Escape Artists

Escape Pod => About Escape Pod => Topic started by: NeilSF on September 15, 2007, 01:34:00 PM

Title: male sexuality in SF
Post by: NeilSF on September 15, 2007, 01:34:00 PM
While listening to Aliens Want Our Women, I found myself again thinking about some issues of sexuality in sci-fi.  Gay men surface briefly in that entertaining episode as a familiar foil, with a play on the cliche observation that "all the handsome, available men are gay or married."  In this story, it was the disappointment felt by a woman who learned that the handsome man she dated was a homosexual.   

Steve, our host, has thoughtfully observed some of the factors contributing to a lack of diversity among sci-fi authors, and its effects.  One of the good things about the emergence of women in sci-fi is the openness of the genre to observations like the above - which I think is good.  Of course, the search for a partner, whether one is looking for a short connection or a long-term relationship, is filled with the realization that often the person we want does not have a reciprocal desire.   The whole hetero-homo thing is just one broad theater of that dynamic. 

"Aliens Want Our Women" aside, the prevalence of white, heterosexual, men in sci-fi writing has also led to a distinct attitude toward male homosexuality, very obvious even in Escape Pod.  Like Howard Stern, or many other facets of popular culture, lesbians are titillating, or at least examples of a progressive future openness in sexual attitudes.  (See, for example, the podcast of My Friend is a Lesbian Zombie.)   But in our conceived future, gay men still apparently still are merely an impediment to women's hooking up.   In our culture, male homosexuality is still demeaned, even when imagining our infinite possibilities.  After all, we are still in a culture where, in general, for a man to adopt anything believed to be a woman's role is shameful, disgraceful, silly, or at least undesirable.   Pity.

Strangely, the Escape Pod that I thought came closest to capturing a gay male's perspective was "Conversations With and About My Electric Toothbrush."  Although it may have been the furthest thing from the author's mind, this was a story about a sentient being who was cast against his own sense of identity.   His struggles for public self expression and acceptance of the identity which he knew to be "true" must have resonated with many people who struggle with our culture's ongoing pressure to conform to a generally accepted sexual orientation.  I hope someday to hear more Escape Podcasts that directly portray, even in fleeting or passing reference, the perspective of a gay man.   Until then, I'm going to continue to think of the Toothbrush as a good start. 
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: Rachel Swirsky on September 15, 2007, 09:13:55 PM
I don't feel like this is true, in the broader scene of literature. Look at the Future Is Queer anthology by Lawrence Schimel, or Samuel Delany's writing, or the existence of a lot of specualtive alternative presses. Also, I think it's a mistake to look at the use of lesbians as objects of titilation as meaning that the genre is somehow more open to lesbian characters or relationships.

A few more examples off the top of my head:

Gay male narrator in Ryman's Tiptree award (winning? nominated?) story, 2003.
MTF character in F&SF published, Tiptree-award nominated story 2003.
Recent F&SF story with gay male narrator/main character, from 2005 or 6 (name escapes me), which carried a "not G" warning and caused several subscribers to have fits.

...anyway, I certainly think there's less than ideal representation of male homosexuality in speculative fiction. I just wish that this argument wasn't framed as somehow suggesting that lesbians have it better. A) I don't think that can be substantiated, and B) it pits two oppressed groups against each other, suggesting that representation is a zero sum game.

Also, with affection for Escape Pod, I don't think it's representative of the genre as a whole - particularly its alternative or subversive undercurrents.
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: NeilSF on September 17, 2007, 02:25:19 AM
I actually think we're in general agreement, in that I didn't mean my statement to apply to speculative fiction in general.  But I've listened to every episode of Escape Pod (I think!) and really intend to limit my observation to how lesbian characters surface, and how gay male characters don't.   I certainly agree strongly that this is not a zero-sum situation - there's room for representation of all forms and expressions of humanity in these podcasts, and I merely observe the relatively disproportionate underrepresentation of gay men here. 
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: Listener on September 17, 2007, 01:23:59 PM
I agree, gay men are somewhat underrepresented in SF, but IMO it's because many men are still intimidated by gay men, even though they declaim against the contrary.  They're programmed by their culture to think "two girls = hot, two guys = creepy/weird".  Even guys with gay friends think that sometimes.

(That is all anecdotal opinion, not backed up by any facts.)

"Iron Council" has gay male characters in it too.

One of the best representations of male homosexuality in SF is in the Hidden Frontier series of Star Trek fan films.  Though I was quite surprised and not at all titillated at the first male-male kiss, I was not actually bothered by it in any way because it wasn't gratuitous, as I find a lot of lesbian characters to be.  I think some writers just throw in the occasional lesbian couple because "hey, it's trendy, titillating, and unthreatening to the audience, which is generally guys" (again, anecdotal opinion).

Example:  I'm reading "The Buried Age", a Star Trek novel by Christopher L Bennett.  In it, two of the characters on Picard's expedition to the Scorpius Reach are a lesbian couple with a two-year-old child.  Bennett doesn't make a fuss about it or draw any attention to it, which is how I believe it should be treated, but it doesn't feel necessary to the plot except to say "see, in the future, gay people are just people".

So, what I take away from that mishmash is this:  as an American culture, we are not sufficiently advanced to accept gay characters without thinking too much about it, much in the same way we think too much about skin color.  Until all people are people first, without qualifiers, discussions like these -- which IMO are not BAD discussions -- will continue to happen.  Smart people like those of us on the forums will say "yes, all people are people" but we will remain the minority.

(Again, remember, this is all anecdotal and opinion, not factual.)
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: Rachel Swirsky on September 17, 2007, 02:27:56 PM
Quote
They're programmed by their culture to think "two girls = hot, two guys = creepy/weird".  Even guys with gay friends think that sometimes.

Right, but again this is pitting lesbians against gay men. The concept that lesbians exist for the sexual pleasure of straight dudes is homophobia -- just as much as the concept that two men having anal sex is "gross."

Gay men and lesbians are stigmatized in different ways, totally. Traditionally, some of the more virulent bile has been thrown at gay men, while lesbians have been disappeared or objectified. Both aparatuses (aparati?) are about reinforcing heterosexual privilege over homosexuals.

To the extent that the sexual objectification of lesbians makes it easier for them to exist in society or be represented in fiction (an arguable point), it also only works for certain kinds of lesbians -- women who are willing to present in a feminine way, and whose bodies are considered appropriate for sexual fantasy within the dominant culture. Beautiful, feminine lesbians exist. However, even they aren't usually enthusiastic about being used for the sexual titilation of straight guys. It leads to a lot of problems that aren't intuitive to men, but sticking with something basic and on the surface -- straight guys just don't do it for them, so it leads to intrusive attention. Also, fixating sexually on women who don't want you back (which is the definition of this situation) is pretty much always nasty. It's not about honoring the target of your affection; it's about honoring yourself.

Anyway, I'm just going through this because I don't like the meme that lesbians have it easier because you can see straight dudes buying porn involving two chicks. There are some certain, specific ways in which lesbians probably do have it easier than gay men -- for instance, I think they come out as being victims of fewer violent crimes. However, lesbians are subject to other pressures, such as the one in eight risk of rape that comes with being female.

--

Anyway, all that said, I'll repeat the general point of the thread (which I so agree with!) again. More gay characterz, plz.

Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: bolddeceiver on September 17, 2007, 08:36:03 PM
And part of that might be on the editorial side, but I'm betting the majority of this comes down to submissions.  So all of the writers on the forum:  Let's write and submit some good stories with believable gay and bi men in them!

Or we could just start a letter-writing campaign to draft Samuel Delany.
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: Russell Nash on September 18, 2007, 08:12:57 AM
The thing with EP and short fiction in general is that unless the story is about sex.  We never find out what the sexual tendancies of the main charactors are.  To use the latest story as an example, unless he mentioned a wife when he use talking about flying to Stockholm (I don't think he did, but I'm not 100% on that), we don't know if this guy was straight, bi, gay, or a eunic. 

In stories where sexuality comes up I think the percentage of gay charactors should match the percentage of gay people in the general population.  The most quoted number I hear is 3%, but I've heard as high as 5%.  Lesbians and gay men should get equal time, so that means 1.5 - 2.5% of main sexually active charactors should be gay men. 

It comes down to, one story with a gay male main charactor and EP has met it's quota for 3-4 years.
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: Listener on September 18, 2007, 12:44:10 PM
The thing with EP and short fiction in general is that unless the story is about sex.  We never find out what the sexual tendancies of the main charactors are.  To use the latest story as an example, unless he mentioned a wife when he use talking about flying to Stockholm (I don't think he did, but I'm not 100% on that), we don't know if this guy was straight, bi, gay, or a eunic. 

In stories where sexuality comes up I think the percentage of gay charactors should match the percentage of gay people in the general population.  The most quoted number I hear is 3%, but I've heard as high as 5%.  Lesbians and gay men should get equal time, so that means 1.5 - 2.5% of main sexually active charactors should be gay men. 

It comes down to, one story with a gay male main charactor and EP has met it's quota for 3-4 years.

If I promise to write that one will you guys promise to put a rubber-stamp on it and push it into production?

 ;D
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: Russell Nash on September 18, 2007, 03:18:03 PM
The thing with EP and short fiction in general is that unless the story is about sex.  We never find out what the sexual tendancies of the main charactors are.  To use the latest story as an example, unless he mentioned a wife when he use talking about flying to Stockholm (I don't think he did, but I'm not 100% on that), we don't know if this guy was straight, bi, gay, or a eunic. 

In stories where sexuality comes up I think the percentage of gay charactors should match the percentage of gay people in the general population.  The most quoted number I hear is 3%, but I've heard as high as 5%.  Lesbians and gay men should get equal time, so that means 1.5 - 2.5% of main sexually active charactors should be gay men. 

It comes down to, one story with a gay male main charactor and EP has met it's quota for 3-4 years.

If I promise to write that one will you guys promise to put a rubber-stamp on it and push it into production?

 ;D

I only help out in the forums.  I've never been asked to do anything for any of the podcasts.  You have a better chance than I do of getting on the 'cast.
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: SFEley on September 19, 2007, 03:45:51 AM
I hope someday to hear more Escape Podcasts that directly portray, even in fleeting or passing reference, the perspective of a gay man.   Until then, I'm going to continue to think of the Toothbrush as a good start. 

Neil, you say you've listened to every episode of Escape Pod.  What did you think of EP067: "Life in Stone" (http://escapepod.org/2006/08/17/ep067-life-in-stone/) by Tim Pratt?  The two central characters were men who had an explicit long-term romantic and sexual relationship.  Did it fail to convey the perspective you're looking for?

I'm not going to claim that one story featuring gay male characters in two years is a satisfactory ratio.  I'd actually like to see more, too.  I'm bisexual, and much of what I read and watch could be considered gay entertainment.  But, much like the folks who say they want more spaceships in EP, I'm limited by the stories we have submitted to us.  I don't have time to read all the anthologies out there.  Just about all the stories we run on Escape Pod are the ones people send us.

Write a good story with gay characters and send it to us, and if I think it'd be a good listen on Escape Pod I'll buy it.  I can't pin down with any precision what "good listen on Escape Pod" means, but I promise you, with all sincerity, that homosexuality in the story isn't  a negative on any level.
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: SFEley on September 19, 2007, 03:51:43 AM
In stories where sexuality comes up I think the percentage of gay charactors should match the percentage of gay people in the general population.  The most quoted number I hear is 3%, but I've heard as high as 5%.  Lesbians and gay men should get equal time, so that means 1.5 - 2.5% of main sexually active charactors should be gay men. 

It comes down to, one story with a gay male main charactor and EP has met it's quota for 3-4 years.

I suspect Russell's being tongue in cheek here, but for the record, I reject this perspective absolutely.  That's not how I pick stories, and I don't think it's how most people read them.  Whether a story or characters are interesting is not a matter of demographics.
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: Russell Nash on September 19, 2007, 07:56:50 AM
In stories where sexuality comes up I think the percentage of gay charactors should match the percentage of gay people in the general population.  The most quoted number I hear is 3%, but I've heard as high as 5%.  Lesbians and gay men should get equal time, so that means 1.5 - 2.5% of main sexually active charactors should be gay men. 

It comes down to, one story with a gay male main charactor and EP has met it's quota for 3-4 years.

I suspect Russell's being tongue in cheek here, but for the record, I reject this perspective absolutely.  That's not how I pick stories, and I don't think it's how most people read them.  Whether a story or characters are interesting is not a matter of demographics.

I never meant it as a real quota.  That choice of wording was just for fun.  You've made your position clear on many occassions that it's all about story.  My point was just that the charactors were representitive of the public if this math worked out. 

I, myself, just want good stories.  My gay brother-in-law forces me to see every gay film he likes.  So far I liked them all, but that was only because they were good films.
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: Opabinia on September 19, 2007, 03:34:45 PM
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaand it looks like we're back to this: http://theangryblackwoman.wordpress.com/2007/05/02/how-to-promote-diversity-in-fiction-markets/
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: Chodon on September 19, 2007, 04:14:53 PM
I'm not going to claim that one story featuring gay male characters in two years is a satisfactory ratio.  I'd actually like to see more, too. 

I don't have any objection to having male sexuality in this podcast, but not to the exclusion of a better story that doesn't include male sexuality.  It shouldn't receive preferential treatment.  Why should it matter if there are gay men in EP stories or not? 
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: SFEley on September 19, 2007, 04:59:49 PM
I'm not going to claim that one story featuring gay male characters in two years is a satisfactory ratio.  I'd actually like to see more, too. 

I don't have any objection to having male sexuality in this podcast, but not to the exclusion of a better story that doesn't include male sexuality.  It shouldn't receive preferential treatment.  Why should it matter if there are gay men in EP stories or not? 

Argh.  Chodon.  Did I say anything like that?  Did I say "Given a purchasable story with gay characters and an even more purchasable story without gay characters, I would buy the gay story and reject the other one?"

I did not.  It's actually a null question, because I don't compare stories against each other at all when I'm buying.  In the above scenario, with two purchasable stories, I'd buy them both.  I always buy every story I think I should buy.  I don't adhere to strict quotas -- "Whoops, bought five stories this month, better reject all the others" -- or anything.  This means our backlog grows and shrinks somewhat organically, but I'm okay with that.

All I said was that I'd like to see more stories here with gay male characters.  This is consistent with what I've said before about wanting to offer more diversity and more worldviews in science fiction.  It does not, however, signal the beginning of a crusade.  I have a lot of things I'd like to see, but I don't always get what I want when it comes to Escape Pod either.  That may seem odd, but it's true.
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: SFEley on September 19, 2007, 05:09:09 PM
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaand it looks like we're back to this: http://theangryblackwoman.wordpress.com/2007/05/02/how-to-promote-diversity-in-fiction-markets/

Yes.  There's a lot of truth in that blog post.  And yes, I personally could be doing more to get the word out to more diverse groups of writers.  If anyone has concrete suggestions for people I should contact or communities where the word should be spread about Escape Artists podcasts, please let me know.  Or if you're already active in those communities, and you want to spread the word for us, let me know that too.  You'll be my favorite person of the day.

I also want to note, although it's rather a tangent, that we've bought multiple stories from the Angry Black Woman.  Her stories have been very well received by Escape Pod listeners.
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: Rachel Swirsky on September 19, 2007, 06:56:09 PM
I'd just like to register that I think it's unpleasant that there's an assumption that "quotas" lead to reduction in story quality. I know people don't mean this overtly, but there's an implicit assumption in that argument that straight white men write better stories than those of us who are queer, female, and/or non-white. Thanks, Steve, for explicitly rejecting that assumption.

Quote
If anyone has concrete suggestions for people I should contact or communities where the word should be spread about Escape Artists podcasts, please let me know.

You might consider contacting Lawrence Shimel, both as an author and as an editor. He seems to love the 'cast; he's sent me 8 or 9 stories for PodCastle. He recently produced a book called The Future is Queer which might have some appropriate stories in it. You can get him at http://desayunoencama.livejournal.com/.

There's also a feminist SF livejournal community called whileaway which might be a good place to spread the podcast word, just given that the feminist and queer communities often overlap.

As far as places to go to attract writers of color, the much-bothered ABW is probably a good person to bug. Personally, I appreciate the writers of color we've seen on this 'cast: for instance K. Tempest Bradford, the ABW herself; N. K. Jemison; and Eugie Foster.
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: SFEley on September 19, 2007, 07:06:58 PM
As far as places to go to attract writers of color, the much-bothered ABW is probably a good person to bug. Personally, I appreciate the writers of color we've seen on this 'cast: for instance K. Tempest Bradford, the ABW herself; N. K. Jemison; and Eugie Foster.

Oops.  I need to issue a retraction; for some reason I had it in my head that Nora Jemison was the ABW.  (Possibly because she's written there too.)

We haven't bought anything from Bradford.  Or at least, I haven't for Escape Pod.  I will have to see if I can get her to submit some things, though.
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: Rachel Swirsky on September 19, 2007, 07:08:39 PM
Yeah, Nora's a guest blogger there. Her post name is nojojojo.

She is a kicker of much ass.
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: bolddeceiver on September 20, 2007, 02:19:36 AM
I'd just like to register that I think it's unpleasant that there's an assumption that "quotas" lead to reduction in story quality. I know people don't mean this overtly, but there's an implicit assumption in that argument that straight white men write better stories than those of us who are queer, female, and/or non-white. Thanks, Steve, for explicitly rejecting that assumption.

While I am mostly on board with promoting diversity, even doing so with intentionality and some force (in some cases), I can't stand to see even an argument I don't subscribe to mischaracterized.  So I'm putting on my devil's advocate boots when I say this.

The argument made isn't that all straight white male-written stories are better than all queer brown female-written stories.  The argument that was made is that if a story is chosen because of a quota it is, by definition, not a story that would have otherwise been chosen.  If it would have otherwise been chosen the quota isn't doing anything.  It is not necessary to the argument to assume superiority of all privelleged class submissions over all minority submissions; it only needs assume that there is one privelleged class submission that is marginally more appropriate to the publication than one minority-submitted story.

So let's keep the strawmen out of this and confront arguments as they're actually made.
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: Rachel Swirsky on September 20, 2007, 02:26:23 AM
Instead of calling the uncomfortable subtext of certain cultural biases "strawmen," let's confront the implicit assumptions in the argument. The assumption here is that if a quota needs to be installed, it is because the work submitted by the group whose work is not being selected is less good (you say this yourself, when you say that a story selected by quota is less good because it was selected by quota). In fact, this need not be true, as long as systemic bias - the existence of which is unquestionably proven - is in effect. Systemic bias, which is often unconcious, can contribute to the non-selection of stories which are written by people outside dominant groups, even if such stories are equally "good."
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: SFEley on September 20, 2007, 02:41:14 AM
The argument made isn't that all straight white male-written stories are better than all queer brown female-written stories.  The argument that was made is that if a story is chosen because of a quota it is, by definition, not a story that would have otherwise been chosen.  If it would have otherwise been chosen the quota isn't doing anything.  It is not necessary to the argument to assume superiority of all privelleged class submissions over all minority submissions; it only needs assume that there is one privelleged class submission that is marginally more appropriate to the publication than one minority-submitted story.

I want to be very, very explicit about this.

The only 'quota' Escape Pod has is that we must run at least 52 stories per year.  We haven't missed a week yet and I don't intend to, so it is incumbent upon me to buy at least that many stories.

Except for that, I have no idea what you're talking about.  Stories don't "edge out" other stories.  I don't compare stories against each other.  That sounds like an unnecessary and ridiculous chore.  I buy any story that I think would make a good Escape Pod story.  If it has robots and laser beams, that's fabulous.  If it has gay characters, that's fabulous.  If I don't think a story's good enough, or wouldn't work well in audio, then it doesn't matter what it has in it, because I'm not going to buy it.

I did not offer to lower my quality standards for stories with gay characters, or stories with any other diversity feature.  What I've said, and I stand by this, is that I would love it if we got more good stories with those features.
 
Am I making sense here?  Does anyone have a problem with this?
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: eytanz on September 20, 2007, 05:35:46 AM
Let me start by making it clear that I'm not posting to discuss Escape Pod's story selection policies - my comment below is because I find the questions raised by bolddeceiver and palimpsest's posts interesting, though I don't think they are directly applicable to the actual way this podcast is run.

With that out of the way,

The argument made isn't that all straight white male-written stories are better than all queer brown female-written stories.  The argument that was made is that if a story is chosen because of a quota it is, by definition, not a story that would have otherwise been chosen.  If it would have otherwise been chosen the quota isn't doing anything.  It is not necessary to the argument to assume superiority of all privelleged class submissions over all minority submissions; it only needs assume that there is one privelleged class submission that is marginally more appropriate to the publication than one minority-submitted story.

Instead of calling the uncomfortable subtext of certain cultural biases "strawmen," let's confront the implicit assumptions in the argument. The assumption here is that if a quota needs to be installed, it is because the work submitted by the group whose work is not being selected is less good (you say this yourself, when you say that a story selected by quota is less good because it was selected by quota). In fact, this need not be true, as long as systemic bias - the existence of which is unquestionably proven - is in effect. Systemic bias, which is often unconcious, can contribute to the non-selection of stories which are written by people outside dominant groups, even if such stories are equally "good."

My problem with both of your arguments is that you both seem to assume that there's an objective standard of how "good" a story is. This is perhaps more overt in bolddeceiver's post, since his argument only makes sense if the stories are easily rankable. I've never selected stories, but I've reviewed abstracts and papers for academic publications. Some small percentage of them are clearly "accept". A much larger percentage is clearly "reject". And a sizable remainder is always in between, with enough merit to make you hesitate about rejection, and enough problems to make you hesitate about acceptance. You can always ask for revisions, but that has diminishing returns - the more times you send a submission back for revisions, the less likely they are to affect your position. So, eventually, you have to make a choice. I assume it's the same with story publication. And how do you choose between a story with, say, an original concept with a cool twist at the the end, but somewhat flat characters, and a story with wonderfully poetic imagery but where the action descriptions are somewhat confusing? Well, maybe you go for the one which doesn't have a gay man as a major character, because why risk upsetting any of your readers?

So I agree with palimpsest that the reasons stories get rejected are not always quality-related. And depending on how entrenched the bias is, it may well trump quality in some cases.

But where my problem with palimpsest's argument lies is in the reverse - she is making a distinction between the "systematic bias" and the quality judgments. And I can't see how these two are separable, in any real way. I read a lot of short stories in anthologies, and I never read the author's biographical information before I read their story. I often don't even glance at the author's names beforehand (I also fast forward through film credits, and recently I've been skipping the Escape Pod intro and only listening to it after I hear the story, because I find that Steve sometimes will give too much information about the story before it starts. But I digress). Normally, once I've read all the anthology, I go back and see who wrote what. Even without making any real effort, I've noticed over the years that I can make generalizations - broad, with many exceptions, but still somewhat valid - about the demographics of authors I'm more likely to enjoy. For example, gender and sexual orientation don't matter much to me, but the author's age does - I'm more likely to enjoy stories written by people who are older than me.

My point is, the systematic bias is not just a fact of the story selection. It's also a fact of the readership, and of the authors themselves. You present quotas as a means of correcting the symptoms of a bias - but I can't see how you can keep that separate from a proactive attempt to correct the bias itself. And I can't see how that can be done without affecting story content, and thus affecting story "quality".
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: Simon on September 20, 2007, 01:23:27 PM
<Content Removed>

Arse, I really need to learn not to lose my temper in public...  Excuse me, while what was posted wasn't shockingly offensive, i'd rather not have my name tagged to it...  So it has been removed,  the operative sentence Steve chose below is probably all you need to get the gist:

Chinese, and Indian culture (who represent 20% of the world population between them) is extremely under represented in science fiction, but I see none of the heat and light in trying to globalise these under-representations than I see in Americans banging on about feminism, gay rights and the black issue.
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: Russell Nash on September 20, 2007, 01:45:36 PM
I would like to jump in here and take the blame for introducing the word Quota to the discussion.  It was used in a light manor as I was trying to make two points.

1) Most charactors never divulge their sexual orientation or even their race or nationality.  When we try to figure out representation ratios, these charactors need to be discarded from the calculations.

2) As long as these representation ratios closely correspond to the English speaking societies, this cast is aimed at, I see no need to worry about it.  Meaning if we find Steve never gets a good story submission about dog owners, maybe we need to try to get more quality submissions from people who write about dog owners.

I am now going to take the word quota out back and shoot it in the head.
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: Anarkey on September 20, 2007, 02:12:53 PM
eytanz -

Your arguments are cogent, but it appears you've glossed over one of palimpsest's explanations of bias.  Everywhere she wrote "systemic" you've changed that to "systematic".  It's only a syllable, I know, but it does make a difference.

But where my problem with palimpsest's argument lies is in the reverse - she is making a distinction between the "systematic bias" and the quality judgments.
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: SFEley on September 20, 2007, 04:33:14 PM
Chinese, and Indian culture (who represent 20% of the world population between them) is extremely under represented in science fiction, but I see none of the heat and light in trying to globalise these under-representations than I see in Americans banging on about feminism, gay rights and the black issue.

This is an excellent point, Simon.  I'd like to see a more international presence as well.  We've had a number of submissions from authors in India, but I haven't found any yet that I could buy.  I'm hoping that doesn't discourage them.

Simon, if you have any links or suggestions for ways to get the word out in other nations' writing communities, I'd love to hear about it.  Thanks.
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: Anarkey on September 20, 2007, 08:05:11 PM
<Content Removed>

Arse, I really need to learn not to lose my temper in public...  Excuse me, while what was posted wasn't shockingly offensive, i'd rather not have my name tagged to it...  So it has been removed

That's really a shame, because I've been thinking about your post all day, and just now meant to respond to it.  However, if you'd prefer to pretend you didn't say it, I guess I'll let it go as well.

Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: Chodon on September 21, 2007, 02:17:28 AM

Argh.  Chodon.  Did I say anything like that?  Did I say "Given a purchasable story with gay characters and an even more purchasable story without gay characters, I would buy the gay story and reject the other one?"

I did not.  It's actually a null question, because I don't compare stories against each other at all when I'm buying.  In the above scenario, with two purchasable stories, I'd buy them both.  I always buy every story I think I should buy.  I don't adhere to strict quotas -- "Whoops, bought five stories this month, better reject all the others" -- or anything.  This means our backlog grows and shrinks somewhat organically, but I'm okay with that.

Fair enough, Steve.  I guess I just misunderstood how the EP business model works.  I figured it was to purchase the 52 stories a year that are played and that's it.  It sounds as though my assumption was incorrect.  IF that was the model, I hope my previous post and concern about bumping stories I may be more interested in for a story with a gay protagonist would be better understood.
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: Heradel on September 21, 2007, 02:46:45 AM
Fair enough, Steve.  I guess I just misunderstood how the EP business model works.  I figured it was to purchase the 52 stories a year that are played and that's it.  It sounds as though my assumption was incorrect.  IF that was the model, I hope my previous post and concern about bumping stories I may be more interested in for a story with a gay protagonist would be better understood.

Not to speak for Steve here, but I don't believe there's a business model outside of not putting Steve in the poor house. I do believe he's said the only reason it's not a non-profit is the record-keeping would cost too much.
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: eytanz on September 21, 2007, 03:36:18 AM
Fair enough, Steve.  I guess I just misunderstood how the EP business model works.  I figured it was to purchase the 52 stories a year that are played and that's it.  It sounds as though my assumption was incorrect.  IF that was the model, I hope my previous post and concern about bumping stories I may be more interested in for a story with a gay protagonist would be better understood.

Not to speak for Steve here, but I don't believe there's a business model outside of not putting Steve in the poor house. I do believe he's said the only reason it's not a non-profit is the record-keeping would cost too much.

I do hope that's not true anymore, especially given the soon to be two spinoffs.

That said, one of the (many) reasons I'm happy about the fact that in a month or so I'm actually going to have an income is that I'd be able to finally donate some money towards Escape Pod and it's progeny.
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: eytanz on September 21, 2007, 12:42:42 PM
eytanz -

Your arguments are cogent, but it appears you've glossed over one of palimpsest's explanations of bias.  Everywhere she wrote "systemic" you've changed that to "systematic".  It's only a syllable, I know, but it does make a difference.

But where my problem with palimpsest's argument lies is in the reverse - she is making a distinction between the "systematic bias" and the quality judgments.

Hmm... I just noticed this correction. You're right, of course, but (unless I misunderstood palimpsest), I believe I was responding to what she was actually saying, and just consistently misspelling that word "systemic" in my post, rather than misreading her.
Title: Re: male sexuality in SF
Post by: Anarkey on October 09, 2007, 07:39:52 PM
Hmm... I just noticed this correction. You're right, of course, but (unless I misunderstood palimpsest), I believe I was responding to what she was actually saying, and just consistently misspelling that word "systemic" in my post, rather than misreading her.

I'm not sure whether I can explain why the difference is so important and why it impacts your argument, but I'll give it a go.  Systemic bias can be countered with awareness, systematic bias needs much more.  Thus it can be helpful to be aware that in the TOC's of many of our genre magazines authors and protagonists of stories are overwhelmingly white and male.  Merely noticing this opens up avenues by which to correct it, because systemic bias works primarily by being invisible.  When people notice it, they can (and often do) compensate to avoid it. 

In systematic bias the decks are stacked so as to disallow you fixing the thing merely by noticing it.  You're not going to fix segregation by reading a sign saying "coloreds only".  Noticing the sign would do nothing, on its own.  You have to take the sign down to start the ball rolling, an act with far-reaching legal and social ramifications.

No laws need changing for F&SF to be more gender or culture balanced.  No social revolutions are required for a magazine to appeal to those readers that feel shunned by the so-called "big three" (and I am one of those readers, I'll just come clean and tell you) and market itself to the shunned.  There needn't be demonstrations in the street.  All it takes is for people to notice the imbalance, point it out, and act accordingly.

The reason I think this is a critical point is because in these discussions there is often a level of knee-jerk defensiveness when people try to raise awareness of systemic bias (and I'm not talking about your response, here, eytanz, which I would never characterize that way) because in systematic bias you can blame.  There is something very obviously wrong (an unjust law, say, or physical intimidation by groups trying to keep the status quo) but in systemic bias it's everyone's fault.  We're all doing it and we - often - don't even know we're doing it. 

When someone says,"Check your zipper, your fly is down," most people just shrug and zip it up, because everyone's had their zipper down at one point or another.  When it's "Might I get a female protagonist about half the time?" or "Your magazine is whiter than a snowstorm" people get all defensive instead of saying "Huh, you're right, lemme zip."

I think this reaction comes, in part, from the unzipped's concern that they are being accused of purposeful racism or sexism.  Systematic, intentional bias.  And that's an offensive accusation.  But it's not the one that's being made.  Thus, I think the emphasis on "systemic bias" is a way of letting people off the hook instead of pointing fingers, the way "systematic bias" does, and that's why I think the omitted syllable is critically important to what palimpsest laid out.