And she says this without any sense of irony, too…

And she says this without any sense of irony, too...

Shorter Kathryn Cramer: How dare conventions promote panels that are hostile toward people who repeatedly engage in racist, sexist, or otherwise prejudicial speech or actions against oppressed groups within the SF community. You are making those of us who want to prop up the oppressive status quo that has served us so well feel uncomfortable, and I think that’s just wrong.

Anonymized link, for those who care.

Comments

  1. says

    WTF? She, what? I’m sorry having a panel about the utter fail that won’t die is somehow harassing people?

    Oh, f this shyte. I’m going back to watching my Fed Ex tracking status for a package I’m expecting. That post made no sense and made my head hurt. (hers, not yours)

  2. jonquil says

    My favorite bit is “whether your convention promotes a hostile environment for members of the sf community, even those who didn’t attend.”

    Let’s take her premise for granted, that certain people are being unfairly singled out. (This is for the purposes of argument ONLY) It is not clear to me how Wiscon can prevent other people — in non-Wiscon-controlled spaces! — from discussing these people’s shortcomings.

    There is no possible way that Wiscon can make the Internet a safe space for *talking about Wiscon*. Ask, for instance, anybody like you or Karnythia who has talked about her experience and gotten trolled.

    BTW, your layout is way borked on Chrome — is it on Safari?

  3. unusualmusic says

    Why the fuck does she think that anyone was gonna assault her racist arse at last year’s Wiscon?

  4. veejane says

    Trufax: the stinkeye is a form of assault. Eyeball-rays of great power penetrate paler shades of skin with withering effect. It is like gamma radiation!

  5. yeloson says

    “…hostility towards members of the sf community.”

    Interesting theory that what people on panels are saying is causing hostility and not, you know, what comes out these people’s mouths in the first place.

  6. Vicki says

    Is there any convention that satisfies her standards?

    Any convention where we can count on not being hassled by anyone because we happen to be one or more of: disabled, non-white, trans, female, queer, fat, or dressed in clothing that some sexist (drunk or otherwise) thinks is an excuse for groping?

    And will that hypothetical convention also protect me from someone, later, talking about that fat bitch in the con suite, that wheelchair user who blocked his way by daring to hang out in the narrow hallway, those black fen harshing his squee, those teens who aren’t “really” fans and spend all weekend in the anime room?

    It’s possible that Victor and Debbie could push for a higher standard, but it sounds as though Kathryn Cramer is setting one that nobody can meet.

  7. julian/kate says

    I was gonna say, I don’t feel particularly safe at more traditional SF cons, but I don’t write long angry blog posts about it. (Just short grumpy ones, sometimes.)

  8. says

    I would like to know, specifically, who Kathryn thinks was in danger of assault last year and what makes her think so. I would also like to see examples of people being harassed for simply “being,” as I do not take Kathryn to be thinking of the examples that come to my mind. I would also still like to know how Jay Lake defines “unsafe,” and to see examples of people disregarding what he says because of his identity rather than his words, or for that matter anyone paying much attention to him after the first week of RaceFail09. I would have thought clarifying what he meant about unsafe would have been a better use of energy than trying to guilt-trip people who laughed at him.

    Critique and harassment are not the same thing.

  9. yeloson says

    Oh noes! I can’t be a part of the SF community because of Mis-fannination laws and one-drop rule! Fail to pass the paperbag test! Seperate but equal fandom for me! (Shuffles off to “Magical Realism” section with the rest of my kind.)

  10. says

    I am fascinated by her example of “programming that encourages the continuation and escalation of abuse and hostility towards members of the sf community.”

    The link leads to a post reporting that someone had said at a panel that — wait for it — calling people who disagree with you a “mob” tends to provoke a bad reaction.

    OMG THE HORROR. THE ABUSE. THE IMPLIED CRITICISM OF UNSPECIFIED PERSONS.

    “Thanks to the Internet, you can now get harassed at a convention without even attending. ”

    And, apparently, without anyone actually harassing you. Such is the power of the Intrawebz.

  11. yeloson says

    I would also like to see…

    I get it! They’re science-fiction writers! They’ve been writing one big sci-fi ARG this whole time! We’re supposed to use our imaginations and let their words transport us to an imaginary world in which all these things are true!

  12. Isabel S. says

    I’m going to ignore the fail and just concentrate on the good-she and her kind won’t be at my convention. That and a chocolate cupcake should help me calm down. Off to the kitchen…

  13. delux says

    Because the white folks under attack at really that special and important. Of course “racefailers” going to wiscon, especially poc in wisconsin, are going to risk jailtime for a chance to “get” at “the man.”

  14. delux says

    I would also still like to know how Jay Lake defines “unsafe,”

    I’ve *been* wanting to know this.

  15. says

    Hey, I’m Internet Famous! :) And in such good company, too – hi, Debbie!

    I mean, I could comment about how Jay Lake’s comment was unclear, or how his choice of language was unfortunate, or about my personal regret and sympathy for his cancer. All of that was and is true, especially the latter.

    But what strikes me as just completely out of the blue weird is how little this has to do with WisCon-as-it-actually-happens. I’m not reporting this from my perspective, I’m reporting it from the perspective of my multi-hued (and frankly, mostly white) Safety staff. While we can’t see every single instance of unhappiness, confrontation or argument, what we did see this year was A Bunch of Nothing. (Gasp, shock, horror!) People enjoying themselves – and the vast majority wouldn’t know what RaceFail was if it came up and bit them.

    So this is truly Internet Drama, of the finest kind. And I seem to be momentarily one of the stars. Oh, joy.

  16. Lori S. says

    That would explain the accusation of walk-outs, at least, which otherwise completely boggles me and then some. I’m just supposed to imagine! La la la!

  17. says

    Hm… yeah, she’s right but that also means that pretty much all cons fit this bill: “programming that encourages the continuation and escalation of abuse and hostility towards members of the sf community”. Just you know, who those members are … changes (but not often)

  18. Lenora Rose says

    Sigh. She makes me ashamed to be a member of the SF community, because at least I can tell that the SF community includes a lot of people already made to feel unsafe by her and her ilk in a way they did nothing to deserve. Whereas she just yanks down her pants at every opportunity then complains when people are offended.

  19. says

    IAWTC! MONOCLES ARE WIN.

    I wonder if KC would feel more reassured knowing that as I won’t go to the US, I won’t be at Wiscon? Scary scary person that I am. For a white gurl.

  20. 8mph Ansible says

    Make sure that lens is ruby quartz. Just in case. *shakes head* The last time I glared at a white person while wearing an ordinary lens… I twirled my moustache while laughing evilly. =p

  21. Kym Rees says

    Seems to me that the term “unsafe” in this context means you uppity PoC’s having the audacity to speak up passionately about racism in the SF community rather than be silent and allow fail to go unchecked. I notice this kind of ‘shut down’ in mainstream feminist circles when white women don’t want to hear what WoC have to say. Speaking truth to power makes some folks very uncomfortable.