Nora Charles (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
noracharles) wrote2009-12-16 01:40 pm
noracharles) wrote2009-12-16 01:40 pm
Entry tags:
International fandom, again.
Someone uses a common figure of speech, referring to corporate headquarters by the name of the city the HQ is in, while criticizing a recent management decision.
Other people point out that in the context of the Othering of Russians and Russophobia by Westerners, especially U.S. Americans, going on in English language LJ/LJ off-shoot based circles, that particular metonymy can easily be read as an offensive and hurtful statement 1) lumping all Russians together as one homogeneous mass and 2) implying that corporate HQ is bad because it is Russian.
The person who offended Russians apologizes and changes her phrasing, the person who lumped all Americans together as one homogeneous mass also apologizes and changes her phrasing. All is good. People discuss the problem of Russophobia and general former Eastern Bloc phobia, and how they have personally been exposed to this ignorance, Othering, contempt and aggression.
Then a person whom I generally like and respect, and who has already apologized, quoted this: "Sometimes it seems that all those debates about cultural appropriation only take into account skincolor differences," and answered: "Well, you have to take into account that skin is such a visible marker; my Russian and Ukrainian friends can often benefit from white privilege right up until they open their mouths or sign their names."
I was repulsed and horrified. I am not out to attack the person who said it, I'm sure it was not a deliberate offense, and she's already apologized, but her comment has inspired me to discuss this.
First a disclaimer: Racism in Canada and the U.S. is a serious problem, and discussing it is important and legitimate. In the melting pot societies of Canada and the U.S., it in many circumstances makes sense to divide people into macro-"ethnicities" like White, Black, Asian, Hispanic and Native American, and when discussing racism in Canada and the U.S. it is relevant to examine the interplay between a person's actual ethnicity/ies and their perceived ethnicity/macro-"ethnicity". Okay?
When you are in a discussion about tensions between cultures and prejudices against certain nationalities, and how Westerners (hint: especially Canadians and U.S. Americans) are generally ignorant, dismissive and fearful of people from certain countries, don't reframe the discussion to be about your own nation and culture, erasing and dismissing the actual people from actual different countries than your own whom you are currently talking to.
I mean, don't ever do that, but especially don't ever do that in those particular circumstances. It makes you look like a dumbass. An incredibly culturally arrogant, nationalistically solipsistic dumbass.
That whole thing was mainly about the possessive attitude Western anglophones have towards LJ and its off-shoots, and how the fact that crappy service is being given by a non-American company rather than the crappy service from an American company we're all used to is met with shock and horror, and how people resent it very much when the non-American company does its job and improves service for the many users the previous American crappy service providers used to almost totally neglect, and how there's been a recent upswing in the tradional Russophobia of Western anglophone LJ users who feel their privileged position as the moral owners of LJ slipping.
It reminds me very much of my experiences in English language U.S./Canadian media based fandom. I've previously written about how I've witnessed fans who couldn't or wouldn't successfully pass as native English speakers (or who were the wrong=not U.S. American kind of native English speakers) be harassed out.
The The Sentinel fandom was very rough. I did not want to be mauled, so I did not speak up about where I live, and I was conscious of the time of the day I posted, because there were people who would simply not reply, or who would make pointed comments, if you were in the wrong time zone = posted "at night".
The Due South fandom was better. The fandom made a point of being welcoming to both U.S. Americans and Canadians! (Not any-native-language-but-English Canadians or Americans, though, obs. Eew.)
The Buffy the Vampire Slayer fandom was the best yet. There were many different mailing lists, so it was easier to self-sort into one with an agreeable social climate, or maybe just to not feel as emotionally attached to one single mailing list. It was a large and vibrant fandom, with more than one popular pairing. Kink was regarded as something fun and positive, not dirty and furtive. The show was on in many different countries simultaneously, and screen cappers and recappers/transcribers worked tirelessly to keep us all up to date and able to participate.
In many ways I felt that I had come home to my fandom. I was no longer a fandom or internet newbie. I felt that the show was "mine", having sprung out of my generation, being about fannish/pop-culture obsessed women, and tying into the international grrl-power movement. I finished and published a fic for the first time ever! My fic was about a break-up, and drew a lot on my own experiences as a bisexual woman with a tendency to cover how introverted I am by talking a lot, but not about my feelings. I'd like to think I grounded it in canon and that it was in-character, but it was definitely my fic, written for love of a fandom and characters I felt were my people.
Then I got some feedback from an old man who had read my fic from a perspective of femdom sadomasochism and D/s. I was flattered and pleased that the kinky content in my fic had worked for him, but I was creeped out by the objectifying way he talked about my grrl-power icons, offended that he found it appropriate to tell me his explicit sexual fantasies even after I asked him not to, and I felt that he was rather missing the point of BtVS. I mentally positioned him on the outer fuzzy edges of the fandom, with me and my fannishness smack dab in the center, of course.
He was sorry to have offended me, and tried to make nice by telling me how flattered and pleased he was that foreigners like me were interested in and fannish about his culture's TV show. Oh hell no. OH HELL NO!
I'm not saying queering the text trumps kinky pr0n. I'm not saying the international grrl-power movement trumps the obviously America-centric and America-based nature of the show. I'm not saying my generation trumps his generation. I'm not saying my personal identification with the characters trumps his fetishistic objectification of the characters. I'm sorry I ever mentally labeled myself as a genuine fan and him as a fringe fan, my fannish expression as right and his as wrong.
I'm saying that you do not get to declare moral ownership of a product/artistic expression based on sharing the nationality of its creator and "graciously" allow people of other nationalities to engage fannishly with it!
All these years later, and I'm still really butt-hurt over it. I've been dissed directly and indirectly for my ethnicity in fandom lots of times before and since, but that particular conversation still sticks out in my memory, probably because of my comfortable perception of myself as privileged for being "the right kind of fan". I was wrong to have that kind of attitude, and my fannish horizons have been expanded a lot since then. There are no right or wrong fans, and my attitude was as wrong-headed and prejudiced as his.
And privileging of the U.S. and/or Canada in international fandoms still is a huge hot button for me, as you can see.
ETA: Marina, on russophobia
Other people point out that in the context of the Othering of Russians and Russophobia by Westerners, especially U.S. Americans, going on in English language LJ/LJ off-shoot based circles, that particular metonymy can easily be read as an offensive and hurtful statement 1) lumping all Russians together as one homogeneous mass and 2) implying that corporate HQ is bad because it is Russian.
The person who offended Russians apologizes and changes her phrasing, the person who lumped all Americans together as one homogeneous mass also apologizes and changes her phrasing. All is good. People discuss the problem of Russophobia and general former Eastern Bloc phobia, and how they have personally been exposed to this ignorance, Othering, contempt and aggression.
Then a person whom I generally like and respect, and who has already apologized, quoted this: "Sometimes it seems that all those debates about cultural appropriation only take into account skincolor differences," and answered: "Well, you have to take into account that skin is such a visible marker; my Russian and Ukrainian friends can often benefit from white privilege right up until they open their mouths or sign their names."
I was repulsed and horrified. I am not out to attack the person who said it, I'm sure it was not a deliberate offense, and she's already apologized, but her comment has inspired me to discuss this.
First a disclaimer: Racism in Canada and the U.S. is a serious problem, and discussing it is important and legitimate. In the melting pot societies of Canada and the U.S., it in many circumstances makes sense to divide people into macro-"ethnicities" like White, Black, Asian, Hispanic and Native American, and when discussing racism in Canada and the U.S. it is relevant to examine the interplay between a person's actual ethnicity/ies and their perceived ethnicity/macro-"ethnicity". Okay?
When you are in a discussion about tensions between cultures and prejudices against certain nationalities, and how Westerners (hint: especially Canadians and U.S. Americans) are generally ignorant, dismissive and fearful of people from certain countries, don't reframe the discussion to be about your own nation and culture, erasing and dismissing the actual people from actual different countries than your own whom you are currently talking to.
I mean, don't ever do that, but especially don't ever do that in those particular circumstances. It makes you look like a dumbass. An incredibly culturally arrogant, nationalistically solipsistic dumbass.
That whole thing was mainly about the possessive attitude Western anglophones have towards LJ and its off-shoots, and how the fact that crappy service is being given by a non-American company rather than the crappy service from an American company we're all used to is met with shock and horror, and how people resent it very much when the non-American company does its job and improves service for the many users the previous American crappy service providers used to almost totally neglect, and how there's been a recent upswing in the tradional Russophobia of Western anglophone LJ users who feel their privileged position as the moral owners of LJ slipping.
It reminds me very much of my experiences in English language U.S./Canadian media based fandom. I've previously written about how I've witnessed fans who couldn't or wouldn't successfully pass as native English speakers (or who were the wrong=not U.S. American kind of native English speakers) be harassed out.
The The Sentinel fandom was very rough. I did not want to be mauled, so I did not speak up about where I live, and I was conscious of the time of the day I posted, because there were people who would simply not reply, or who would make pointed comments, if you were in the wrong time zone = posted "at night".
The Due South fandom was better. The fandom made a point of being welcoming to both U.S. Americans and Canadians! (Not any-native-language-but-English Canadians or Americans, though, obs. Eew.)
The Buffy the Vampire Slayer fandom was the best yet. There were many different mailing lists, so it was easier to self-sort into one with an agreeable social climate, or maybe just to not feel as emotionally attached to one single mailing list. It was a large and vibrant fandom, with more than one popular pairing. Kink was regarded as something fun and positive, not dirty and furtive. The show was on in many different countries simultaneously, and screen cappers and recappers/transcribers worked tirelessly to keep us all up to date and able to participate.
In many ways I felt that I had come home to my fandom. I was no longer a fandom or internet newbie. I felt that the show was "mine", having sprung out of my generation, being about fannish/pop-culture obsessed women, and tying into the international grrl-power movement. I finished and published a fic for the first time ever! My fic was about a break-up, and drew a lot on my own experiences as a bisexual woman with a tendency to cover how introverted I am by talking a lot, but not about my feelings. I'd like to think I grounded it in canon and that it was in-character, but it was definitely my fic, written for love of a fandom and characters I felt were my people.
Then I got some feedback from an old man who had read my fic from a perspective of femdom sadomasochism and D/s. I was flattered and pleased that the kinky content in my fic had worked for him, but I was creeped out by the objectifying way he talked about my grrl-power icons, offended that he found it appropriate to tell me his explicit sexual fantasies even after I asked him not to, and I felt that he was rather missing the point of BtVS. I mentally positioned him on the outer fuzzy edges of the fandom, with me and my fannishness smack dab in the center, of course.
He was sorry to have offended me, and tried to make nice by telling me how flattered and pleased he was that foreigners like me were interested in and fannish about his culture's TV show. Oh hell no. OH HELL NO!
I'm not saying queering the text trumps kinky pr0n. I'm not saying the international grrl-power movement trumps the obviously America-centric and America-based nature of the show. I'm not saying my generation trumps his generation. I'm not saying my personal identification with the characters trumps his fetishistic objectification of the characters. I'm sorry I ever mentally labeled myself as a genuine fan and him as a fringe fan, my fannish expression as right and his as wrong.
I'm saying that you do not get to declare moral ownership of a product/artistic expression based on sharing the nationality of its creator and "graciously" allow people of other nationalities to engage fannishly with it!
All these years later, and I'm still really butt-hurt over it. I've been dissed directly and indirectly for my ethnicity in fandom lots of times before and since, but that particular conversation still sticks out in my memory, probably because of my comfortable perception of myself as privileged for being "the right kind of fan". I was wrong to have that kind of attitude, and my fannish horizons have been expanded a lot since then. There are no right or wrong fans, and my attitude was as wrong-headed and prejudiced as his.
And privileging of the U.S. and/or Canada in international fandoms still is a huge hot button for me, as you can see.
ETA: Marina, on russophobia
Re: Here from metafandom - don't have openID
You are right to correct me on "melting pot". I understand, and very much appreciate, that you all prioritize being a quilt :-D
I should have taken care to be more truthful and respectful, and talked about how the colonial and multi-cultural history of Canada (and other countries) and the social kierarchy have led to the formation of macro "ethnicities", people who identify primarily as white, for example, and don't necessarily know of the ethnic heritage of their forefathers.
It is my personal experience that Americans, (I wouldn't know about Canadians), have a real hard time distinguishing ethnic facial features, and most white multi-generational Americans I know and have talked to about this identify as "Heinz 57". People of color have been even harder hit by this, not only by voluntarily intermarrying between ethnicities, but also forced by white perception into an ethnic monolith.
So it would be wrong to say that Americans or Canadians as nations have or aim to have melting pot cultures, (though some individuals do work to achieve this,) but I think it's fair to say that the U.S. and Canada have become "stew" nations. (A kind of cannibalistic metaphor, but I still like it.)
Re: Here from metafandom - don't have openID
(Anonymous) 2009-12-21 01:31 pm (UTC)(link)I should have taken care to be more truthful and respectful, and talked about how the colonial and multi-cultural history of Canada (and other countries) and the social kierarchy have led to the formation of macro "ethnicities", people who identify primarily as white, for example, and don't necessarily know of the ethnic heritage of their forefathers.
*g* Perhaps you should have, but that would have been an awful lot for one post.
I'm not sure about distinguishing ethnic facial features either, to be honest. Within those ethnicities that are 'white', I doubt I could. If anything, because I've little to no exposure (or exposure that I'm aware of - I don't go looking for peoples ethnicities on a regular basis!) to such. Once you add in something like tell-tale hair, or slight skin colour change, I, personally, would be more able to.
But I find that interesting that many Americans you have spoken with have such an unknown/generalized ethnic identity. I don't know about elsewhere in Canada, but in Nova Scotia/the Maritimes, knowing the exact nationalities/ethnicities (sometimes the same thing, sometimes not) is fairly common. For example, I'm pure Scottish on my mother's side all the way back to Scotland, and until my grandfather, in my direct line of the family, we spoke Gaelic. And on my father's side I'm descended from English settlers who originated in Yorkshire, England, with a few dabs of Dutch blood and the (more family legend than anything) possibility of one inter-marriage with a Mi'kmaq woman. (I'm 10th gen Canadian on both sides, btw). And many people I know still hold a certain pride in Scottish heritage, or French/Acadian heritage, or Dutch, etc. (Especially Acadians hereabouts.)
People of colour have been even harder hit by this, not only by voluntarily intermarrying between ethnicities, but also forced by white perception into an ethnic monolith. The generalizations of 'black' or 'brown' or (ugh, detest this term) 'red'. -.- I must admit, I'd never heard the term 'macro-ethnicity' before, but it certainly fits.
"Stew" nations! It is rather cannibalistic, but it works, I do think!
-Pearlsie
Re: Here from metafandom - don't have openID
I've been thinking a lot about ethnic identities in the U.S. after talking with you about it. There are many neighborhoods/towns/areas where people of a certain ethnic identity group together. People who live in a place like that are likely to marry someone of the same ethnicity and pass the identity down to their children.
And most Americans are descended from 1st, 2nd or 3rd generation Americans (or are 1st generation Americans themselves), and probably have a pretty good idea where their ancestors are from. However, many people have had family cultural traditions handed down, but not community cultural traditions - those have been replaced with general American cultural traditions, if you see what I mean.
If a family has an ethnically mixed heritage, especially if it's been ethnically mixed for generations, its members are likely to know the ethnicity of their ancestors, but not themselves id as anything but American and maybe a macro-ethnicity.
It's considered polite and normal to think of other people as American first, and a macro-ethnicity second, and not pry into their exact ethnicity. And treating others like this all the time probably will accustom you to think of yourself like this as well.
I don't know. It's hard to explain, because you can't explain all Americans as if they were the same, it wouldn't ever make sense. I just know that in America it makes perfect sense to operate with macro-ethnicities, and in Europe is doesn't (though more in some countries than others).