Want to make friends in fandom?

[james_davis_nicoll]

Don't point out the photo of former Worldcon chairs is composed mostly of men and almost entirely of white people.

Comments

[carloshasanax.livejournal.com]

"concern trolling over the need to provide special food preparation areas for “Kosher Jews”."

oh this must have been a laff riot.

[sean o'hara (from livejournal.com)]

I have to wonder, are there any Lovecraft fans who don't acknowledge that his works are full of racism?

[mme-hardy.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty sure I've seen the "just a man of his time" defense.

[cmattg.livejournal.com]

Yeah, but that's still acknowledging it's there.

[wakboth.livejournal.com]

IIRC, Lovecraft was actually unusually racist (and in unusual way) for his time. He got better towards his death, but still.

[mme-hardy.livejournal.com]

Oh, cosigned, absolutely.

The "man of his time" defense invariably gives too little credit to the time and too much to the man. See the appallingly racist letter Heinlein wrote to F.M. Busby.

[wakboth.livejournal.com]

All that said, his racism has never stopped me from reading and enjoying his work. I think a lot of it is because I don't have any personal negative experience worth noting with racism, but also because the xenophobia works along with the building unease and horror, making his stories work all the better.

[agharta75.livejournal.com]

There is the "yeah, he was really racist but he started getting better during the Depression" argument. He did become pro-Roosevelt.

[ethelmay.livejournal.com]

I liked the "Edgar Rice Burroughs wasn't racist because he was pro-miscegenation -- with Martians" explanation.

[bruce munro (from livejournal.com)]

Ah, the old "I don't care if people are white, black, yellow, red or green" argument. :)

[don-fitch.livejournal.com]

Ummm...Maybe. But that may be mostly because the Cardinal Sin in fandom is to be Boring, and ever since I got into fandom (c. 1958) the vast majority of Con Chairs have been White Males. Same old, same old. Much of that time -- until quite recently -- so have been the readers of science fiction &/or the people who consider themselves Fans. And there is, IMHO, no "assumption" about White Males being much more likely to have the time and money to do such things. That was (& still is) pretty much just a fact. (Okay, a digusting fact, but....) I'm not sure how much all this Signifies. After my rather close observation of WorldCons & WesterCons for six decades, I'd venture to suggest that most Chairs are pretty much Figureheads -- Substantial People who are useful to point to when dealing with Hotels, Convention Centers, & other organizations.

Usually, I think, the people who do almost all the Creative work are the Department Heads, and those who do the physical Work are those who operate under them. I'm convinced that a large majority of these have been women since at least the mid-'50s, and that the only reason more of these (both women & men) aren't White is simply that there haven't been enough non-Whites there & volunteering. Hey, as a Certified Old Male White Geezer, I don't give a damn about the gender or color of the people who make the Con a pleasant experience for me, and I'm delighted to hold doors open for people who are carrying things (especially Party Supplies, who are the ones to Follow), and to be blunt about it I do this without actually noticing their physical appearance.

[redbird]

Somehow, that "the cardinal sin is to be boring" never stops people from using the exact same "we aren't racists, now stop complaining" arguments for the umpteenth time. I don't buy the idea that "why are there so few nonwhites here?" is inherently more boring than "I don't know, but it's not important" when the latter is repeated over and over. I don't, in fact, buy the idea that the question is inherently boring at all: but even if it was, your line of reasoning only works if "we don't care" is an inherently more interesting statement.

[liviapenn.livejournal.com]

ever since I got into fandom (c. 1958) the vast majority of Con Chairs have been White Males. Same old, same old. Much of that time -- until quite recently -- so have been the readers of science fiction &/or the people who consider themselves Fans

....... define "quite recently."

[(Anonymous)]

Good point, though perhaps too vague for me to pin down to a point. Maybe the mid-'90s marked a point of reasonable balance in my fandom circles... which are mostly print-oriented. Some Visual Media fandoms seemed to approach gender-balance much earlier.

Don Fitch

[liviapenn.livejournal.com]

So when you say "the people who consider themselves fans" you don't actually mean that, you mean "the people in my personal social fandom circles, who are fans of print media, who consider themselves fans." Got it.

[the-xtina.livejournal.com]

You... are my new favourite person today.

[mme-hardy.livejournal.com]

I knew a hell of a lot of SF-reading women from the late 1970s onward. They weren't part of "fandom" (partially because several of them, including me, had bad experiences going to conventions), but they definitely thought of themselves as fans. Various of the Unicorn Herd (SF readers of color) have testified to having been fans all their reading lives.

Non-(white male fans) exist and existed, in substantial numbers. We just weren't in your space, in some cases because it was made clear to us that it was *your* space and not ours.

[jayblanc.livejournal.com]

I'm actually genuinely considering going to the Business Meeting at Loncon to stand up and ask for WSFS to hire a diversity consultant. How well do you think that would go down?

[james-nicoll.livejournal.com]

May I suggest a small change? Ask for WSFS to hire a qualified diversity consultant.

[beamjockey.livejournal.com]

How would that work, exactly? Does WSFS even have any money? As distinct from the organizations operating individual Worldcons, which do have a cash flow?

[mme-hardy.livejournal.com]

I'm asking from ignorance -- when there's a surplus from one year's Worldcon, does the surplus flow through WSFS's hands to the next Worldcon? Or has it been years since this was an issue?

[pauldormer.livejournal.com]

Money is often passed along from Worldcon to Worldcon, and this year, several cheques were handed over at the WSFS business meeting, but as WSFS just means the members of the current Worldcon, it's debatable what "through WSFS's hands" actually means.

The only permanent group involved with Worldcons is the Mark Protection Committee, and that has the narrow remit of existing just to register the various marks such as "Worldcon" and "Hugo".

[awesomeaud.livejournal.com]

Is that something you can find in the Yellow Pages?

[dd-b.livejournal.com]

Well, perhaps I'll be able to watch the video, after the fact, at least. That'll give me time to make popcorn.

[dd-b.livejournal.com]

That photo has Worldcon chairs going back *at least* 40 years, though. And was missing several female Worldcon chairs that could have been in it.

So, it's not very accurately representative of the current state of fandom.

And it's really kind of a buzz-kill for people to jump on our nostalgic photo showing umpteen generations of Worldcon chairs to beat us about the head and shoulders with. Maybe particularly when we'd just awarded Worldcon to a bid with two female co-chairs.

[liviapenn.livejournal.com]

Bawwwwww, it always is such a buzz kill for the powerful people in charge of stuff when it's pointed out that for "umpteen generations" they've been excluding large groups of other people. Meanwhile, the people being excluded don't have feelings, I guess.

What specific part of about James' posts on the subject would you characterize as "beating someone about the head and shoulders"? Or is it just observing an obvious fact that's now considered an attack?

[dd-b.livejournal.com]

I was talking about the original blog post and much of the reaction to it, not James' pointer. A picture commemorating the former Worldcon chairs (people in the photo went back to before my time in fandom, I believe, and I got involved in 1972), is grabbed and used to "prove" the discrimination practiced in current fandom. It's bullshit; that photo covers more than a generation of Worldcons, some people were missing (you only get who shows up at the convention and then at the photo shoot!). And, somehow, the bid just chosen to host the 2015 Worldcon was chaired by two women -- which was never a discussion point anywhere I heard or read about it, so apparently it's not controversial not something anybody thought could be used against that bid or for another bid.

There are things to be talked about with how fandom treats women, I know. Not letting them volunteer for the hard jobs doesn't seem like one of them, to me. But, if it is, that photo doesn't prove or disprove it. That photo commemorates the people who have kept Worldcon going for the last couple of generations, which is an important thing deserving commemoration.

Your facts are not in evidence to me. I haven't seen large groups of people being excluded, and I have seen lots of women in top-level (chair and exec) and the next level down and everywhere else running conventions.

[liviapenn.livejournal.com]

What "original blog post?" You mean Jim C. Hines' original tweet, where the only additional comment he added was "fandom is color blind and gender blind" ?

It's bullshit; that photo covers more than a generation of Worldcons, some people were missing (you only get who shows up at the convention and then at the photo shoot!).

Yes, the generational nature of fandom's color-blind and gender-blind inclusivity is kind of the point?

"Some people were missing?" Yes, and I'm guessing the missing people are also overwhelmingly white and male?

And, somehow, the bid just chosen to host the 2015 Worldcon was chaired by two women -- which was never a discussion point anywhere I heard or read about it, so apparently it's not controversial not something anybody thought could be used against that bid or for another bid.

... you're literally asking for *praise* because your community didn't consider two women in charge of a concom to be a fatally controversial flaw in their bid? As if that's some kind of major accomplishment or proof of virtue, instead of an absolute 101-level basic standard of participating in modern society? Are you actually serious?

Your facts are not in evidence to me. I haven't seen large groups of people being excluded,

So, why is WorldCon so white, old and male then? Total coincidence?

[(Anonymous)]

Well, Kees van Toorn, who chaired Confiction, the Netherlands worldcon in 1990 was missing. But then Dutch fandom always was more diverse than UK fandom (at least in the last century, when I used to go to cons more regularly - I think I've maybe been to half a dozen cons since Intersection).

[scott-sanford.livejournal.com]

Pointing out the lack of a problem is not itself a problem.

[liviapenn.livejournal.com]

If I go on a job interview and they ask me, "Well, we've heard some things about your anger management skills, how would you respond to that?"

And I say "I've never once burned down a job site, no matter how strong my motivation was, and no matter how close the matches and gasoline were, no matter how easy it would have been to set things ablaze, and watch them burn..."

... I think that defending myself by saying "But I was just pointing out the LACK of a problem! It's TRUE, I've never burned down a job site!" would be just about the most tone deaf thing they'd ever heard.

Making up an imaginary problem and then saying "but it didn't happen!" is not the same as pointing out the lack of a problem.

[the-xtina.livejournal.com]

"I haven't seen large groups of people being excluded"

That is like the working definition of privilege, come on.

[the-xtina.livejournal.com]

Is it intended to be representative of the current state of fandom, or of the history of fandom?

Can you see why straight white males might not be particularly pleased by this history?

[dd-b.livejournal.com]

By intention, it's commemorative, not representative; that's the first point. No effort is made to sort through the people who are available for the photo (at the convention, and choose to come to the photo shoot) and pick a representative sample. The intention is to document everybody available who has in fact been a Worldcon chair.

Since Jim's article was about fandom needing change, I understand his use of it to be to illustrate the current state of fandom. It's poorly chosen IMHO for that, for the reasons already given.

Fandom is pretty much always plunged into war, so everybody who stays around twenty years has plenty of things to be not particularly pleased about. Fandom is part of a wider society; we and society at large have changed our standards on a lot of behavioral issues over the years. My impression is that fandom is generally ahead of society in general on these issues, but certainly today, and at any point in the past I know about, fandom has NOT perfectly enacted any reasonable view of "ideal" behavior. We have plenty of things to work on today.

[liviapenn.livejournal.com]

"My impression is that fandom is generally ahead of society"

... define "fandom."

[(Anonymous)]

"My impression is that fandom is generally ahead of society"

ah ha ha ha haaaa.

I'm trying to think of any respect in which fandom as a group could be called "advanced". about the only one I can come up with is "tolerates poly". that was cutting-edge stuff in 1982, sure enough.


Doug M.

[seth ellis (from livejournal.com)]

My impression is that fandom is generally ahead of society in general on these issues

Speaking as a member of society at large looking in at fandom, I'm curious where you got this impression.

[carloshasanax.livejournal.com]

Well, society looks down on Roman Polanski, while you defend him. Which is more progressive?

[dbdatvic.livejournal.com]

Side note: I saw this weekend in Barnes & Noble that The Girl involved in that has written a book about it. Cue internet re-polarization, possibly involving multipoles for large N, and subsequent N-dimensional flamethrowing...

--Dave

[jimhines.livejournal.com]

"Since Jim's article was about fandom needing change, I understand his use of it to be to illustrate the current state of fandom. It's poorly chosen IMHO for that, for the reasons already given."

The bulk of my blog post was about the rather silly and over-the-top nastygrams that started popping up in my Inbox. (I received some thoughtful angry responses as well, which were appreciated.)

Looking at the rest of that post, I talk about the photo several times, noting how heavily white and male our *history* seems to be, and then later on, about looking at this photograph and refusing to see anything problematic in our history.

As I've said, I think it's a great photo. I also think it's symptomatic of some problems. Some of those problems are ours in fandom. Some are societal. Some are historical. And yes, some of those problems are very much ongoing in fandom today.

[liviapenn.livejournal.com]

Oh, the_xtina, cut them a break! The WorldCon community has progressed to the point that two women, totally unchaperoned or guided by men in any way, are now considered totally capable of chairing a con! WE HAVE REACHED THE PROMISED LAND!

[dagbrown.livejournal.com]

You're a Tumblr troll aren't you?

[liviapenn.livejournal.com]

I've been commenting on James' journal since 2006 (at least, that's as far back as the saved comments go on my current gmail account; I had a hotmail account before that.) I'm not sure what Tumblr has to do with it.

But, anyway, I'm sure James appreciates your swooping in to prove his point.

[vass]

Tumblr invented racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, and ableism. None of those things existed before then; therefore anyone who raises them in any space must be from Tumblr.

[liviapenn.livejournal.com]

"Anyone who complains about sexism in SF fandom must not actually *be* in SF fandom-- they must be an Interloper from the Outside!" A rather neat self-fulfilling prophecy...

[timill]

Looked up the 1952 Worldcon? Chaired by a 21-year-old woman.

[(Anonymous)]

Also, John Campbell had that one black dude as a regular contributor! So, he was totally Not Racist!


Doug M.

[james-nicoll.livejournal.com]

He did?

[carloshasanax.livejournal.com]

Isaac Asomugha. And Carl Brandon.

[mme-hardy.livejournal.com]

Honestly, women are a red herring (and I am one). Saying "Look, some women succeeded!" doesn't answer "Where are the people of color?" We know that there are a lot of them reading science fiction, but they're rare at conventions, and even rarer in positions of power at conventions.

The quintessential geek (any kind of geek) experience is finding other people who share your geekishness, looking around a room (online or otherwise), and saying "Wow! I'm not the only one!" Many of my Asian and black and ... friends experience "I'm the only one" every time they enter convention fandom. They don't get that big charge, because they're always visibly Other in the room. By contrast, I'm surprised to be the only woman in the audience of an SF panel. I am, sadly, not at all surprised when there are no women on the panel.

If you just casually appoint "people you know are good", and you're a middle-aged white male, there's a good chance your appointments will be almost entirely white, and heavily male, judging by panel makeup. That's why outreach is important.

[liviapenn.livejournal.com]

And Ida Lupino directed some movies; therefore there's no sexism in Hollywood and female directors are doing just fine now?

From the comments

[(Anonymous)]

"As you know, convention runners in fandom are not paid. Your bold proposal that qualified people of color be rounded up and forced to work in convention running without pay whether or not they wish to volunteer has no bad historical precedents and can only end really well."



Doug M.

Re: From the comments

[the-xtina.livejournal.com]

:slow blink:

Re: From the comments

[seth ellis (from livejournal.com)]

Yes, that's a special one.

Perecentages

[colemanus.livejournal.com]

Hello there is not enough Black, Hispanic or Asians to make an impact on Worldcons to allow the creation of diversity on the racial issue.

As Sam Moskowitz wrote' there has been one colored person in many groups in Fandom since 1930."

I do not feel that Fandom is bigoted. With only one Black person in the groups of Fandom how can there be diversity unless you recruit some.

I am happy to say I am Black American who was on the BOD(2008-2011) of the Los Angeles Science Fantasy Club. The first one in 79 years.

In my time from 1995 to now there has been 5 Black Americans who were either active members or visiting LASFS. And 19 who went to Loscon over that time. There were 5 Hispanics also. There were just very little Black and Hispanics visiting the club.

LASFS wasnt bigoted, they elected me to the board because they did not want the other person, probably 4 voted because I am Black but if that was true I would have been on Board in 2005.

[dbdatvic.livejournal.com]

... how DO you do it, James? It's something in the html markup, isn't it?

--Dave, in awe