quarantining the girl cooties

[truepenny]

yuki_onna has a good, chewy post about Realms of Fantasy's plan for an All Women-Authors Issue. What she says about it, of course, goes for any minority group: women*, African-Americans, GLBT writers, writers with disabilities, etc. etc. etc. I think there's a point in the process of opening a genre where the Very Special Episode Issue is a good thing, when what you're saying with it is, HEY! There are enough [women/African-Americans/GLBT writers/writers with disabilities/etc.] doing excellent work in our field to fill A WHOLE ISSUE! Maybe we should all be PAYING ATTENTION!

But, returning to the specific circumstances, that's really not where women SF writers are anymore, and hasn't been for, jeez, thirty years. Because, seriously, a whole issue of Realms of Fantasy (or any other magazine) is, what? Six stories? Seven stories? Ten if they're small? I guarantee you there are more than ten women writers doing excellent work in sffh. As Cat says, a Very Special Issue is tokenism. (It also suggests, subliminally, that women writers are fragile flowers and can't compete with men head-to-head, that our stories wouldn't be good enough to fill a whole issue without this special enclave, like we're a rare species of owl or something.) It neither causes nor promises fundamental change in the way a magazine is run or the way an editor makes decisions.

I should say here that I don't know what the motivations are at RoF. For all I know, this is a sincere attempt to cut through the male-dominated bullshit and champion the cause of feminism and women writers. And it's a very attention-getting way of doing it. I'm just not sure it's the best way.

[ETA: as jimhines kindly points out, Douglas Cohen explains some of the editorial thinking in the second comment to the announcement.]

---
*Not, of course, that women are a numerical minority. Tra la.

Comments

[jimhines.livejournal.com]

Douglas Cohen explains some of the reasons behind the issue in the second comment on the announcement post: http://www.rofmag.com/2010/01/04/announcing-august-2011-women-of-fantasy-themed-issue/

[truepenny.livejournal.com]

...

I dunno if Shawna McCarthy edited the first feminist speculative fiction anthology (Amazon has one, Space of Her Own (http://www.amazon.com/Space-Asimovs-Science-Fiction-Anthology/dp/B000NQBZGY/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1262723073&sr=1-2), from 1983, and check out the gender politics of that cover), but citing that credential actually just reinforces my point: she edited an all-women-authors SF anthology THIRTY YEARS AGO. Have we not moved on at all?

This is not to diss Shawna McCarthy, and CERTAINLY not to diss the fact that she edited an all-women-authors SF anthology in 1983--because that's an honorable achievement, and I know it. It's just to say that this feels like we're stuck in a time warp.

[ide-cyan.livejournal.com]

There have been lots of feminist and/or all women SFnal anthologies, going back over 30 years, with such editors as Virginia Kidd, Pamela Sargent, Marianne Leconte putting them together in the 70s.

http://feministsf.org/anths/index.html#editorindex

I really hope this ROF issue isn't going to compound tokenism with suppression of history.

[truepenny.livejournal.com]

Thank you!

[ide-cyan.livejournal.com]

I tried to leave the link on the ROF blog, but the URL might have landed my comment in moderation.

[alex51324.livejournal.com]

I'm kind of stuck on how the rationale he explains is, "We thought it would be cool." OK, well, now that you have me caught in the crushing grip of reason, I have no objections.

Sometimes, dude, when you have a cool idea, you have to keep thinking beyond the initial "ooh, shiny!"--an even cooler idea might be on the other side. (For example, the article he mentions would just as easily fit into a Very Special Issue about gender, which would, or at least could, be cool.

[truepenny.livejournal.com]

That was what I noticed with the cover on Amazon: the ASIMOV in huge letters across the top. Hello to the irony.

[dd-b.livejournal.com]

I agree entirely with your analysis of how it is a good thing at earlier stages of breaking down the barriers, and not so good a thing later on. Generalizing, this sort of thing is "good" or "bad" depending on the environment -- the group of people who are seeing it. (Presumably it's "neutral", or so close as makes no difference, in some cases, too, if only as part of a transition.)

The group of people reading a magazine, submitting to a magazine, editing the magazine, and hearing about what's happening at a magazine (especially if somebody on the Internet thinks it's noteworty) are all different. Therefore, the answer to whether an all- issue is a good thing may differ for each of those groups.

So in theory, something that was good for the group of people reading the magazine might look bad to the people writing for it, or to self-selected flash mobs off the Internet attracted by a claim that something bad was happening.

This is but one example of how group 3 there (the editors) have a hard job. I, like you, suspect they made the wrong choice this time, but it might actually be the right choice relative to their readership; I know almost nothing about their readership.

[cija.livejournal.com]

Two thoughts:

1. If an editor is going to commit himself to believing that doing this is a constructive way to address feminist and gender issues, he's got to come up for an explanation for why he's not going to be doing that for 50% of the issues from now on. I mean, once you allow that it is a good idea to do it once, what possible reason could there be for not doing it every other issue, forever? Boy-girl-boy-girl?

Because there are non-sexist justifications for never doing special Lady Issues, and there are non-sexist justifications for doing them half the time or, indeed, all the time, but I can't think of any non-sexist justifications for doing one, once.

2. "feminine speculative literature" lol forever.

[leahbobet.livejournal.com]

This is so not constructive at all, but now I want to have a Special Lady Issue just because the phrase makes me laugh like a loon.

[joycemocha.livejournal.com]

I want a Special Lady Issue with all the right packaging. Chocolates, perhaps some fine tea (with matching tea set), bath salts, facial mask, spa day....yeah. I'd go for that.

[leahbobet.livejournal.com]

And we could tag it: "For your Special Lady." In an eighties Barry White voice.

Either that or THE LADY ISSUE, in a Dinosaur Comics voice.

Both are hilarious.

[lady-tigerfish.livejournal.com]

This.

[coffeeem.livejournal.com]

"...submissions dealing with gender, sexism, and other areas important to feminine speculative literature are particularly welcome."

Back in the Plasticine, Will and I co-edited a black and white comics magazine with a male cartoonist friend of ours. One contributor, Minneapolis writer/artist Lisa Blackshear, consistently sent us funny, thought-provoking comics about sexual politics, ideas of beauty, shoes--whatever she felt like, really.

Then she sent us a funny, thought-provoking comic about a woman buying bananas at the supermarket. The bananas were hanging from one of those upright display poles...the base of which was skewering a South American guy, a farm worker. The woman is shocked by the display, but she sidles guiltily up, grabs a bunch of bananas, and goes through the checkout with a sigh of relief. I thought it was the best depiction of liberal guilt I'd seen in a long time.

But our co-editor's response to the cartoon was, "Why can't she stick to women's issues?"

"Other areas important to feminine [sic] speculative literature" are ALL areas. Women, being human, are concerned with the fate of their species and their universe, just as men, being human, are concerned with the wellbeing of, and justice for, all sexes.

[cija.livejournal.com]

He edited "feminine" to read "feminist," without saying anything about it, so that people who didn't see the original text will think the person who left a snide comment about it was deranged or something.

I edit public posts all the time without making a record of every typo I fix, but I really think that when you remove something people are already discussing, you might make some mention of it. I am assuming it was just a typo, and that he does not somehow think that 'feminine' and 'feminist' are more or less different words for the same thing.

[coffeeem.livejournal.com]

I assume likewise. But my main irritation is the apparent belief that gender and sexism are women's issues, and that there are other issues like them. Well, I'll admit that menstruation and menopause are probably of more interest to born-women than to men. But that the theme of Women in Fantasy should naturally focus the issue on a limited set of concerns sounds to me a little too much like suggesting women should stick to cookin' and cleanin' and sewin' and raisin' the young'uns.

[cija.livejournal.com]

This is true, but I also feel that intentionally doing a feminist theme is a lot more palatable than doing a women writers issue and taking it for granted that ladies will naturally want to write on lady subjects. I can see how it might look like a distinction without a difference, though. Continuing to call it 'Women in Fantasy' is not doing themselves any favors, either.

Of course I would feel still less hostile if they would follow it up with a women-only issue of werewolf stories (say) just to make it clear that they do not consider feminism to be YOUR PROBLEM, GIRLS. Like the housework, as you say.

[coffeeem.livejournal.com]

Good point--fixing that typo did give the theme a bit more focus, which helps.

In the '80s, it seemed as if every SF and comics convention I went to had what we began to call The Obligatory Women In Panel. The panel wasn't about how the creation of female protagonists altered the direction of sword-and-sorcery fantasy, or interesting views of the roles of women in post-apocalyptic SF. It was about Women in Science Fiction (or Fantasy, or Comics)...which the panelists were left to try to turn into an actual panel topic, since we were never even sure whether we were supposed to be talking about female characters or female authors or female fans, for cryinoutloud.

The Obligatory Women In Panel eventually grew up and turned into lots of actual panel topics at conventions about interesting gender stuff, with enough specificity that the panelists had a decent starting point for the discussion. But when I read that RoF was announcing a Women in Fantasy issue... Well, just for a second, there, I had a heck of a nasty flashback moment. *g*

(And having now performed my role as a Graying Ol' Lady of SF for the week, I'll quit thumping my cane on the floor and go take my teeth out.)

[truepenny.livejournal.com]

Y'know, I've been on that panel.

[jimhines.livejournal.com]

He did leave a comment on the post at the Realms board.

"Yes, the edit was mine. I clearly meant to write “feminist” and wrote “feminine.” That’s what I get for writing this before the drinking of the morning coffee. Once the mistake was pointed out to me, I changed it at once."

http://www.rofmag.com/2010/01/04/announcing-august-2011-women-of-fantasy-themed-issue/#comment-97

[polenth.livejournal.com]

I didn't intend it to be snide. I just wasn't sure what he meant (and hadn't realised it was a typo).

Thank you for pointing out the change in the main thread. I wondered if I'd misread it till I saw the later comments about the change.

[linkspam-mod.livejournal.com]

Your post has been linked in a Linkspam Collection.

http://linkspam.dreamwidth.org/14268.html

[callunav.livejournal.com]

I think I agree with everything you're saying, here.

My only side comment is that I like anthologies of women's work, and particularly feminist work, because that way I'm more likely (albeit not by any means guaranteed, heaven knows) to get a concentration of stuff I like in one place. Despite the percentages in publishing, about 90% of the sffh I read is written by women. When I'm looking for new authors, I am much more likely to randomly pull something off the shelf if it has a woman's name on the spine. I do read and like fiction by men, quite often - but I read and like a lot more fiction by women.

This really applies more to major collections than to having a Very Special Issue, though. I don't keep up with any magazines at the moment (though I probably want to change that). Certainly, I think all the implications you bring out are present and significant.

(And I keep on pointing out to people that women are not a minority population. Weirdly, I happen to think that's important.)