Author Topic: Is Podcastle Sexist?  (Read 68430 times)

wintermute

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1291
  • What Would Batman Do?
Reply #50 on: July 02, 2008, 02:08:31 PM
So, I just started listening to PodCastle a few days ago, and so far I'm up to Hotel Astarte. Full disclosure: I'm a white, middle-class, heterosexual male, and I consider myself a feminist (because, to paraphrase Coupling: "You've got to treat women like people in their own right; after all, in many respects, they are.").

Is there more female exposure (female voice talent, female authors, female protagonists) in PodCastle than in a typical short-story outlet? I think we can safely agree that there is; certainly there's more than in any other short-story media I currently subscribe to.

Is PodCastle feminist in outlook? I certainly hope so. They seem to believe that a strong female character makes for as good a story as a strong male character, which is a good thing. Are they acting on that feminism? By which I mean, are they rejecting good male-oriented pieces in favour of less-good female oriented pieces? Obviously, I can't answer that without knowing the contents of their slush pile (and, of course, "less-good" is a huge judgement call), but judging by the quality of the pieces they've run so far, I don't think they are.

Is PodCastle sexist? I've not heard anything that would make me think that there's any anti-male agenda at PodCastle.

I didn't think A Fear of Dragons was about a male-female conflict of any kind. The fact that the dragon was male slipped by me completely. It was about female empowerment in a patriarchal society, but that's not the same. And it ends with the character compromising with the patriarchy to mitigate the damage done to individuals.

As for Run of the Fiery Horse, well, I suppose the serpent could be considered male, if it had a gender at all. But almost all of the male humans in the story were supportive. There was a tiny amount of male-female conflict when she Po La (?) attacked her in the market, but  the major conflict with identifiably gendered characters came with old women who thought that she ought to be crippled in order to conform to male ideals of beauty.

So, hrm. Both have feminist themes, though they come through conflict with the world, not conflict with other characters.

Other stories: Come, Lady Death had four strong characters, two male and two female, no gender-based conflicts. Goosegirl was an entirely female-female conflict; you could argue it was a class war piece, if you really wanted to, I suppose, but not a feminist piece. The Ant King had a central strong male character, and several other strong characters around him of both sexes; again, it could be ant-corporate, or anti-commitment (or pro-commitment), but there is no strong gender conflict anywhere. I've not finished Hotel Astarte yet, but I'm a little surprised that everyone is saying it's a male-centric story. I can see that, now that people mention it, but I'd been thinking that Queen Columbia was the central character.

Anyway, of what I've heard so far, I'm very surprised by the claims of sexism.

Science means that not all dreams can come true


Swamp

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 2230
    • Journey Into... podcast
Reply #51 on: July 02, 2008, 03:50:49 PM
Thanks for your replies, Thaurismunths.

I’ve been thinking about this more and have become more firmly resolved that it is all about the stories.  The podcast should be judged on the quality of the stories.  If the stories stand on their own as being of consistently good quality (of course no one will like all of the stories.  I haven’t), then the motivations of the editor shouldn’t matter.

To be fair, I’m not completely innocent.  The questions I asked of you were questions I had to answer earlier for myself.  I was originally looking for an agenda at the start of PodCastle, too.  It stemmed from Rachel’s discussion of organizing a female blitz of one of the magazines (Asimov’s was it?).  I remember thinking, That’s all well and good, but if you run stories in a publication just to satisfy having a certain number of female authors, is that right?  (I think Rachel would say the point was that many quality stories were/are being overlooked expressly because it came from a female author.)

So when I heard that Rachel would be the chief editor of PodCastle, right or wrong, I wondered if this would compromise the story selection.  So I was “looking for it”, too.  After the Fear of Dragons and Fiery Horse ran back to back, I thought, Aha, see, my preconceived expectations were correct.  Then something in my mind made me stop and change my perspective.  I asked myself whether I would feel the same way if Fiery Horse ran on Escape Pod and judged the story on its own merits; it had many.  Since then I’ve tried to only look at the stories themselves and disregard everything else.  So I’m sorry if I came across as being above the subject.  I know where you are coming from.  I just resolved the question for myself previously and saw your concern as misplaced.

(my posts tend to be formal, stiff and lacking in self revelation, so I’m trying to be more transparent.  Tango Alpha Delta and DKT are my inspiration.)
« Last Edit: July 02, 2008, 03:53:23 PM by Swamp »

Facehuggers don't have heads!

Come with me and Journey Into... another fun podcast


Swamp

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 2230
    • Journey Into... podcast
Reply #52 on: July 02, 2008, 04:55:11 PM
Rachel has been doing an admirable job as editor, and has shown superhuman restraint - not just in this thread, but in the forum as a whole since taking on the job.

I agree

Facehuggers don't have heads!

Come with me and Journey Into... another fun podcast


Rachel Swirsky

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1233
    • PodCastle
Reply #53 on: July 02, 2008, 06:14:58 PM
Quote
Is PodCastle feminist in outlook?

Looking over the thread with slightly more rested eyes, I'm wondering if this is the crux of the question?

Yes. PodCastle is and will be feminist in outlook. We will not be publishing material we find offensively sexist, nor will we be publishing material we find offensively racist.

I don't find this to be the same thing as being anti-male. Refusing to publish anti-woman stories is not the same thing as being anti-male. Similarly, refusing to publish racist stories is not the same thing as being anti-white.

While being feminist and anti-racist in outlook (as well as many other things), PodCastle will not simply be picking up any story that happens to feature feminist themes. We get a good many of these pieces, and most of them -- like most of everything else -- are badly written. The stories that have come up here as being questioned for their quality are stories that Steve selected, which is a bit odd to me for various reasons, but should at least establish that they were not chosen by me simply because of their message despite 'inferior writing.'

Selecting stories that are actively feminist is not a priority in the editorial selection. I do not go out and read things with the intent of selecting stories that support "a feminist agenda." However, I'll qualify this by saying that the only story in this line-up that I think is even remotely under the "active feminist" label is "Run of the Fiery Horse."

PodCastle will continue to run stories with male villains. PodCastle will continue to run stories where women fight against men. PodCastle will continue to run stories where women fight against society. I do not accept the assertion that these things are, by default, feminist propositions. Nor do I accept that any story which features one, or more, strong female characters, is automatically feminist. 

If you forbid stories in which women fight against men or society, you cut off most avenues for female characters to experience conflict. Females do experience conflict. They experience conflict with men and society as well as other women. This will continue to be represented.

Stories like "Giant" get at the crux of the problem for me. "Giant" is not a feminist story. The original story of "Giant" is about a prince who rescues a princess from a giant. That original story is not feminist, either. It's about male agency. It's literally a damsel in distress story in which the woman is a plot coupon. The retelling of the piece is about humanizing the villain, in the classic mode of fairy tale retellings. It's a piece akin to telling Cinderella from the step-mother's side. The villain is male, but here we have a big bad oppressive male being rendered as fully human instead of a one-dimensional villain. To call this story anti-male is, in my opinion, to miss the point.

I bring up Escape Pod numbers to expose the double standard that is in play here. No, I do not think Escape Pod is sexist. Thaurismunths claims that he would notice if the trends he finds sexist were reversed; however, he did not, to my knowledge, actually notice when female voices didn't appear on Escape Pod. Nor did anyone else complain about it, notice it, or mention it on the Escape Pod boards until Ann and I dug up the data point to illustrate that we are being held to a double standard.

I hope this is clarifying about my positions, both in regard to the discussion and in regard to PodCastle's editorial policy. I feel I'm starting to repeat myself, so I may reply less frequently as the thread goes on.



deflective

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1171
Reply #54 on: July 02, 2008, 06:50:05 PM
so, has it been three months already? last time round still seems so fresh: the long careful choosing of words, rewriting to minimize misinterpretation, waiting that extra hour for the head to clear. i like to think that i took away some little idea of the games politicians have to play.

since then some things have changed; i understand that Rachel is married (congrats! =) ). nothing substantial about my position has changed tho. anything points i'd wish to make were already made the best that i'm gonna make them. no one's standing alone in this thread, so i'm just gonna answer some comments that seemed to reference the last thread. or at least that caught my attention.


The stories everyone is bitching about the most?  I bought them.  "For Fear of Dragons" was my purchase.  (And I did notice that even then, in week fucking two, people were getting upset about the "pattern" of feminism on the podcast.  Two episodes!)

this may have been aimed at the web comments or some other conversation i'm not aware of. i definitely understand your frustration. if you're talking about the fantasy women thread i feel i should defend my position.

a lot of time was spent on for fear of dragons but the thread was started three weeks after launch; there were five episodes by then (including two minis). this was also during a time when podcastle and escape pod were running similarly themed episodes. finally, the time spent on for fear of dragons was a result of people arguing against the idea that there could be a female empowerment interpretation. personally, it wasn't really more objectionable than other episodes; just had examples that were easy to point to.

Hell, I had issues with "Sparrow" myself -- not for sexism, but for offending my polyamorist sensibilities

man, how many plots would that leave you?

Helen: "i'm spending the summer in troy."
Menelaus: "k, drop me a letter."

mr Roper is working in the garden when he overhears Jack saying, "i'm going to get you into bed Chrissy but first i have to get Janet off." he shrugs and gets back to gardening.

"one million dollars?! honey, start negotiations on the house."


I'm not clear what the point of asking, "Is PodCastle sexist?" actually is. If the answer turns out to be "yes," then what? We demand quotas? We stage a mass un-subscribe until we get new editors?  We petition Steve to start "StudCastle" -- a male-oriented fantasy podcast -- by way of affirmative action?

what's the point of discussing episodes at all? people see a common thread running through multiple episodes and think it's worth talking about. it's been worded confrontationally this time, more than i'm comfortable with really, but that doesn't have to be a big deal.

the editors here are easily the most engaged of the podcasts, directly responding to most questions and concerns. that's been fantastic, i greatly appreciated Rachel's effort to meet me halfway in a hostile environment, but sometimes it's best to let the kids tire themselves out. so long as we feel like we're being listened to it's all good, you'll probably get much the same information and save frustration. (edit: the last post kinda makes this paragraph pointless)


Mostly, I remember him defending PC around Episode 2 and I'm curious as to what sparked the discussion now, because when we had the discussion before, as illogical as it was in PC's second week, it made more sense to me, as I think there was a story on each of the casts in about a two week span about female empowerment in male-dominated society.

third week, five episodes, general atmosphere of similar themes dammit! =P



Corydon

  • Peltast
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
Reply #55 on: July 02, 2008, 07:25:49 PM
Selecting stories that are actively feminist is not a priority in the editorial selection. I do not go out and read things with the intent of selecting stories that support "a feminist agenda." However, I'll qualify this by saying that the only story in this line-up that I think is even remotely under the "active feminist" label is "Run of the Fiery Horse."

How about "For Fear of Dragons"?  I'm not trying to challenge you-- I agree with what you're saying-- but that story's themes of a girl claiming agency against a patriarchal system seem about as actively feminist as they come.



Liminal

  • EA Staff
  • *****
  • Posts: 109
    • These Liminal Days
Reply #56 on: July 02, 2008, 07:42:42 PM
If a male protagonist takes on a cabal of old, powerful men, there is not "ist" attached to the story.

If a female protagonist takes on a cabal of old, powerful men, it becomes a feminist story.

*sigh*

Corydon - this is not meant as a response to your post per se, just a reflection on the trends of our society.


Why is this thus? What is the reason for this thusness? - Artemus Ward


Corydon

  • Peltast
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
Reply #57 on: July 02, 2008, 08:01:27 PM
As I remember it, the background to the story was that every year, virgin girls were sacrificed by male priests.  That's not just a female protagonist taking on a cabal of old, powerful men; it's making the story explicitly about gender.



Thaurismunths

  • High Priest of TCoRN
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1421
  • Praise N-sh, for it is right and good!
Reply #58 on: July 02, 2008, 10:15:23 PM
Why are so many of the so many of the stories about . . . men?
Are the editors aware of this trend?
Is this trend acceptable?
Is this a trend we can expect in future . . . stories?
Will more variety be expected in the future? When, and what kind?

Ask these questions of other publications, television shows, movies, novels, etc. Let me know what you find and then we can start a thread that discusses gender issues in popular culture. Honestly, I feel you are issuing a challenge rather than asking a question.
I apologize Liminal, I missed your post last night. That wasn't meant to be a slight.

I did ask them, and they said ask someone else, just like you did.
No one wants to get asked these questions, and no one wants to ask them because questioning the motives a minority makes you an 'ist' person pretty much no matter what.

How do you fight a bully that can un-make history?


Thaurismunths

  • High Priest of TCoRN
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1421
  • Praise N-sh, for it is right and good!
Reply #59 on: July 02, 2008, 10:16:10 PM
I'm sorry, I feel the need to re-state myself.
Please, re-read the words of my original post and see what is there, not what you want to read, and don't skim. Please see what I'm saying.

Is PodCastle sexist?
The knee jerk answer is probably "no" but I would disagree. I think this is a question worth asking of the audience and, most particularly, of the editorial staff.
It has been remarked that women are a minority in publishing; I can't say one way or another, nor is that my concern, nor is it the concern of this podcast (to my knowledge anyway). What I am commenting on is the general tone and trend of the collected works published by PodCastle,and the appearance that they are strongly favoring women to the exclusion of other kinds of stories.
We're on episode thirteen, with five miniatures in the bag, and to me it's become obvious that PodCastle is being sexist in its choice of stories. Since Podcastle's debut nearly all of the stories feature female protagonists, and are mostly told from a female perspective. For example, only three stories (Ant King, Hotel Astarte, Osteomancer's Son) featured male leads, the rest are largely about women triumphing over (directly or indirectly) male oppression of some fashion or other. Three of the five PC Miniatures have been from a male perspective, but about negative domestic relationships with women (of the two that weren't, one was chosen by popular demand).
These issues have been danced around and nodded at, but we haven't really gotten any direct answers. I hope we can put some of these issues to rest publicly.

Why are so many of the so many of the stories about women?
Are the editors aware of this trend?
Is this trend acceptable?
Is this a trend we can expect in future PC stories?
Will more variety be expected in the future? When, and what kind?

Where did I say "Feminist"?
Why is this becoming a discussion about my views on feminism?
I said sexist.
Shwankie said feminist. And she meant feminist.
If you want to talk about feminism, ask her. Or ask me my views on feminism some other time, but don't lump us together. We are individual people and we have reached our own conclusions about this.

The definition of Sexist
Wikipedia:"Sexism can refer also to any and all systemic differentiations based on the gender of a person, not based on their individual merits. In some circumstances this type of sexism may constitute sex discrimination, which in some forms is illegal in some countries."
That is the definition I am using. I'm using it because it is an accurate description of my concerns, and I consider Wikipedia a reliable source in this case because its content is user provided, making this use of the word reasonably accurate and current.

I said PodCastle has "...the appearance that they are strongly favoring women to the exclusion of other kinds of stories." meaning that I think the content is being chosen based on gender, rather than the individual merits of the stories. That is sexism.

Sexism is not about anti-men or anti-women. Sexism is choosing one thing over another (often to the detriment of the 'another'). If a podcast were to feature stories exclusively about one gender it would be just as sexist as a podcast that degraded one gender.

How do you fight a bully that can un-make history?


Thaurismunths

  • High Priest of TCoRN
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1421
  • Praise N-sh, for it is right and good!
Reply #60 on: July 02, 2008, 10:51:33 PM
These issues have been danced around and nodded at, but we haven't really gotten any direct answers. I hope we can put some of these issues to rest publicly.

Yeah.  All right, Thaurismunths, let's put it to rest.  Here's what you don't know.

Rachel got handed the reins of PodCastle with about 15-20 stories already in inventory before she had a chance to pick anything.  Many of the stories you've heard so far are stories that were originally sent to Escape Pod, before there was any word of us splitting off a fantasy podcast.  I initially bought them with contracts in Escape Pod's name.  If I were put on the witness stand, I could submit scanned copies of the signed contracts.  When I first got serious about doing a separate fantasy feed -- which was roughly a year before PodCastle actually launched -- I contacted those authors and asked if they'd be okay with  their stories going up on a different podcast.  They said yes, of course.  Peter S. Beagle's business manager was the first person I approached about it, because as soon as I read "Come Lady Death" I knew I wanted it for a debut story.

The stories picked by me are as follows:
  • Come Lady Death
  • Stone Born
  • For Fear of Dragons
  • Hippocampus
  • Barrens Dance
  • Spell of the Sparrow
  • The Grand Cheat (tonight's story, if I can get away from this long enough to edit it)

The stories picked by Rachel are as follows:
  • Run of the Fiery Horse
  • Giant
  • Goosegirl
  • The Ant King: A California Fairy Tale
  • Pahwahke
  • Hotel Astarte
  • Fear of Rain
  • The Osteomancer's Son
  • Wisteria
  • Magic in a Certain Slant of Light
  • Fourteen Experiments in Postal Delivery
  • Directions

There are other stories coming up that were bought by me.  No, I won't tell you which ones.  I also gave Rachel some stories that she didn't like at all, and rejected.  Some of those stories turned up on Escape Pod before we made the full transition.  Some will simply go quietly unpublished until our two-year option expires.  I didn't like the fact that she turned down some stories I was in love with, but I've made clear to the editors of both PodCastle and Pseudopod that their editorial authority is absolute.  If I'm going to override their decisions, there is no trust and I might as well not delegate.

But here's the thing, Thaurismunths.  The stories everyone is bitching about the most?  I bought them.  "For Fear of Dragons" was my purchase.  (And I did notice that even then, in week fucking two, people were getting upset about the "pattern" of feminism on the podcast.  Two episodes!)  "Spell of the Sparrow" was my purchase.  Hell, I had issues with "Sparrow" myself -- not for sexism, but for offending my polyamorist sensibilities -- but I was so happy to get a light sword-and-sorcery piece that didn't suck that I overlooked my own prejudices.  I didn't obsess about the gender of the protagonist.  I was just happy that it was competent.  (You can read into that any conclusions you like about the state of our slushpiles.)
I haven't "bitched" about any stories. I've liked a good number of them, as stories. I've never had a problem with them, on their own. My comments are that from an outside perspective PodCastle looks to have a strong sexist bent. I posted the numbers reflecting how my impression of the stories.
I'm only a listener. I'm not a podcaster, not an editor, heck, I'm barely literate compared to some of the folks on these forums. Things may be as plain as the sun in the sky to you, but from the outside it looks too slanted to be the coincidence everyone says it is. Maybe it is just chance that so many women have shown up in the first two and a half months of the podcast, that doesn't change that they have. That doesn't change the impression some of us listeners have gotten.

Quote
And the other thing.  You say there are only three stories so far with male leads.  I could quibble over definitions, but whatever.  The three you named?  "The Ant King," "Hotel Astarte" and "The Osteomancer's Son?"  Rachel and Ann picked all three.  I had absolutely nothing to do with them.  I never even glanced at "The Ant King" until I sat down to narrate it.  I only picked the ones that seem to have everyone up in arms shouting "Estrogen!  Estrogen!"

So here's your culprit, Thaurismunths.  I stand before you.  The hyperfeminist who's offending the hell out of you is me.  I'm the one skewing the curve.  Rachel's bringing needed balance to PodCastle by making sure male viewpoints are represented in the fiction you hear. 

Are we clear on that?  Good.  Now to put your foregone-conclusions-in-the-form-of-questions to bed.  The following are my opinions only -- I'm not speaking for Rachel or Ann here; this thread annoys me for my own completely individual reasons:
As magnanimous as that is, you could only be partly to blame. You didn't chose the order of the stories, and as someone else mentioned much later on, the one story that was so thrashed about was only used because it was close at hand. I'm sorry you feel so beaten-up over them, but I wasn't the one carrying the stick.

And what "foregone-conclusions-in-the-form-of-questions"?
I asked if PC is sexist, then stated my opinion, then asked questions of the editorial staff after having been (I thought) clear on my view.  Perhaps I don't know what a "foregone-conclusions-in-the-form-of-question" is?

Quote
Why are so many of the so many of the stories about women?

Because good stories are about interesting people, and women are interesting at least as often as men are.  Is it your view that women should be interesting considerably less often? 
No. I'm fascinated by women. Love them, treat them as equals, and am very supportive. *waits for Shwankie to bring me a beer*
I'm also a member of PFLAG. I speak out regularly against sexism, racism, and homophobia in my every day life. I help with food programs for the under unprivileged. I donate to charity. I try to put a lot of thought in to what I say, and how it may affect the world around me.
I am not, irregardless of how this forum will paint me, an orgre.

And by your logic, men should be just as interesting (though perhaps less often). Maybe I should have asked "why so few of everything else?"
Quote
Are the editors aware of this trend?

That the stories feature interesting people?  Yes.
No, that the majority of stories are about interesting women.
Yes, I get that women are people, but they're a kind of person, just like men are. When someone choses to have a majority of one sex and a minority of another it's called 'sexism'.

Quote
Is this trend acceptable?

Yes, very much so.  It's why PodCastle is so much more successful than all the other dedicated fantasy short fiction podcasts.  (Yeah, exactly.)
If PodCastle is more successful than all the other similar podcast, Hurrah!
Nothing could be better. You're obviously doing something right.
Who are the other podcasts and are they being regularly promoted on two other wildly successful podcasts?

Quote
Is this a trend we can expect in future PC stories?

I sure hope so.


Will more variety be expected in the future? When, and what kind?

You mean, stories about boring people?  Dude, you already have morning radio.  Why do you want us to give you more?

Now can we please let this whining and griping die?  I'm not involved with PodCastle's story selection anymore, but I've loved almost all of the stories on PodCastle, and I'm genuinely happy with the job that Rachel and Ann are doing.  I asked Rachel to run this podcast and harangued her until she said yes because she doesn't have all the same opinions and viewpoints that I do.  Because it mattered more to me that she had opinions than what they were. 

But no matter how many people complain about it, I am not going to exert one ounce of pressure for Rachel to change a thing.  I think she's doing a great job.  As the owner and publisher, I would never allow popular opinion to force changes that the editors don't agree with.  If that ever succeeds, then and only then will I start to wonder if I picked the wrong editors.  So far there is no evidence that I have, and plenty of evidence that I picked the right ones.
Thank you for answering my questions.

Folks, I'm within a cat's whisker -- nay, a paramecium's flagellum -- of locking this thread for going too deep into personal attack. 

I don't want to lock the thread.  Although I was up front in expressing that the question in the topic annoys the crap out of me, I don't consider that sufficient grounds for stifling a discussion.  Opinions matter, and if I shut down this one thread but people really have a problem with a podcast, it's just going to come up in other ways.  I try hard to maintain an allergy to political censorship.

However.  This is starting to get mean.  We will abide discord but not nastiness.  I ask everyone from this point on to make a conscious, explicit effort to keep your debate focused on the ideas we're talking about here, and not the people you're talking to.  Let's not dwell on who said what and when, or who's holding to what patterns, or anything like that.  It doesn't matter.  This goes for everyone in this thread, including Escape Artists staff and including myself.  I brought up the original poster's name far too often in my prior reply.  It was not necessary to frame my points as a personal retort.

Thank you in advance.
I appreciate your candor, and I hope my reply did not cross the line.

[edit] I'm sorry. On re-reading this didn't come out nearly as respectful as it should have. I will try to restrain myself in the future.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2008, 11:38:10 PM by Thaurismunths »

How do you fight a bully that can un-make history?


Liminal

  • EA Staff
  • *****
  • Posts: 109
    • These Liminal Days
Reply #61 on: July 02, 2008, 10:53:21 PM
Wikipedia:"Sexism can refer also to any and all systemic differentiations based on the gender of a person, not based on their individual merits. In some circumstances this type of sexism may constitute sex discrimination, which in some forms is illegal in some countries."
That is the definition I am using. I'm using it because it is an accurate description of my concerns, and I consider Wikipedia a reliable source in this case because its content is user provided, making this use of the word reasonably accurate and current.

I said PodCastle has "...the appearance that they are strongly favoring women to the exclusion of other kinds of stories." meaning that I think the content is being chosen based on gender, rather than the individual merits of the stories. That is sexism.

Sexism is not about anti-men or anti-women. Sexism is choosing one thing over another (often to the detriment of the 'another'). If a podcast were to feature stories exclusively about one gender it would be just as sexist as a podcast that degraded one gender.


According to the definition you are using, the only way PC could be sexist is if it were discriminating against male authors in its story selection. If sexism is "systemic differentiation based on the gender of a person," then a person must be involved. If you were to demonstrate that PC was only publishing stories by women or only by men, then you might have a case, but I find it hard to understand how you can be sexist toward a genderless thing, i.e. a story. Also, I can't quite see how "systemic differentiation" is the same as "choosing one thing over another," especially when it comes to publishing stories. Every story published is a product of choosing one thing over another. For there to be a valid claim of sexism, it seem that you would have to read every story submitted to PC before you can assume that decisions are being based on gender instead of quality. And even then, sexism would only occur if male authors were systematically barred from being published. If (and I don't believe this to be true at all) PC is biased toward stories that put women at the center of the narratives, that is still not sexism. You may not like that particular editorial choice but I honestly don't feel that the charge of "sexism" - even by your own chosen definition - is warranted.

Why is this thus? What is the reason for this thusness? - Artemus Ward


Thaurismunths

  • High Priest of TCoRN
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1421
  • Praise N-sh, for it is right and good!
Reply #62 on: July 02, 2008, 10:56:06 PM
Virtually every premise of the original post is factually wrong -- just as the premises of the similar complaint from Thaurismunths were factually wrong. How often is Thaurismunths planning to come back here to beat this dead horse?
What dead horse and when did I flog it?
I believe you have me confused with someone else.

How do you fight a bully that can un-make history?


Thaurismunths

  • High Priest of TCoRN
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1421
  • Praise N-sh, for it is right and good!
Reply #63 on: July 02, 2008, 11:06:47 PM
I'm not clear what the point of asking, "Is PodCastle sexist?" actually is. If the answer turns out to be "yes," then what? We demand quotas? We stage a mass un-subscribe until we get new editors?  We petition Steve to start "StudCastle" -- a male-oriented fantasy podcast -- by way of affirmative action?  Or what?  Like I said, I'm really, really unclear about what you're trying to "settle publically."
Yes. If that's how you want to handle a sexist podcast.

Quote
Let's suppose for a moment that Rachel and Anne have made a conscious decision to favor a stories that take a particular point of view and theme, and that the stories they've chosen reflect that theme. So what?  That's just editors doing their jobs. 

IMNSHO, the best and most interesting publications on any platform -- print, broadcast, podcast, whatever -- have a strong "flavor" and a recognizable editorial stance.  They aren't democracies, and they sure as hell aren't "representative" -- they're the distinct and recognizable voice of a benevolent dictator.  Think American Mercury under H. L. Mencken, Astounding Science Fiction under John W. Campbell or more recently, Harper's under Lewis Lapham.

The best publishers give them room to develop their vision and find an audience, or die (financially) trying. <<appreciative nod to Steve>>

Almost by definition, not everybody is going to like what they see or hear.  Strong flavors are going to turn some people off.  But if you don't like pickled herring, don't try to convince me that there's something morally wrong with the people who made it by calling them "sexist."
Yes. True. I agree.
And if PodCastle is going to have a flavor, I'd like to see it listed on the label.
I've been stung more than once buying something with walnuts only to find out it's full of cashews.

Quote
Myself, I think it's way too soon to figure out what Rachel and Anne's "voice" is going to be -- not enough data points.  They may not know yet, themselves.  But I'll be very happy to be around and watch it develop.
I hear this again and again. Do you mean to say there may or may not be a trend developing, but you don't have enough data yet? Is that saying that I'm wrong and there is no trend, or is that saying you don't have enough information to be decisive?

How do you fight a bully that can un-make history?


Thaurismunths

  • High Priest of TCoRN
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1421
  • Praise N-sh, for it is right and good!
Reply #64 on: July 02, 2008, 11:43:15 PM
In fact, I really wonder whether the OP is going to explain exactly what he means by 'sexist.' To my mind, you could have a podcast called 'femcastle,' with exclusively female protagonists, and all dealing with issues of sex and gender, and it wouldn't be sexist. That's the editors prerogative, to choose the stories she likes.
Hi Steve, welcome to the forums.
Somewhere on page 4 I re-posted my OP with the definition of sexist. I hope that answers your question.
I encourage you to listen to Run of the Fiery Horse, it's a terrific story.

How do you fight a bully that can un-make history?


Thaurismunths

  • High Priest of TCoRN
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1421
  • Praise N-sh, for it is right and good!
Reply #65 on: July 02, 2008, 11:48:52 PM
I was totally going to stay out of this thread, because of the whole pot/kettle black thing, and my being the fool who renounced PP over a story so jaw-droppingly sexist I had to check a calendar to make sure I still had the right to vote.

But here's the thing.  I never said PP as a whole was sexist.  That would have been a ludicrously vague accusation.  I said,"Holy effing cow, this story just totally ruined the PP flava for me because it's incredibly sexist and here is why."  And then I wrote a compulsively detailed reasoning behind what I saw as sexist and why. 

That's the responsibility of someone laying a claim to sexism.  You got to bring out the flowcharts, and the deconstruction, and the nitpicking.  Otherwise, your claim cannot be taken seriously.  (My accusation wasn't taken all that seriously even WHEN I did all of that work, btw, so don't be surprised if yours isn't either)  It's terribly convenient to say "Oh the whole thing just feels sexist but I'm not going to tell you what or why."
I hope you'll review the information I posted in my reply to Rachel. If there's a problem with them, or you want me to pick more nits, please let me know. I have a whole bag full, but I'm trying not to waste everyones time splitting hairs.

Quote
And can I just say that I find it appalling to freely interchange the terms sexism and feminism?  WTF?  These are not the same.  They are not even close.[/b] 
I agree. Most appalling. And if you were directing this line at me, then I have to ask: Why are you doing it?
I said sexist, and I meant it.

How do you fight a bully that can un-make history?


SFEley

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1408
    • Escape Artists, Inc.
Reply #66 on: July 02, 2008, 11:56:39 PM
Hell, I had issues with "Sparrow" myself -- not for sexism, but for offending my polyamorist sensibilities

man, how many plots would that leave you?
Helen: "i'm spending the summer in troy."
Menelaus: "k, drop me a letter."

Cute.  But what I meant was more specific than that.  The ubiquity of monogamy as a source of dramatic conflict does not 'offend my polyamorist sensibilities.'  ...Okay, sometimes it does; there have been plenty of books and movies where I've said, "There's a much simpler solution.  Just pick both guys!"  But I don't get up in arms about it.

"Spell of the Sparrow" is different.  It doesn't just present a typical romantic conflict over jealousy.  It creates an artificial scenario very similar to a polyamorous V, where the husband in the story is genuinely and equally in love with two women at the same time.  A lot of time in the prose is spent on that emotion.  Only it's due to an evil compulsion, and the state of loving two people is clearly seen as unnatural, unstable and unacceptable.  In that case it really is unacceptable (it's non-consensual) but the details in the story, living together and having to work out mundane conflicts, etc., were close enough to real stuff I'm familiar with that I was deeply troubled.  Most jealousy stories are utterly irrelevant to polyamory; this one was relevant to it, but presented polyamory as a sort of curse.

That's my issue with it.  But again -- I bought the story anyway.  It's not the first time I bought a story that offended me.

ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine


Heradel

  • Bill Peters, EP Assistant
  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 2938
  • Part-Time Psychopomp.
Reply #67 on: July 03, 2008, 12:57:58 AM
Hell, I had issues with "Sparrow" myself -- not for sexism, but for offending my polyamorist sensibilities

man, how many plots would that leave you?
Helen: "i'm spending the summer in troy."
Menelaus: "k, drop me a letter."

Cute.  But what I meant was more specific than that.  The ubiquity of monogamy as a source of dramatic conflict does not 'offend my polyamorist sensibilities.'  ...Okay, sometimes it does; there have been plenty of books and movies where I've said, "There's a much simpler solution.  Just pick both guys!"  But I don't get up in arms about it.

"Spell of the Sparrow" is different.  It doesn't just present a typical romantic conflict over jealousy.  It creates an artificial scenario very similar to a polyamorous V, where the husband in the story is genuinely and equally in love with two women at the same time.  A lot of time in the prose is spent on that emotion.  Only it's due to an evil compulsion, and the state of loving two people is clearly seen as unnatural, unstable and unacceptable.  In that case it really is unacceptable (it's non-consensual) but the details in the story, living together and having to work out mundane conflicts, etc., were close enough to real stuff I'm familiar with that I was deeply troubled.  Most jealousy stories are utterly irrelevant to polyamory; this one was relevant to it, but presented polyamory as a sort of curse.

That's my issue with it.  But again -- I bought the story anyway.  It's not the first time I bought a story that offended me.

I didn't really get that read off of Sparrow, I found the problem the story presentedwith the V was that one of the relationships developed naturally, and the other one was created artificially via magic with one half of the relationship unable to control or deny it. Love has a way of stripping people of their agency in it's natural incarnations, artificially creating it for your own benefit is just evil.

I Twitter. I also occasionally blog on the Escape Pod blog, which if you're here you shouldn't have much trouble finding.


SFEley

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1408
    • Escape Artists, Inc.
Reply #68 on: July 03, 2008, 01:39:02 AM
I didn't really get that read off of Sparrow, I found the problem the story presentedwith the V was that one of the relationships developed naturally, and the other one was created artificially via magic with one half of the relationship unable to control or deny it. Love has a way of stripping people of their agency in it's natural incarnations, artificially creating it for your own benefit is just evil.

Yeah, I don't really expect that most people will have the same interpretation of the story that I did.  My opinions, and the experiences that contribute to those opinions, are idiosyncratic.  I am okay with this too.  Hell, some of my experiences I wouldn't wish on friends nor enemies.

(BTW, I'd meant to say earlier but forgot until your post reminded me -- secondarily, I had an issue with the fact that the male character in the story was a complete dishrag, very nearly a non-character.  All these women and children are fighting over him but he doesn't do anything, just sits there and waits for it to resolve.  I can't respect that, oviparous love magic or not.)

Anyway, this was a sideline.  We now return you to your regularly scheduled penis- and vagina-counting session.


ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine


Sandikal

  • Matross
  • ****
  • Posts: 287
Reply #69 on: July 03, 2008, 01:56:10 AM
I didn't really get that read off of Sparrow, I found the problem the story presentedwith the V was that one of the relationships developed naturally, and the other one was created artificially via magic with one half of the relationship unable to control or deny it. Love has a way of stripping people of their agency in it's natural incarnations, artificially creating it for your own benefit is just evil.

Yeah, I don't really expect that most people will have the same interpretation of the story that I did.  My opinions, and the experiences that contribute to those opinions, are idiosyncratic.  I am okay with this too.  Hell, some of my experiences I wouldn't wish on friends nor enemies.

(BTW, I'd meant to say earlier but forgot until your post reminded me -- secondarily, I had an issue with the fact that the male character in the story was a complete dishrag, very nearly a non-character.  All these women and children are fighting over him but he doesn't do anything, just sits there and waits for it to resolve.  I can't respect that, oviparous love magic or not.)

Anyway, this was a sideline.  We now return you to your regularly scheduled penis- and vagina-counting session.



I didn't like the husband character.  Spell or no spell, he had no backbone.  Maybe that's what the POV character loved about him though.

and....


 :o :o :o :o



Rachel Swirsky

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1233
    • PodCastle
Reply #70 on: July 03, 2008, 03:16:32 AM
Quote
If a podcast were to feature stories exclusively about one gender it would be just as sexist as a podcast that degraded one gender.

However, the numbers show this is not what's occuring.



Rachel Swirsky

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1233
    • PodCastle
Reply #71 on: July 03, 2008, 03:21:23 AM
Chodon,

"Fear of Dragons" is, to my mind, a pretty simplistic anti-entrenched belief systems piece. It's playing on some old tropes about virgins and priests, but it's not really about the virgins or the priests, it's about the ways in which societies use scape goats to maintain cohesion.



Windup

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1226
Reply #72 on: July 03, 2008, 04:16:15 AM
I'm not clear what the point of asking, "Is PodCastle sexist?" actually is. If the answer turns out to be "yes," then what? We demand quotas? We stage a mass un-subscribe until we get new editors?  We petition Steve to start "StudCastle" -- a male-oriented fantasy podcast -- by way of affirmative action?  Or what?  Like I said, I'm really, really unclear about what you're trying to "settle publically."

Yes. If that's how you want to handle a sexist podcast.


No fair, I asked you first.  :o 

More to the point, I'm not the one who wants to "handle" it.  It's only fair to ask what you're proposing, since I can't think of a solution that wouldn't result in either significantly watering-down the podcast, or behavior that's just plain silly. (Those truly are my best guesses at a solution; I freely admit that they sound like bad ideas, even to me. Which is part of the reason I think "handling it" is probably a bad idea, too.)

Let's suppose for a moment that Rachel and Anne have made a conscious decision to favor a stories that take a particular point of view and theme, and that the stories they've chosen reflect that theme. So what?  That's just editors doing their jobs. 

IMNSHO, the best and most interesting publications on any platform -- print, broadcast, podcast, whatever -- have a strong "flavor" and a recognizable editorial stance.  They aren't democracies, and they sure as hell aren't "representative" -- they're the distinct and recognizable voice of a benevolent dictator.  Think American Mercury under H. L. Mencken, Astounding Science Fiction under John W. Campbell or more recently, Harper's under Lewis Lapham.

The best publishers give them room to develop their vision and find an audience, or die (financially) trying. <<appreciative nod to Steve>>

Almost by definition, not everybody is going to like what they see or hear.  Strong flavors are going to turn some people off.  But if you don't like pickled herring, don't try to convince me that there's something morally wrong with the people who made it by calling them "sexist."
Yes. True. I agree.
And if PodCastle is going to have a flavor, I'd like to see it listed on the label.
I've been stung more than once buying something with walnuts only to find out it's full of cashews.

Oh, come now.  PodCastle's only claim is that it's a fantasy podcast.  I think we can agree that it lives up to that, despite the occasional "that's not fantasy" comments on some stories.  Other than that, it's not promising anything else.

Quote
Myself, I think it's way too soon to figure out what Rachel and Anne's "voice" is going to be -- not enough data points.  They may not know yet, themselves.  But I'll be very happy to be around and watch it develop.
I hear this again and again. Do you mean to say there may or may not be a trend developing, but you don't have enough data yet? Is that saying that I'm wrong and there is no trend, or is that saying you don't have enough information to be decisive?

I admit to being a little sloppy in my construction, there.  I'm really saying two things:
  • I don't know if there's a trend, and suspect no one can at this point.
    and
  • I don't care if there's a trend.

As Chodon points out, with only 13 data points (or even 20) one or two stories one way or another is going to cause huge swings in the percentages, since each story is 5% (or more) of the total, and the way the count is performed makes it a zero-sum game ("male's" gain is "female's" loss, and vice versa).  With each individual story counting for so much, there's too much noise, not enough signal to extract anything meaningful. Not to mention that we can't agree on that to count -- narrator, protagonist, author or "theme."  And we can't seem to define the last one.  So, yes, I'm definitely skeptical of the idea that a meaningful trend can be measured at this point, and somewhat skeptical of the idea that it can be measured at all.

Fundamentally, discrimination -- in the sense of consistently choosing one thing over another -- is what editors in any publication do. It's their job.  I think we will all agree that they should choose "quality stoires."  However, there is no universally-accepted definition of what that is, so what we're getting instead is "quality stories, as defined by Rachel and Ann."  I don't know how much editorial experience either one of them has, or how strong a vision they brought to the task to begin with, but I imagine that to some extent, it's an ongoing, evolutionary, Darwinian process in which the slush smacks up against Rachel and Ann's sensibilities, and maybe changes them a little bit. Or confirms some parts and challenges others.  And maybe interaction with authors changes the contents of the slush a little bit, and other things that happen to Rachel and Ann change their outlook a little bit, and interaction with the new slush helps Rachel and Ann define their standards a little bit more, and somehow one story per week and the occasional flash piece finds its way to audio. 

That's why I say, "Maybe not even they know."  It's early in this process, too.  I don't pretend to know how they are picking and choosing.  I think it's safe to say that we'll probably see somewhat less of the "fur jockstrap/chain mail bikini" Conan-type stories on PodCastle than there are in the genre as a whole.  And probably somewhat more stories that depend on mood or language or "trippy" settings to create their effects.  Somewhere in there, there may be something about their selection process that results in more female protagonists/narrators/authors than there are in the genre as a whole.  If that's the way it works out, I'm OK with that.

If it's not working for you, OK, it's not.  I'm not saying you're a bad person if it doesn't -- despite your implication that I'm "sexist" if it does. 

Anyway, more podcasts than can possibly be listened to, lots of things to do tonight, and I'm tired. 

"My whole job is in the space between 'should be' and 'is.' It's a big space."


Bdoomed

  • Pseudopod Tiger
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5891
  • Mmm. Tiger.
Reply #73 on: July 03, 2008, 04:32:22 AM
Anyway, this was a sideline.  We now return you to your regularly scheduled penis- and vagina-counting session.
to quote The Word Whore... "The General said COCK!" :O!!!!!

sorry for the intrusion

I'd like to hear my options, so I could weigh them, what do you say?
Five pounds?  Six pounds? Seven pounds?


Tango Alpha Delta

  • Hipparch
  • ******
  • Posts: 1778
    • Tad's Happy Funtime
Reply #74 on: July 03, 2008, 04:38:44 AM
As to why posters keep referring to the stats on Escape Pod, the not so subtle point they are making is when the stories are all about men, this conversation does not happen. 

Just as an anal-retentive quibble:  this conversation DID and DOES happen all the time when there are male trends involved.  It's going to come up whenever anyone *feels* that something is unfair, and goes looking for numerical data to back up the feeling.  Steve even devoted an intro to the subject of finding minority voices in SF/F in one of the early EP episodes (if someone can recall offhand which one, that would be greatly appreciated; I thought he framed it eloquently and non-confrontationally).

The reason it comes up is always the same: our perceptions differ from measurable reality.  I consider myself a feminist, too, but when I'm confronted with hard statistics of my own behavior patterns (see my Last.fm music blog on the subject), I certainly seem to gravitate toward "my own kind".  I don't do it on purpose, and I'd like people to see me as open minded for the stuff I read/listen to/watch... but I've got a lot of data points recorded on Last.fm that betray my biases.

There is one thing about all this that I find amusing:

Selecting stories that are actively feminist is not a priority in the editorial selection. I do not go out and read things with the intent of selecting stories that support "a feminist agenda." However, I'll qualify this by saying that the only story in this line-up that I think is even remotely under the "active feminist" label is "Run of the Fiery Horse."

As I've stated several times in other places, "Fiery Horse" is my personal favorite PC story thus far.  Go figure.  ;)

Anyway, this was a sideline.  We now return you to your regularly scheduled penis- and vagina-counting session.

Ha!  Brilliant!  My stake in this conversation was "I had a feeling that proved to be baseless; a lot of people I like and respect discussed it, and revelation of facts made the feeling go away."

It's time we faced the fact that we are "Word People", and numbers will be our downfall, if we let them. 

This Wiki Won't Wrangle Itself!

I finally published my book - Tad's Happy Funtime is on Amazon!