![[del.icio.us]](http://images.del.icio.us/static/img/delicious.small.gif){kind=small}
Trackback URI | Comments are closed.
Pages
- About 1.0
- Call for Participants
- Communications 101: How to Argue Effectively & Respectfully
- Contributors
- Guidelines for Participation
- review copies
- Some sf book blogs
- what we’re using
feministsf.net
forums we like
FSF blogs
- Ambling along the Aqueduct
- Antariksh Yatra
- Broad Universe
- BroadUniverse LJ
- Carl Brandon Society
- Carnival! of Feminist SF Fans
- Comic Fangirls’ LJ
- Designated Sidekick
- feminist fandom LJ
- Feminist Gamers
- FemSFBookswap
- FemSpec
- friends of lulu
- girl in the machine
- Girl Wonder
- Girls Read Comics (& they’re pissed)
- Guilded Lilies
- Jade Reporting
- Killer Betties
- League of Substitute Superheroes
- New Game Plus
- SF Bookswap
- She’s Such a Geek
- Still Life with Soup Can
- Take Back the Knight
- When Fangirls Attack
- whileaway
- WisCon LJ
- women & fantasy’s journal
- Written World
other stuff we read
- all girl army
- black sf society
- Carnival of Radical Feminists
- Carnival of the Feminists
- comic gays linkblog
- DeadBroWalking
- Deep Genre
- Endicott Studios Redux
- Feminism 101
- great hera
- Hathor Legacy
- Heroine Content
- Heroine Sheik
- i blame the patriarchy
- io9
- Megatrouble
- Nalo Hopkinson
- Occasional Superheroine
- official shrub
- people of colour SF carnival
- Tachyon Publications blog
- Token Minorities
- Women & Hollywood
projects
us, elsewhere
- And We Shall March
- Angry Black Woman
- Body Impolitic
- Brutal Women
- Central Cortex
- Composite
- derivative work
- FemSFBookswap
- Foul Papers
- Hiromi Goto
- New Game Plus
- SF Bookswap
- The Foul Papers Blog
- tychoish
- vito excalibur
- whileaway
- Words from the Center, Words from the Edge
- yonmei
Categories
- about this blog (14)
- intros (3)
- activism (9)
- Art & Graphics (8)
- assorted (54)
- Awards & Recognition (28)
- Books & Literature (145)
- calls for papers (1)
- calls for submissions (1)
- Comics (13)
- Cons & Community (47)
- Criticism & Scholarship (23)
- Events (7)
- fandom (25)
- fanworks (4)
- female characters (86)
- feminism (43)
- feminist whimsy (10)
- FSF (18)
- FSF Activism (11)
- FSFnet projects (7)
- Gaming (7)
- geek sexism (21)
- gender in marketing (13)
- horror (3)
- Interview (1)
- lists (6)
- marketing & ads (1)
- music (1)
- News (21)
- obituaries (3)
- Online (35)
- people of colour (29)
- politics (15)
- polls (4)
- Publishing (16)
- Race & Racism (21)
- science (11)
- Sexuality & queerness (25)
- slash (13)
- Theatre & Performance (2)
- Theory (11)
- transcripts (1)
- TV & Film (91)
- Utopia/Dystopia (2)
- vulgarisation (4)
- women in science (2)
- Women in Space (11)
- women writers (34)
- Writers & Artists (61)
- Young Adult (13)
[...] 2. PodCastle Has Girl Cooties! I have been poking my head in the forum topic and the post for the third episode, “Run of the Fiery Horse” because Rachel, the editor, asked me to do the intro (because I love, love, love the story). As with most Escape Artist forum discussions, people have wildly varying reactions to and interpretations of the story. But there’s also been some discussion of the “tone” of PodCastle as being too women-centric/feminist. Quotes & Anti-Quotes @ FeministSF The Blog. [...]
This podcast sounds interesting, and I am subscribing.
[...] on the Feminist SF Blog, Angry Black Woman quotes people from both sides1 of a debate going on about Podcastle, the new [...]
The thing that really kills me about this whole idea is that the reason I left EscapePod was that I did not hear one female authored or female-centric story in months before I left. It might have changed since then but at the time I could find nothing that interested me and it seemed entirely male, so where was the outcry over that? Instead it makes sense to growl about a podcast that’s only what? Four weeks old and hasn’t had anytime to create an actually useful back history to analyze.
A lot of this I feel goes back to coding and how women are forced to be able to identify with male characters so that they can enjoy most entertainment but men never have that kind of socialization and so they’ll start to panic and freak out at three stories in a row.
The behind-the-scenes reality is that Mandolin aka Rachel Swirsky is a feminist and her writing at Podcastle is a feminist statement. It’s not like she’s just a woman doing SF. She actually did come with a feminist ax to grind, and people over there simply can tell. That’s the simplest explanation with no need for conjuration.
How dare she be a feminist! Labrys-grinding is such an unfair demand on the audience — axes should cut only one way, the men’s way!
That’s the simplest explanation with no need for conjuration.
It isn’t “conjuration” to point out the sexism when people start freaking out after three female-oriented episodes but let long streaks of male-oriented episodes pass without comment.
> How dare she be a feminist! Labrys-grinding
> is such an unfair demand on the audience —
> axes should cut only one way, the men’s way!
(this is a response to laura_q too)
Political opposition to feminism is a different issue altogether. I’m not saying it doesn’t exist (that would be a silly statement on my part), I’m just saying it is not the same thing as sexism, and that it is unnecessary to conjure the specter of the latter when the former is readily available as an explanation – unless one’s goal is to conjure the specter, that is.
Err, actually, this is my response to laura_q:
My experience is that “labrys grinding” :) is instantly, unmistakeably recognizable in a work of art. Therefore I am inclined to believe that people at Podcastle had a problem with the “labrys grinding”, which they detected immediately, rather than with the fact that the stories had female narrators.
Pardon me, Basta, I am trying to parse your comment.
Political opposition to feminism is a different issue altogether.
Ye,s it is. i don’t recall anyone bringing it up.
I’m not saying it doesn’t exist (that would be a silly statement on my part),
What is “it” in thsi statement? Opposition to feminism?
I’m just saying it is not the same thing as sexism,
Well, if “it” is opposition to feminism then I would have to say that, yes, opposition to feminism IS sexism where feminism is defined generally, as you seem to have defined it. If you oppose gender parity, equality, and the rights of women, then that’s pretty damned sexist. If you oppose a specific feminist’s political agenda, then that may or not be sexism depending on what that particular feminist’s politics are. Feminism isn’t a mono-movement.
and that it is unnecessary to conjure the specter of the latter when the former is readily available as an explanation – unless one’s goal is to conjure the specter, that is.
yeah i don’t even know what you mean by this.
But, in any case, to answer your other comments: BULLSHIT.
#1 – Rachel doesn’t “write” at PodCastle since it’s a podcast and the stories that go up aren’t hers. now if you’re speaking of her posts on the forum, that’s a different thing.
#2 – to say that all of her choices of stories are a feminist statement is taking it a bit far. What statement would she be attempting to make based on the, what, 5 stories up so far? They’re not all that much alike, and reading any common theme or feminist theme in ll of them at once is, to put it bluntly, stupid and simple-minded.
#3 – feminist ax to grind? And what, pray tell, is this ax? basically what you seem to be saying is that rachel came on board PodCastle with the purpose of buying stories and picking readers that skewed more toward female tastes than male tastes. That’s a HUGE assumption, firstly. Secondly, even if that was her intention, what, exactly, is wrong with that? Did you complain about all the penises running around EscapePod int he years and months previous to this? Or are you only upset about perceived imbalances now that possibly women are the ones benefiting?
I would have to say that, yes, opposition to feminism IS sexism where feminism is defined generally,
That’s a big “where”.
as you seem to have defined it.
Where do I “seem” so?
If you oppose gender parity, equality, and the rights of women, then that’s pretty damned sexist.
I don’t oppose gender parity (except forced parity), equality, or the rights of women. The go-back-to-the-kitchen counter-feminist is just another specter.
If you oppose a specific feminist’s political agenda, then that may or not be sexism depending on what that particular feminist’s politics are.
I oppose those political agendas of feminism that seem not to be about equality, but about continued transfer of power from men to women without ever checking the actual balance.
yeah i don’t even know what you mean by this
Three points, un-convoluted:
1. Opposition to feminism is not the same thing as sexism.
2. Podcastle listeners’ reaction would have been better explained by their opposition to feminism than by their sexism.
3. Pushing the sexism explanation is scare rhetoric.
to say that all of her choices of stories are a feminist statement is taking it a bit far
So you say. I disagree.
What statement would she be attempting to make based on the, what, 5 stories up so far?
When the counter-feminist comments were made, those 5 stories were perhaps 100% of what had been posted at PodCastle up to that point, but gee, what can we infer when our sample is the whole “population”?
They’re not all that much alike, and reading any common theme or feminist theme in ll of them at once is, to put it bluntly, stupid and simple-minded.
The more dissimilar they are, the more the unique common element would stand out, wouldn’t it?
basically what you seem to be saying is that rachel came on board PodCastle with the purpose of buying stories and picking readers that skewed more toward female tastes than male tastes. That’s a HUGE assumption, firstly.
Radio Erewan answers: basically yes, but it is an observation rather than an assumption, it is PodCastle listeners’ rather than mine, and it is not exactly what they observed. They sensed hostile political discourse and reacted accordingly, and now you try to paint it as aversion to all women and things female. Now THAT is a huge assumption, and it just happens to serve the “counter-feminism = sexism” rhetoric.
Did you complain about all the penises running around EscapePod int he years and months previous to this?
I don’t know EscapePod but I honestly wonder what do you mean by “all the penises running [there] in the years and months”. Were there many sex stories featuring penises, or is “penis” your word for an unapologetically male hero, or an unapologetically male author? Or maybe it is a code word for boy cooties?
Basta: Opposition to feminism is not the same thing as sexism
Yes, it is.
Podcastle listeners’ reaction would have been better explained by their opposition to feminism than by their sexism.
It’s the same thing. If they opposed stories just because they perceived them as being feminist, they are sexist.
Pushing the sexism explanation is scare rhetoric.
Trying to claim that people who oppose feminism aren’t sexist is either purest hypocrisy, or impure stupidity. Trying to claim a distinction, and calling that “scare rhetoric”, I think pushes you into the hypocrite camp.
Actually, I suppose one way in which you could convince yourself that “sexism” and “opposition to feminism” are not the same, would be if you’d convinced yourself that you’re not a sexist, because you like women… so long as the women behave like women – ie, according to sexist stereotypes, which, naturally, a sexist bigot would be convinced is the way women “naturally” behave when not “corrupted” by feminism.
I think we have you targeted, basta: neither stupid nor a hypocrite, just a bigot.
I oppose those political agendas of feminism that seem not to be about equality, but about continued transfer of power from men to women without ever checking the actual balance.
Hmm, let me check the balance here… the seesaw is still WAAAY loaded on the men’s side, so i guess we can keep transferring that power!
You see, basta, the problem you appear to be having is that you perceive ANY gender parity or “transfer of power” to be too much for women to be having. it’s a common problem. but that doesn’t excuse it.
The basic fact is that in general and in this specific case, there’s still a lot of stuff loaded on the male side of the seesaw, and anything done to counteract it is a good thing for us all.
The go-back-to-the-kitchen counter-feminist is just another specter.
I think you mean that feminism that says men say go back is a specter. and you’re wrong.
Thank you for clarifying your points. All of them are wrong and/or misguided. let’s just say this. for the sake of this argument, opposition to feminism IS sexism, because you’re opposing nothing more than Rachel’s belief that women are equal to men, and deserve to be treated as such. You’ve shown me no evidence and mode no argument that leads me to believe that Rachel’s feminist leanings are any more sinister than that.
Now, if you want to go bother Steve Ely about the number of times there have been 5 stories by men, narrated by men, or have male-oriented themes all in a row, i might be willing to engage further with you. But so far you’ve shown yourself only to be a mildly interesting troll with a beef against feminism. That may get you far ont he Escape Artists boards, but here will only only earn you a disemvoweling.
Consider that your first warning.
Spot on, Yonmei. ETA: And the Angry Black Woman.
It takes a lot of gall to dismiss “scare rhetorics” and then to espouse in the same comment the ginormous scare tactic that paints feminism as an unchecked, out of “balance” transfer of power to women!
Thank you for clarifying your points. All of them are wrong and/or misguided.
teehee. aka: We appreciate your concern. It is noted and stupid.(1)
TABW: Hmm, let me check the balance here… the seesaw is still WAAAY loaded on the men’s side, so i guess we can keep transferring that power!
Ummm fine. Except you didn’t actually go and check the balance. You just invoked the axiom of your theory. This is precisely the problem I have with feminism: “women have it worse in every frame of reference” is an axiom to feminists, rather than a statement about a particular society at a particular time in history, subject to reassessment every five years or so. All the while men live shorter by 8 years on average and commit suicide 5 times as often, but you will never find these terms in a feminist formula for balance.
You see, basta, the problem you appear to be having is that you perceive ANY gender parity or “transfer of power” to be too much for women to be having.
No, the problem is that YOU perceive ANY “transfer of power” from women to men to be not enough. How big must the life expectancy gap grow for you to pause and think? 10 years? 30 years? What about the suicide rate? 10:1? 50:1?
The basic fact is that in general and in this specific case, there’s still a lot of stuff loaded on the male side of the seesaw
That’s one specific case. Another is e.g. Rachel’s academic specialization, which is antropology/sociology/lit-crit. How many male students were in her group? And more importantly, how much male perspective was allowed there? Can I have a photo depicting Rachel demonstrating in favor of more balance there? Can those “penis” writers whom she will displace from PodCastle go teach Male Perspective 101 to antropology students at her university, so the balance is kept in check? I’d love to ask Rachel these questions but she won’t talk to me.
You see fantasy writing as an area of imbalance in favor of men. I see it as a male reservation so far spared from the feminist juggernaut that “defaults” the female and “others” the male wherever it passes.
That may get you far ont he Escape Artists boards, but here will only only earn you a disemvoweling.
Dsmvwlng? Bt nt dscnsnntng? lv cnstrnd wrtng! :))
I made a typo in the comment above, switching “women” and “men” in one place. Shoulda been:
No, the problem is that YOU perceive ANY “transfer of power” from men to women to be not enough.
BASTA!-
How big must the life expectancy gap grow for you to pause and think? 10 years? 30 years? What about the suicide rate? 10:1? 50:1?
Are you seriously this stupid? I mean really, this is just such a straw man attack that has nothing at all to do with Podcastle. It has nothing to do with what is being discussed so it’s either a purposeful attempt to derail the discussion as a whole or your attempting to use this venue to discuss how feminism is killing men? or something similar? Because in truth I have no idea what those bullshit statistics were supposed to prove or disprove.
I’d love to ask Rachel these questions but she won’t talk to me.
Why does she have to? Why is she required to listen to anything you have to say? You don’t seem to be asking male editors or publishers how many women were in their class, or looking at how many women are in their respective podcasts or magazines? I mean really you have absolutely no evidence that Rachel has been throwing out male authors anything like that (especially since 5 is nowhere near a large enough sample to makes any kind of definitive analysis) so it just seems like any kind of presence of women for you is too much, which leads me into my next point.
I see it as a male reservation so far spared from the feminist juggernaut that “defaults” the female and “others” the male wherever it passes.
Okay wait, that was even stupider. So it’s okay for female to be the “other” everywhere but not male? Because when you say such stupid things you come off as incredibly sexist. I’d actually have more respect for you as a person if you simply admitted to your sexism instead or trying to couch it in some bullshit gender balance theory where the apparent balance you’re trying to push is men up front and women in back.
Are you seriously this stupid? I mean really, this is just such a straw man attack
Not more than TABW’s allegation to which I was responding.
Why does she have to? Why is she required to listen to anything you have to say?
Uh oh, the entitlement specter. Where’s my bingo card?
Okay wait, that was even stupider. So it’s okay for female to be the “other” everywhere but not male?
It was not OK when it was the case, but now it is not the case. These days it is men who are othered, except in small and rapidly shrinking pockets, both geographically and niche-wise. It is men who are generally required to adapt, adjust, reform, while women can just be them empowered selves.
*sharpens labrys*
Run away, Basta, before we have you on the menu for tomorrow morning’s breakfast!
Run away, Basta, before we have you on the menu for tomorrow morning’s breakfast!
It’s not about you eating us. It’s about you shitting at us.
Basta, I would respond to what you have to say if any of that were #1 – true and #2 – not a bunch of straw man argument. Seriously, now we’re bring rachel’s classes into this? WTF? Lovely way to derail a conversation.
as of now, you’re on moderation. Unless you can contribute tot he actual discussion, you’re just distracting from it, and I don’t have the time to babysit you.
Of those first five stories, two were actually purchased before Podcastle’s debut by Steve Eley. The editor of Escape Pod.
Drawing conclusions about Rachel’s editorial policy based on those five episodes would be doing so on a false assumption–that she in fact chose those five stories. In fact, the sample is even smaller than that.
Even if she had made all five choices herself (six, now, since this week’s episode was posted) I’m frankly amazed at the idea that she must be throwing away perfectly good male-authored subs so that she can pack the schedule with women. After five episodes of “evidence.” You’ve got to be kidding me.
Knowing she’s a feminist has nothing to do with that conclusion. Unless you assume that all feminists hate men and want nothing other than to usurp their rightful power.
I wonder, Basta, why you think Rachel won’t talk to you. Does she know you from somewhere, perhaps, and have a perfectly legitimate reason not to talk to you?
I’ve seen the proposed schedule for the rest of the year, btw, since I read slush for Podcastle, and the breakdown is about fifty-fifty male and female authors. I also know Rachel’s expressed reasons for choosing or not choosing various stories, and not once has the gender of the author been an issue.