The Watchtower of Destruction: The Ferrett's Journal - How To Interpret All This Angry Shouting
February 7th, 2013
01:03 pm

[Link]

Previous Entry Add to Memories Share Next Entry
How To Interpret All This Angry Shouting

“These science fiction conventions must be terrible places to go,” a friend of mine said.  “All I ever see is you posting articles on women getting harassed, on the crudely expressed racism that emerges there, the unwashed geeks who ruin it.  I can’t see why anyone would attend.”

Which took me aback, because I love going to cons.  It’s where I make a lot of new friends, and have the fine and absurd conversations I can’t have in the “real” world, and unite with kindred spirits who we can geek out about wonderful things.  My life is enriched by people I met at cons, who I then friend on Twitter and deepen the friendship, so by the next time I go to that con, hey!  I have transformed a “shared a drink with one night” into “Ohmygodit’sYOU!  Gimme a hug, you big lug!”

And yes, I’m a white dude.  But I have a lot of female friends and non-white friends who also go to cons, and continue to go to cons, and they’re all willful enough that if cons were really no fun for them, they wouldn’t go.  Yes, into every con a dash of jerk must fall, and I’m not saying my women and non-white pals experience no harassment or annoyance at cons – but considering many of them go to four or five cons a year, and squee about the upcoming cons on Facebook and blogs and whatnot, the good sides must outweigh the occasional “Jesus, really?”

Which is not to perpetrate the shielding illusion that all my friends do go – some are in fact so put off by the ugly shenanigans that they don’t want to deal with it.  And their opinion’s not to be washed away, since like all things, geek conventions have serious problems that could be bettered.

Still.  If cons were such a universally terrible place, they wouldn’t attract any women.  They’d all be like that awful comics shop staffed entirely by neckbearded mouthbreathers who post posters of women in refrigerators on the walls, and the female quotient would be next to zero.  Which it ain’t.  The cons I attend have a lot of women, and a fair number of non-white people (though efforts like Con or Bust always help that).  Cons are, in general, a fun place to be.

So why do they look so terrible?

Likewise, there was an essay on FetLife posted by someone who said, essentially, “There are a hundred posts on rape and consent and weeding out the troublemakers at fetish events, since there are Doms who are basically abusers in disguise.  But do you realize what all this talking about the problems in our community looks like to outsiders?  Hell, I don’t want to go to an event, because all I hear are all the terrible things that happen, and the tales of the psychodramatic people who tear communities apart, and all I can think is Jesus, why would I want to go there?”

Which is true.  All this airing of dirty laundry makes our fun world look terrible to outsiders.  If you’re dropping in on the conversation, it must feel like the world’s falling in on our heads, and you’d be best served by getting the fuck out, quickly.

But I read a piece today that talked about a place that had perfect silence.  All of the problems were resolved cleanly, neatly, behind the scenes, and the place remained as welcoming as ever.  The silence was resounding… mainly because it was about priests abusing deaf children, because the deaf kids couldn’t talk to anyone about it.

Now, I am a Christian, but this is why I don’t belong to an organized religion.  Andrew Sullivan wrote a stunning and horrifying piece explaining just how the church, fearing that they’d look bad to outsiders, swept it under the rug… and I’d suggest you all read it right now.  It’s a very good example of what a nice, quiet place looks like – and the effectiveness!  After all, people kept coming to the Church.  They didn’t lose faith.  The Church didn’t lose donations, or have to deal with any ugly questions.  Quite a benefit, and all it cost were thousands of abused children and a ticking time bomb that would explode decades later.

If the Church had handled it honestly, as Christ would have, then we would have had an ugly discussion in the 1970s.  The Church would have looked like, well, what it actually was – a place where a young boy could potentially get hurt by a pedophile in clergy clothing.  And many would have reacted negatively.  But in actually addressing the problem, fewer boys would have been hurt, and the problem would have actually been addressed, and there would be much shouting and angry discussion on how could this have happened, and what the right way to handle it would be.

Yet that angry discussion would help ensure the problem – which could never truly go away entirely – would be as minimized as possible.  That it would be fixed to a human extent.  Because there’s always going to be some scummy guy in a priest’s cloak, or a predator pretending to be a friendly Daddy Dom, or a grabby jerk at a con.  We can shield as much as possible, but unfortunately such wastes of human skin exist and the best we can do is to establish best practices to identify and then remove from our good places as much as possible.

So yes, these noisy discussions about the Church, and harassment at conventions, and violation of safe space at dungeons?  They’re all ugly.  But that’s because the problems are ugly, and we’re trying to face them head-on.  And yes, we could and should do a better job of promoting the good times we have at Church and at con and in the dungeon… but part of the solution has to come from people growing up and understanding that justifiably angry discussion about real problems does not mean that “Wow, what a terrible place this is.”  The solution comes from realizing that fixing a house is going to involve some noise as the hammers and saws do their work, and that noise is not an evil but rather the sound of progress taking place.

You can hear the badness, of course.  But when you assume that’s all there is, what you’re telling people is that if you want us to come, you should be silent.  Silent as deaf children.  And in encouraging organizations towards suppression as opposed to discussion, you create a place where monsters feast.

Cross-posted from Ferrett's Real Blog.

This entry has also been posted at http://theferrett.dreamwidth.org/280990.html. You can comment here, or comment there; makes no never-mind by me.

(6 shouts of denial | Tell me I'm full of it)

Comments
 
[User Picture]
From:harvey_rrit
Date:February 7th, 2013 06:18 pm (UTC)
(Link)
"...All this airing of dirty laundry makes our fun world look terrible to outsiders...."

For some, that's the motivation.

There are people* who would smash Tiffany eggs all day to hear the funny noise.



[*Technically, they're people. I hesitate to exclude anyone from this category. I grew up in a house where that was done; in "special cases" at first, but there's no stops on that road.]
[User Picture]
From:ysabetwordsmith
Date:February 7th, 2013 06:24 pm (UTC)

Thoughts

(Link)
I like conventions in general. But there are a number of conventions I have crossed off for unprofessional or downright bigoted issues.
[User Picture]
From:ckd
Date:February 7th, 2013 06:34 pm (UTC)
(Link)
My rule of thumb about transit systems: they're most likely to be useful if there are blogs complaining about how crappy they are.

The reason: people with enough time (and privilege) to blog use them and think they're worth trying to improve.
[User Picture]
From:sesmo
Date:February 7th, 2013 10:55 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Did you see the Foglio's withdrawal from DragonCon? It looks like sometimes the dirty laundry airing is pretty serious.
[User Picture]
From:fallconsmate
Date:February 8th, 2013 03:57 am (UTC)
(Link)
one of the things that i have heard over and over again is that if you keep shining light on the darkness...it gets smaller and smaller. if you refuse to shine light on it at all...it grows.

as long as the con-goers say loudly "we love our cons! we HATE certain behaviors of certain con-goers! this needs to stop!" things will indeed get better. its when the good-ol-boy syndrome kicks in and some people get multiple passes on behavior because of who they know that people get really soured on the owners/managers of the cons, and attendance will fall off eventually.

the con as an institution is not a broken thing. the management of some cons...is.

you got it ALL right. and keep adding your voice of reason, thank you.
[User Picture]
From:virginia_fell
Date:February 9th, 2013 06:35 am (UTC)
(Link)
The thing I would like to add to this is that while complaining often drives me away from particular spaces... it draws me to particular people.

To give a kink-relevant example: I stay away from local groups that I have heard scary things about, but I have found people I can trust by listening to who's complaining about things that'd bother me as well. Gradually... those connections do get made. This has enabled me to pretty much only ever interact with local kinksters who've been vetted by someone that I know is looking for the same red and green flags I look for, and it's been better.

But it requires that we complain where other people can hear. It tells me who's watching for the things I'm scared of, and it tells me that if I needed to complain that I could do it. That's good stuff.

But then, there are also those people who are like "noooooo all conflict is bad and everybody involved in a conflict is bad so there is no good reason for it ever," and honestly? I won't miss them. In the kind of silence that they find comfortable, people are a lot less safe because everything is so locked down and covered up that it's very hard to get good data about the real situation (which could and usually is hiding some serious risks).
The Ferrett's Domain Powered by LiveJournal.com