman told me by phone, "while there is a lot of writing about white kids, there is not a lot from a critical race perspective. Much of the developmental psychology literature uses white kids as the sample, but doesn't interrogate what whiteness means or how it situates them in society." White children are everywhere, but their whiteness is effectively invisible and unspoken.

Some parents, Hagerman found, preferred to keep race unspoken. Families she interviewed in a wealthy, conservative suburb, for example, tended to avoid the topic of race with their children. "They adhered to a color blind way of thinking," Hagerman told me. "They would say that race doesn't matter, or that we're beyond race." One girl told Hagerman that in her school, they weren't even allowed to say the word "racist" — it was on a list of forbidden words that also included homophobic, sexist, and racist slurs.

Kids from these families were so worried about being labeled racist that they were reluctant to identify people as black or white. Yet, obviously, the children could see racial differences — and when pressed they would sometimes say things that were racist. Hagerman reports white children telling her that black children got in trouble in school because of the way they were raised. One 12-year-old white child told Hagerman that police treat white people worse than black people — an argument contradicted by a mountain of evidence.

People who identified as more politically liberal were much more willing to acknowledge the existence of racism, and to talk to their children about it. Many of these parents identified as specifically anti-racist, and were determined to teach their kids to work against bigotry and inequality. Parents encouraged their kids to do charitable work, for example, both in their own communities and on (expensive) overseas trips.

Yet, as Hagerman told me, "all of these families in their own ways were participating in the reproduction of racial inequality." Children were sent to private school, or when they went to public school benefited from private tutors or enrichment classes. Even community service can reproduce racist ideas. It's hard to see people as equals when you always have power over them, or when your primary experience with them involves giving them charity.

The spectacle of well-intentioned people working, half unconsciously, to solidify and perpetuate their own power is not an encouraging one. "I feel like my findings are pretty dismal," Hagerman admits. "When you have people who have a lot of wealth alongside this racial privilege, they're ultimately making decision that benefit their own kids, and I don't know how you really interrupt that."

Hagerman’s findings do offer at least one glimmer of hope. White children, she found, don't automatically reproduce the racial ideology of their parents. One white boy she interviewed, for example, disliked his private school in part because he felt the children were too privileged and too racially isolated.

On the other hand, children of anti-racist parents would sometimes use racist stereotypes or make racist comments. Kids aren't copies of their parents, which means as a society they can become better…or worse. "I don't want to paint this as, 'we're all going to be okay because of the kids!'" Hagerman told me. But the possibility for change is at least potentially positive.

As for white adults, Hagerman says, if they really want a less racist world, they may need to rethink how they approach parenting. "Everyone is trying to do the best for their kid," she says. "But I actually think that there are times when maybe the best interest of your own kid isn't actually the best choice. Ultimately, being a good citizen sometimes conflicts with being good parents. And sometimes maybe parents should decide to be good citizens over being good parents." That could mean voting to raise taxes so to better fund public schools. Maybe in our case it should have meant choosing a public school rather than a private one.

Of course, as a parent, you want the best possible future for your child. But the best possible future should include a society that isn't organized around racism. Hagerman's book is a careful, painful and convincing argument that when white people give their children advantages, they are often disadvantaging others. Racism is so hard to overturn, in part, because white people prop it up when they work to make sure their children succeed.

Noah Berlatsky

Noah Berlatsky is a freelance writer. He edits the online comics-and-culture website The Hooded Utilitarian and is the author of the book "Wonder Woman: Bondage and Feminism in the Marston/Peter Comics, 1941-1948."

#makes you think #every day racism #bigotry #sexism #worth discussing #article

[professional-anti]

Chapter Ten: City of Bones

Things that have happened since the last update: I moved into my new school in a whole different country, became problematic, and read one (1) book. So I’m pretty cultured atm. Let’s do this.

Part Two: Easy is the Descent We have an unstranslated quote from the Aeneid, I guess so CC can show off how smart she is.

Chapter Ten: City of Bones Everybody freaks tf out about the fact that Jocie was Voldemort’s wife. We have an actual, real-life, total gem from Clary:

"That's impossible! My mother would never-she was only ever married to my father! She didn't have an ex-husband!”

Clary….blease…….I’m begging u……..she makes it so easy………

Hodge lists off the other death eaters. I’m not even going to pretend they’re not death eaters. There’s no reason to. Anyway, they all got in trouble after the Uprising™, except the Lightwoods got “clemency” bc they had a baby. Which is ridiculous and makes no sense. Ppl don’t just get lighter sentences bc they have babies. Hodge’s punishment is that he has to stay in this mansion in New York. I thought the Clave would be more into capital punishment, just going off how much they suck, but I guess that would just hinder the story.

Hodge reveals that Voldemort wants the cup bc it can give him an army of Shadowhunters. Isabelle comes in to say that she ordered Chinese, which raises interesting questions. Wouldn’t the ppl delivering just see a decrepit, condemned house? Did she have to order to next door and wait outside?

In the kitchen (where Simon is still staring awkwardly at Isabelle), Isabelle says that she thinks the fact that Voldie is looking for Jocie is “kind of romantic”. You know, that this vile supremacist is hunting down the woman who left him. Super romantic. Then she says the “evil thing” is “sort of hot.” No, really:

"Isabelle," said Hodge patiently, "this is the man who rained down destruction on Idris the like of which it had never seen, who set Shadowhunter against Downworlder and made the streets of the Glass City run with blood." "That's sort of hot," Isabelle argued, "that evil thing.”

At least in Harry Potter, no one thought that Voldemort was hot. In fact, everyone rightly despised him for killing innocents and preaching hatred. Bellatrix Lestrange was physically attractive, and nobody tried to argue that her actions were hot. Because they saw the terror she brought. No one would call her carving “Mudblood” into Hermione’s arm “hot”.

Oh, and even worse, after Isabelle reveals she likes murderous racists, “Simon trie[s] to look menacing”. The whole situation is just so awkward. Hodge tells them that Valentine would use the cup on children (it would kill adults) and discard the children who couldn’t handle it. Isabelle finally gets that Voldemort is bad and that water is wet. Jace is super mad that Voldemort wants to harm muggle children bc Shadowhunters are all about protecting the muggles. Never mind that Jace has shown nothing but disrespect for them the entire book.

Hodge pushed his plate away. "Valentine was insane," he said. "Brilliant, but insane. He cared about nothing but killing demons and Downworlders. Nothing but making the world pure. He would have sacrificed his own son for the cause and could not understand how anyone else would not." "He had a son?" said Alec. "I was speaking figuratively," said Hodge, reaching for his handkerchief. He used it to mop his forehead before returning it to his pocket. His hand, Clary saw, was trembling slightly.

Could Hodge be any more obvious. No, really, I’m asking. Please be more obvious Hodge. All the readers are dumb as goldfish and wouldn’t understand subtly. We need bricks in the face. This is compounded by Hodge telling them that they shouldn’t do anything to stop Voldmort, that the Ministry of Magic will handle it. Hodge is sooo not on Voldemort’s side, you guys. Never!

They decide to go to the Silent Brothers to retrieve Clary’s memories, which they think will help them save Jocie from Valentine. The Silent Brothers are Shadowhunters who destroyed their bodies with runes and now have crazy mental powers. Honestly sounds a little creepy. I’d read a book about their order, tbh. Are they all guys, though? Then I wouldn’t read it. Also, they sound like Dementors.

That night, Clary has a dream that she’s dancing with Simon in the Glass City, and then Simon turns into Jace. The Symbolism is so real. Then Jace wakes her up, holding her wrists. Apparently she tried to hit him in her sleep, but he shouldn’t have grabbed her wrists. I can think of few things more terrifying than waking up to a boy restraining my arms. Apparently, she fell asleep in a hallway the night before and Jace and Hodge let her to a bedroom. Honestly confused how she fell asleep in a hallway, but we have bigger problems to deal with.

Oh. My. God. A silent brother (I’m done with the dumb capitalization. We don’t say a Congresswoman or a Principal or a Citizen) has arrived. And his name is. His name is. BROTHER JEREMIAH.

Clary gets dressed and wishes she could look more like Isabelle. Bc girls have to judge themselves on their appearance even during everday tasks, like getting dressed. They meet BJ in the library, and he’s described like a death eater with a white color scheme, basically:

For a moment she thought he was alone in the room: that Jace had been playing a joke on her. Then she saw a figure move out of the dimness, and she realized that what she had thought was a patch of darker shadow was a man. A tall man in a heavy robe that fell from neck to foot, covering him completely. The hood of the robe was raised, hiding his face. The robe itself was the color of parchment, and the intricate runic designs along the hem and sleeves looked as if they had been inked there in drying blood. The hair rose along Clary's arms and on the back of her neck, prickling almost painfully. "This," said Hodge, "is Brother Jeremiah of the Silent City." The man came toward them, his heavy cloak swirling as he moved, and Clary realized what it was about him that was strange: He made no sound at all as he walked, not the slightest footstep. Even his cloak, which should have rustled, was silent. She would almost have wondered if he were a ghost-but no, she thought as he halted in front of them, there was a strange, sweet smell about him, like incense and blood, the smell of something living.

BJ says that he can’t get Clary’s memories bc there’s some sort of magical “block” in her head, and that she has to come to the Brotherhood HQ in order to have it removed. BJ leaves on his own, and Clary and Jace go and stand on the corner. Jace is incredibly cruel about Simon. Then a black carriage disguised as a limo pulls up, driven by BJ himself. It’s honestly cool how the carriage moves thru NY traffic and no one nottices. It’s the exact touch of “magic hidden in New York” that I like. Clary and Jace also have a conversation about poetry and music, which reveals the distance between their worlds, that I like, so maybe this carriage is magical.

Oh, here we are. Back on our bullshit. Clary looks at Jace’s ring and thinks that “there would have been something feminine about a boy wearing a ring, but there wasn’t.” Let’s deconstruct, shall we? First of all, men wear rings all the time. Secondly, we get it, Jace is super super masculine, feminity in men is Bad, Jace would never at all be feminine in any way at all bc that’s gross right? Like, I love how Clare has to specify that this ring in no way, shape, or form makes Jace at all feminine. No one would have thought it, and, also, there’s nothing wrong with femininity in anyone.

Jace says that he didn’t tell Hodge the identities of the guys Luke was talking to bc then Hodge would know that Jace wouldn’t take no for an answer re killing Valentine. He gives a pretty realistically traumatized description of his father’s death:

"I was ten," Jace said. She turned to look at him. He was without expression. It always seemed like some color drained out of him when he talked about his father. "We lived in a manor house, out in the country. My father always said it was safer away from people. I heard them coming up the drive and went to tell him. He told me to hide, so I hid. Under the stairs. I saw those men come in. They had others with them. Not men. Forsaken. They overpowered my father and cut his throat. The blood ran across the floor. It soaked my shoes. I didn't move.”

Bare bones, emotionless, disconnected. I approve. Honestly, I like the next part too. Clary shows emotion while attempting to comfort Jace, and Jace tells her that he’s not unhappy bc he has a purpose. It shows a bit about their respective upbringings.

Jace says that demons are worse than everything else (e.g. vampires and warlocks) bc the latter are part human while the former are “interdimensional parasites”. Doesn’t explain why Jace is such a dick to the other Downworlders, though. If I remember correctly, he’s going to be a total asshole to vampires at some party later on. I wouldn’t mind Jace’s disgust as much if it weren’t so confusing. The book contradicts itself so much. It’s demons he doesn’t like, no it’s all Downworlders, he’s all about protecting mundies, but actually, he hates them. It flip-flops back and forth, leaving me with little understanding of Jace’s psyche.

They end up at the Marble Cemetary and take a secret passageway under a statue into BJ and co’s lair.

You know why I think this seems so good to me? I read a little bit more of ACOMAFail last night, and this writing is so much better in comparison.

Anyway, the lair called the Silent City (so many cities), and it’s giant and underground has archways with shadowhunter ashes mixed in. Pretty cool. Clary also has a moment where she tells the brothers they have to wait for her to be ready for them to go inside her head. Showing agency, girl!

The brothers do their thing, and a bunch of memories come into Clary’s mind. Among others, there’s a box with the initials J.C. on it (Jesus Christ?) and a doorway with the name “MAGNUS BANE” over the door. When she comes to, she’s lying on the marble floor and has blood all over her arm. Not sure what she managed to cut herself on. The floor should have bruised her, not cut her. Anything for the Drama, I guess. Jace heals her with a stele. Anyway, the block can’t be removed, and they have to go find Magnus Bane. Clary and Jace leave. The end.

#anti cassandra clare #anti the mortal instruments #book snark #CoB: Chapter 10 #CoB snark

[bookaddict24-7]

BOOK REVIEW: Moxie by Jennifer Mathieu

Release Date: September 19, 2017

Age Group: 14+

Genres: Contemporary, Feminism

My rating: 5/5 Stars

Add it to your TBR on Goodreads here. 

Disclaimers: 

I received a copy via the publisher through NetGalley. 

This is a long text post. 

There may or may not be spoilers.

You can check my original post on Goodreads here. 

"Moxie is for every girl." 

(I also think boys should read this one, too)

Moxie by Jennifer Mathieu is one of those novels that, much like with recent and timely releases in YA, I believe will have a big impact on today's readers. In a very unapologetic and jarring fashion, Mathieu has managed to bring the very real issue of inequality between genders, and the stereotypes that plague women in North America. I say North American because this is where the novel is set--I know there are more issues with gender inequality all around the world. 

I read one of Mathieu's other books called The Truth About Alice which is lesser known but equally important because it touches on the topic of slut shaming and the power of rumours. If you've read Moxie and feel like you want more, I strongly urge you to pick up The Truth About Alice. I love Mathieu's writing because just when you think your eyes are open to the situations around you, she opens them just a bit wider by metaphorically asking you, "What if YOU got to see it all through your own eyes?" 

Vivian, the protagonist, is that gateway for the reader to see a world that may be the same as their own, or vastly different. Vivian is the daughter of a woman who once fought for equality with a vengeance. Finding the courage to halfway follow in her mother's footsteps, Vivian decides to find her own way of fighting back. In doing so, she is giving voice to the once voiceless girls of her school. 

Here's the thing: Vivian's school is a disaster when it comes to gender equality. You might read the situations and say, "No way, that's too much! That can't possibly happen/be happening!" It's scary that we live in a world where things like that can and do happen.

I live in Canada and I am a decade too late to see how gender inequality is affecting the school system today. Either that, or I was either unaware or I never paid too much attention (which I do regret). But I've read stories and seen videos of girls being put through a lot at their schools. Girls being suspended, or sent home because of what they're wearing. Boys being excused from their actions because of their athletic prowess, or because they are like tiny gods in their own small towns. 

When watching these news and reading these stories, one always (unknowingly) places a thin, clear line between themselves and the stories. Thinking, "Oh that's horrible and it's happening...but maybe not here?" Every one is different, so maybe it's just me. I think that's why this book is so jarring, because being in first person, you get to see through Viv's eyes. You get to experience the shock and the tension and the "OMG did that just happen?" reaction. Because while the events might seem over the top, they could very well be happening now. And even if they are hyperbolic situations, it is meant to get a reaction out of the reader. It is meant to lift the reader up from potential complacency.

I had a digital copy of this book, so while I got to look at the Zines, I didn't get a chance to see them in their full glory. They're amazing and I really hope that readers can feel empowered looking at them. The level of creativity, as well as positive rebellion in this book is inspiring. 

One of the best, absolute best things about Moxie is that it truly honours feminism. It talks about equality, tackles the misconception that follows feminism like a shadow, and introduces ways to fight for equality without literally fighting, or getting aggressive. There's a scene in this book where one character comments on why we need a word like feminism, why can't we just have equality? And Vivian responds with: 

"But isn't that what a feminist is? [...] Equality?" 

and also this gem from later in the book: 

"Feminist. It's not a bad word. After today it might be my favourite word. Because really all it is is girls supporting each other and wanting to be treated like human beings in a world that's always finding ways to tell them they're not." 

[Both quotes are from an unfinished e-galley of Moxie and may have changed in the final printing]

I love BOTH of these quotes because of the message they're portraying to their readers and young girls AND boys who might pick up this book. I like that situations came up in Moxie where the reader is shown how they can or may be handled in real life situations. Some people may need to have it all explained to them and some people won't want to hear it. The world is far from perfect. 

The pacing is super quick and the tone, other than the obvious message of the book, felt like one of those books you might read while lying outside in the summer sun, though it's set during a full school year. Vivian and her bicycle riding adventures made me think of moments in my teen-hood where I always had somewhere to go and be. It just felt strangely nostalgic. 

I love all of the characters and how they all had something to offer to the story. Everyone had a reason to be in this story. This book used every side character equally. The character growth wasn't just for Vivian to experience, but for those around her as well.

Vivian herself is a complex character who, for most of the time, is very introverted when it comes to the things she witnesses. Even when she does start to speak up, she is hesitant, or just learning to wear her new level of confidence. She isn't without faults and I like that instead of making her a perfect spokesperson, Mathieu writes her as a young woman learning to navigate her life. Despite the amazing message and the incredible feats she eventually accomplishes, one has to remember that Vivian is a teenager and those are some of the most difficult years in a person's life as they grow into who they will one day become. 

I don't know if you can tell, but I really liked this book. 

I strongly recommend this one for anyone who loves a powerful story. I believe that EVERYONE should give it a shot. Moxie's message is powerful enough to change the world. 

Happy reading!

#books #books for review #read #reading #reader #review #book review #book reviews #reviews #my writing #moxie #jennifer mathieu #young adult #yalit #feminism #contemporary #september #new release #Features #writing #book blogger #book blog #recommendations #recommendation #bookaholic #bookworm #booklover #bookaddict

[sophygurl]

10,000 Worlds; 10,000 Feminisms: What Even IS Feminist Science Fiction Anyway? - Wiscon 41 panel write-up

These tend to be long and only of interest to specific segments of folk so click the clicky to read.

Disclaimers:

I hand write these notes and am prone to missing things, skipping things, writing things down wrong, misreading my own handwriting, and making other mistakes. So this is by no means a full transcript. 

Corrections, additions, and clarifications are most welcome. I’ve done my best to get people’s pronouns and other identifiers correct, but please do let me know if I’ve messed any up. Corrections and such can be made publicly or privately on any of the sites I’m sharing these write-ups on(tumblr and dreamwidth for full writings, facebook and twitter for links), and I will correct ASAP.

My policy is to identify panelists by the names written in the programming book since that’s what they’ve chosen to be publicly known as. If you’re one of the panelists and would prefer something else - let me know and I’ll change it right away.

For audience comments, I will only say general “audience member” kind of identifier unless the individual requests to be named.

Any personal notes or comments I make will be added in like this [I disagree because blah] - showing this was not part of the panel vs. something like “and then I spoke up and said blah” to show I actually added to the panel at the time.

10,000 Worlds; 10,000 Feminisms: What Even IS Feminist Science Fiction Anyway?

Moderator: Julie C. Day. Panelists: Jackie Gross (ladyjax), Lauren Lacey, (Kini Ibura Salaam was listed, but unable to make the panel due to travel issues)

#10000Worlds - lots of livetweets if you want to see more, also lists of recs including stuff I’m sure I missed

Julie introduced herself, saying this was her first WisCon, she is a writer, and “I am weird.”

Lauren introduced herself and talked about teaching at Edgewood college - teaches contemporary speculative fiction and directs the women and gender studies program. She recently taught a class on contemp. global feminisms. 

Jackie introduced herself as a writer of fanfic (ladyjax on AO3), and also teaches at UC Berkley. Used to work for a women’s bookstore. Motherlands was the first feminist book she read at age 13. She said she started out as a feminist, and then a black feminist, and then a lesbian black feminist. 

Julie started off the questions about SF as feminism being a broad category, so make it personal, and asked the panelists to list off a couple of best/worst works of feminist SF.

Lauren said a not-fave of hers is Sheri Tepper’s work, specifically Beauty. Revised fairy tales are ways that SFF writers were re-appropriating fairy tales. As feminists, we should be asking ourselves what do we keep - not just in our fiction but in general (example: the institution of marriage - what’s good about it, what it isn’t, etc.).

Lauren listed Angela Carter’s work as an example of her favorite feminist SF. 

In regards to Tepper’s work, Lauren said that instead of re-working fairy tales, Tepper was just doing the same things. She also talked about dystopian narratives as being about how everything sucks, and thinks the point of feminist SF should be about giving hope. 

Jackie brought up Daughters of a Coral Dawn by Katherine Forrest, which she hates with the fire of a thousand suns. It was hyped up, but she thought it was bad, although she likes Forrest’s other works. 

Julie talked about feminist fiction as a reflection of how things are vs. pathways forward to something better - not necessarily perfect but better as opposed to the dystopian/utopian paradigm. 

Jackie discussed the idea of entry points where you find yourself in a narrative. She references Suzy McKee Charnas’ Holdfast Chronicles, which brings you from the past to the present to the future, and Shelly Singer’s The Demeter Flower - “we seem to go to the woods a lot!” It’s like something goes wrong, women pack it up and head for the woods. There are lots of similar stories, you read them to see how this story does this kind of narrative differently. Charnas has others in this genre, also Motherlands. 

Jackie laments that dystopias now are for the sake of the dystopia vs. being commentary on where we’re going wrong and how to change that. [I disagree but get where she’s coming from]

Jackie tells us that the director of Moonlight, Barry Jenkins, shot a film series with the idea of slow dystopia called Futurestates.

Julie asked the panelists about the function of YA dystopias. The teen state is about identity and rebellion, coming of age and opposition to authority.

Jackie posited that there is a difference between a dystopia and a distaster. 

Lauren said a story doesn’t have to be just a dystopia or utopia, it can combine elements of both. She mentioned Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood and Octavia Butler’s Parable series as dystopias that represent the hope of resistance/rebellion. 

She also brought up the New Wave 70′s stories where there was this narrative of women just entering SF (when actually we’ve always been here). At this time, there were a lot of feminist utopias - all female societies where men show up. Herland by Charlotte Perkins Gillman is an earlier example of this type of feminist utopia. 

Lauren talked some more about the timelines of these kinds of stories - the 90′s had an explosion of the more dystopian type, but they always existed as well. The dominate culture latched on to this kind of prepatory dystopia around that time. 

Jackie said that she feels differently about Handmaid’s Tale now than in the 80′s when it came out. “All of this has happened to My people already.” Can/should the show give us stories of the people who were wiped out instead of just saying “they’ve killed all of these people” as part of the narrative. For example, in a conversation with a friend, they were wondering - how would the hood react when this started - because the hood is armed up.

She also talked about Womanseed by Sunlight, which has this idea of different people and groups of people who left society at different points eventually finding one another and joining up. Another example is Steve Barnes’ series that begins with the book Streetlethal about 2 different extremes of people working together. 

Julie brought up Jane Eyre and Wide Sargasso Sea as examples where the narrative makes us relate to the main character so much that we’re pulled in to their reality. The real victim is the mad woman in the attic, but we don’t see that at first because of the point of view character. 

Lauren said that a good writer will flag those silences so that we see who isn’t being represented by the main narrative. James Tiptree does this well. Literary theory asks the question - who can speak, and how can they speak. 

Julie talked about feminist SF as being intersectional. An example is Ursula Le Guin’s Left Hand of Darkness and how reading this, she was exposed to ideas of gender identity much sooner than she would have otherwise. SFF leaves room for more expansion of ideas - gives permission for more and lets you experience things and transforms you in different ways.

Jackie emphasized getting away from the mainstream - especially look for gay and lesbian publishers. She mentions Return to Isis by Jean Stewart - things go bad, a new society develops, but there is war with others. Also Swords of the Rainbow, and Gilda Stories. Basically, seek out things that won’t get published by mainstream publishers.

Another example she gave was Space Traders by Derrick Bell, which asks the question - what happens when aliens show up and say they’ll solve all your problems if you give us all of your black people. It’s told as a fable that’s already happened.

She talked about how early copies of Octavia Butler’s Dawn featured a white woman, so it took awhile when reading the book to realize the main character was black. There was an another example like this that I missed the title and author of, but when the publisher was asked why they did this with the cover, the response was that 1) black people don’t read scifi [UGH] and 2) white people won’t read a book if there’s a black person on the cover [DOUBLE UGH].

Lauren brought up the fact that Indigenous fiction is sold as “Native American” fiction even if it should be put in other genres. She agrees about looking outside the mainstream. The mainstream is what publishes think sells, so we have to seek this other stuff out to find it, and also to send the message of what we want to see more of.

Julie talked more about gay and lesbian publishers still being very necessary.

Jackie added that Barnes and Noble might sell a book by one of these publishers, but it’s the only copy they have, and if it’s a book in a series they won’t have the other books, plus it will be shoved into the LGBT section in the corner.  On the other hand, when Jackie was hand-selling books in a feminist bookstore, it meant being able to say “this is book #5 - do you want me to get 1-4 for you?”

Amazon’s name was taken from a woman’s bookstore - it’s important to remember our history. Mama Bear’s was the last woman’s bookstore in California. 

Lauren brought up that on Amazon, it can be harder to find certain things because people can bid to be at the top of search lists. Amazon and Google are rigged - making smaller publishers and self-published books harder to find. 

An audience member shouted out - “Library catalogs are not rigged!”

Julie stated that there are many narratives to tell and asked the panelists if things have changed?

Lauren said it’s dangerous to historicize the present, but there are ways in which the dominant popular culture has embraced SFF and it’s interesting to look at the ways that has contained the genre. 

She added that we should check out WisCon’s Guests of Honor and Tiptree noms for examples of all of the great stuff out there right now. She said that 10 years ago when she was studying SF, people were surprised that it was a thing you could do - but now people are getting it more.

Jackie said she was fortunate to have studied the golden age of SF. She added that she was a Tiptree judge a few years ago - it’s not all necessarily feminist, but there’s a lot that is. She recommended All That Outer Space Allows by Ian Sales. In this story, women write SF but it’s seen as sort of housewife stuff. This ends up meaning that only women can see spaceships when they come. 

Jackie also said that reading everything for the Tiptree judging showed her that while not everything she had to read was great - yes, there are indeed 10,000 narratives out there. 

Jackie and Lauren discussed how people are looking for more Hunger Games-like stories, but that doesn’t work for everyone. Authors can’t keep telling the same thing over and over. 

Julie discussed how publishers, editors, etc. may not connect to certain narratives, but that has more to say about them and their own biases than about the stories not getting published. 

An audience member asked if there was a word for created societies that are neither dystopian nor utopian. Julie offered heterotopia. An example is Le Guin’s Dispossessed. 

Another audience member said they are looking for publishers of contemporary feminist SF - not feminist fantasy and especially not romantic fantasy.

Jackie suggested Aqueduct Press, but also said not to discount the romantics. For example, Romantic Times reviews a lot of SF. Romance can be a gateway genre to SF. 

An audience member brought up Woman on the Edge of Time by Marge Piercy as having a balance of dystopia and utopia, where the utopian society is based on reproductive technologies. (Either this audience member or Lauren on the panel - my notes aren’t clear which) stated that their students love that, as well as Octavia Butler’s work. 

Another audience rec is Rachel Pollack’s Unquenchable Fire. Jackie seconds this rec and added that it’s a real mind bender. 

Jackie said that utopias can get so boring, whereas many dystopias are like - well that’s kinda how life is. 

An audience member said that as a male, he enjoyed the wave of feminist utopias because he found they were the only ones he actually wanted to live in - not like the male-written ones he’d previously read.

Jackie mentions The Wanderground by Sally Miller Gearheart as another in this genre.

An audience member asked Lauren about finding feminist SF on a global level. Lauren said it’s out there but in the US, we don’t tend to like reading stuff that comes from elsewhere, so it’s harder to find.

Jackie said that everything nominated for Tiptree is easily findable on their website. Also manga is get-able. 

Lauren talked about how a lot of work from writers in India gets described as fantasy but there are genre issues there due to people writing about Hindu traditions and getting labeled “fantasy.” 

Jackie mentioned the discussions that happened recently on twitter in regards to Justine Larbalestier and Magical Realism genre issues - post-modern female authors just tend to get labeled that way and it can be problematic.

An audience member brought up Starhawk’s The Fifth Sacred Thing. Jackie talked about it as coming from the SFF and woman’s spirituality movements, and added that San Fransisco SFF slipstream fic is a whole thing. 

At this point of the panel a ton of recommendations got tossed out, but I’d stopped taking notes because I had to hurry off to the green room for my own panel in the next time slot. Do check out the twitter hashtag as the livetweeters were pretty diligent about getting those listed. 

#10000worlds #wiscon #wiscon 41 #wiscon41 #wc41 #10000 worlds #10000 feminisms #wiscon panel write-ups #feminist science fiction