I think it makes sense to me. But to me that's exactly what I'm wondering about. Are we really trying to fix overall racism as an institution through blogging in fandom?
Several people have compared the POC experience to somebody standing on their foot and not getting off. People talk about actual hurt it causes. In that case, wouldn't it make sense to try to think of ways to evade it? Because in the end there is never a way to completely evade it. Because in the end you still are writing outside of your own experience and no amount of studying up on it will change that. So wouldn't the logical and fair thing be to slap a warning outside "This might not be as good as you have hoped for".
I'm thinking less with people mind who write actively horrible stuff, but more of the "I have well intention, but I'm worried I might not get everything right/I might fall short". To me, it's just fact that you are not going to get everything right. Even if you did an endless amount of historical research, you are not going to get everything right if you haven't lived through it (even if you manage evade things that are actively wrong; but there is a difference between "not getting it actively wrong" and "getting it perfectly right") and since this is fandom, people are even less likely to put in the same amount of research they would or should put in if they are writing an actual book. So wouldn't a fair thing be to give a warning?
It just seems to me that fandom is more or less built on the idea that you can write what you please and that you don't get to question people'e preferences. If somebody wants to write a teamfic where Teyla and Ronan are just afterthoughts that is incredibly depressing, but can you actually forbid people from writing it? At least a warning would indicate some awareness.
I get the idea of how minds have to change so attitudes will change. But isn't the approach from the backdoor also one that deserves considering? If you change the attitudes, maybe the mindsets will eventually change with it? (or how about a combo version? Install some attitude related laws like anti-discrimination laws and still work on trying to change mindsets on top of that)
Again, people use the language of immediate hurt. So wouldn't the normal reaction to hand out a bandaid? I get the idea that it is pointless to keep carrying over bandaids rather than fixing the bridge that is crumbling above. So why can't you do both? Hand out a bandaid and at the meantime continue thinking about how you can fix the bridge above? Work on both the mindsets and the attitudes?
Again, I can picture that these things might be boring or frustrating for fen of color (white fen talking amongst themselves how they could potentially make things nicer for our fellow fen of color), but maybe it is still something that has to happen. With of course, the problem of where we draw the line between things that really need to happen and things that are just the equivalent of tying your shoelaces for 5 hours.
Re: The safe space metaphor
Several people have compared the POC experience to somebody standing on their foot and not getting off. People talk about actual hurt it causes. In that case, wouldn't it make sense to try to think of ways to evade it? Because in the end there is never a way to completely evade it. Because in the end you still are writing outside of your own experience and no amount of studying up on it will change that. So wouldn't the logical and fair thing be to slap a warning outside "This might not be as good as you have hoped for".
I'm thinking less with people mind who write actively horrible stuff, but more of the "I have well intention, but I'm worried I might not get everything right/I might fall short". To me, it's just fact that you are not going to get everything right. Even if you did an endless amount of historical research, you are not going to get everything right if you haven't lived through it (even if you manage evade things that are actively wrong; but there is a difference between "not getting it actively wrong" and "getting it perfectly right") and since this is fandom, people are even less likely to put in the same amount of research they would or should put in if they are writing an actual book. So wouldn't a fair thing be to give a warning?
It just seems to me that fandom is more or less built on the idea that you can write what you please and that you don't get to question people'e preferences. If somebody wants to write a teamfic where Teyla and Ronan are just afterthoughts that is incredibly depressing, but can you actually forbid people from writing it? At least a warning would indicate some awareness.
I get the idea of how minds have to change so attitudes will change. But isn't the approach from the backdoor also one that deserves considering? If you change the attitudes, maybe the mindsets will eventually change with it? (or how about a combo version? Install some attitude related laws like anti-discrimination laws and still work on trying to change mindsets on top of that)
Again, people use the language of immediate hurt. So wouldn't the normal reaction to hand out a bandaid? I get the idea that it is pointless to keep carrying over bandaids rather than fixing the bridge that is crumbling above. So why can't you do both? Hand out a bandaid and at the meantime continue thinking about how you can fix the bridge above? Work on both the mindsets and the attitudes?
Again, I can picture that these things might be boring or frustrating for fen of color (white fen talking amongst themselves how they could potentially make things nicer for our fellow fen of color), but maybe it is still something that has to happen. With of course, the problem of where we draw the line between things that really need to happen and things that are just the equivalent of tying your shoelaces for 5 hours.