International fandom, again.

[noracharles]

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

Comments

[noracharles]

Yesterday, I went back and reread the post where the discussion I mention took place. There were many new comments, and I had to laugh because there was some serious xenophobia apologia and derailing going on, and I didn't even care, except in a being fascinated by a train-wreck kind of thing.

The particular comment repulsed and horrified me because it was from a would-be ally. They were clearly unaware of displaying their own privilege, and I did not expect a comment like that from someone like them.

In case you're not wondering why the comment was particularly horrifying, but more why it was horrifying at all, I'll break it down for you. I hope you'll be patient with me for saying some really obvious stuff I know you know, it's just so I can line it all up neatly.

The debate was about tension between Westerners and Easterners, and especially Americans and Russians. LJ users from the former Eastern Bloc are very tired of being simultaneously vilified and erased in English language LJ+clones journals.

In real life Slavs living in Germanic, Latin and Greek countries have to deal with a lot of racist shit. Some of them pass until they have to use their name, or reveal that they speak with an accent, but a lot of them don't. Europeans don't think white ethnic groups look alike.

The idea of white privilege is typical of melting pot societies, such as in the Americas. In Europe, there is no "white ethnic group", in Africa there is no "black ethnic group", in Asia there is no "Asian ethnic group". Yes, there is a complex kyriarchy, and some ethnic groups are "more like us" and some are "less like us" in any given country, and I certainly don't mean to dismiss or simplify that. But it remains incredibly America-centric to talk of "white privilege".

(And that's not even getting into the idea that all people who identify as Russian are white, or that only the white Russians are important enough to mention. They're not.)

On the internet we all look alike, so unless we identify ourselves as a member of an unprivileged group we get treated to everyone's unfiltered privileged shit, of the sort they wouldn't say if they were physically in a room with us.

So the Eastern European LJers were rightfully getting very, very tired of having Westerners, especially Americans, pretend like English language LJ+clones journals were only for Americans, and only Americans ever participated or lurked here.

This would-be ally, wanting to show their condemnation of xenophobia, and also put it into a bit of perspective, demonstrated very clearly that they were unable to grasp the idea that English language LJ+clones is for people from all over the world, not for North Americans only. The discussion was not about ethnic tension within North American countries, it was about erasing and silencing Eastern Europeans, and she was actively doing that very thing.

I hope that was an okay explanation, but feel free to ask for more clarification. I'm a Westerner myself, though, and don't have the best grasp on all this.

ETA: Sorry, I overlooked this part:
As you said, it's relevant to consider the interaction between actual ethnicity and perceived ethnicity. So this seems a valid observation to me.

Relevant for Canada and the U.S. Valid for Canada and the U.S.

[(Anonymous)]

I think it should also be mentioned that while IRL looks is usually the most visible marker, that's really not the case in an internet-community. This is a text-based medium and language is definitely the most visible marker here.

[noracharles]

Yes, you are absolutely right. I find that small errors in semantics or grammar that don't actually hinder communication at all will make the xenophobes jump on people, precisely because, as you say, language is the most visible marker.

Thank you for bringing that up, I think that's an important aspect.

here via metafandom

[solvent90.livejournal.com]

As you said, it's relevant to consider the interaction between actual ethnicity and perceived ethnicity. So this seems a valid observation to me.

Relevant for Canada and the U.S. Valid for Canada and the U.S.

I'm a little surprised by the argument that Europe is to be so clearly divided from Canada and the US because those are melting pot societies and European countries aren't. [Is that the argument you're making? Perhaps I'm missing the point.]

I agree with you that the comment is likely inappropriate in the context of the discussion - because, as you say, it changes the focus away from the issue actually being discussed. But I'd question the argument that it's just plain irrelevant in Europe. In my experience, many European countries are also multicultural societies in which some ethnic markers are more visible than others (if that's what you mean by a "melting pot" society?). And therefore there can be a difference between actual ethnicity and perceived ethnicity.

For example, I can walk down a street in my country with a visiting friend from France or Germany - or, indeed, a friend of Russian origin also permanently settled here - and get into a conversation with a stranger where I'm the one who gets asked "where I'm from". My friends only get asked that question if they have a non-local accent. So it seems to me that the difference in skin colour is more immediately visible than the difference in European ethnicity. I don't understand why that would be less true in Europe than in America. Though I agree the relevance of that fact to this discussion is unclear.

Re: here via metafandom

[rodo]

I'm a little surprised by the argument that Europe is to be so clearly divided from Canada and the US because those are melting pot societies and European countries aren't.

You have to differentiate between European countries here. Germany, for example, wasn't a country with many immigrants for the longest time. In the 60s, immigration became a topic for the first time, before that, most foreigners were probably allied soldiers. And when the immigrants came, they were still called "guest workers" because they were expected to leave again. Only they didn't in the 70s and 80s. Instead, more and more came, and in the 90s there was a huge wave of Eastern European immigrants with German ancestors (because due to a law, they could easily become German citizens), refugees and more immigrants.

Germany is currently in the process of redefining itself as a country people immigrate to, and it's going slowly and is much discussed. I don't think there's been enough time for it to be a melting pot yet. Especially since the 150 years before were mostly spent trying to de-melt the European continent and to create national states.

And for many, being Eastern European or Turkish is visible. Probably not as undeniably other as skin colour, but it's still there. Sometimes I go down the street and see somebody who looks ... well, "foreign", for lack of a better word. I have no idea why I think that, but it seems to be some sort of overall impression - like my brother telling apart people who visited different schools, despite the fact that they all bought their clothes in the same shops.

Re: here via metafandom

[solvent90.livejournal.com]

You have to differentiate between European countries here.

Oh, I agree absolutely. My query is only about the claim that there's a sharp dividing line between America and Canada and "Europe" when it comes to this phenomenon of apparent vs actual ethnicity. Different European countries have different histories, different ethnic populations and different ethnic conflict issues and so the extent to which these things matter depends very much on which European country you mean. My point is that the phenomenon isn't exclusively American; I'm not suggesting that it's universally European either. Though I'm now unsure of whether it's a point worth making. My comment was a footnote to the question I thought the original commenter was asking and, having read more, I don't want to get into a discussion that derails the original conversation which is about something different and important. So perhaps I should be quiet now :)

Re: here via metafandom

[solvent90.livejournal.com]

Having thought about it some more: my point is that I agree with the OP that the comment about skin colour is irrelevant to this discussion but I disagree about why. I read the OP as saying that "white privilege", discrimination based on skin colour, and related issues are relevant in North America and Canada but not relevant in Europe; therefore, not only is the issue irrelevant but bringing it up in this context is an instance of the very privilege that was being criticised in the original discussion. I hope noracharles will correct me if I'm wrong in that summary of her point.

My concern is that I don't think "white privilege", skin colour and related issues are irrelevant in Europe. However, that kind of racism isn't the same kind of racism as the prejudice faced by Slavic people and Eastern European people; therefore it's irrelevant to the original discussion in the same way that a discussion of sexism is irrelevant to a discussion about racism. Not because it doesn't exist but because it's not what the conversation is about. But I object to the premise that skin colour doesn't matter in Europe, anywhere in Europe. It really does.

Re: here via metafandom

[yvi]

I read the OP as saying that "white privilege", discrimination based on skin colour, and related issues are relevant in North America and Canada but not relevant in Europe

I completely didn't read it like that. I read it as being "discrimination based an ethnicity on top of based on skin color", meaning just because someone would have white privilege in the US does not mean that's the case in Europe. A lot of people that would just be called 'white' in the US are actually quite obviously treated as 'non-white/native' in European countries. Examples being Polish people, Italians, Russians, other Eastern Europeans, depending on which country in Europe you are in. Thus "my Russian and Ukrainian friends can often benefit from white privilege right up until they open their mouths or sign their names" does not necessarily apply in Europe.

And yes, discrimination based on race as identified by skin color is certainly a problem over here as well, and I hope no-one denies that. However, certainly the worst racism especially in Germany is against people from Turkey and the the area I am from against Italians. Whether people from these countries have a different skin color is certainly debatable as quite a few have very light skin. But they still look 'different' to a lot of people and ou will find people much more likely to respond well to someone from Asia or Africa than from the country next door, Poland or Italy.

Re: here via metafandom

[noracharles]

I have answered this elsewhere, but that is not what I meant to say. I am sorry that it came across like that.

I meant to say that referring to the concept of white privilege demonstrated how the commenter was speaking from a North American perspective. It's certainly an issue in European countries that people are judged by the color of their skin, but depending on the individual country (the UK being more of a melting pot than Denmark), perceived ethnicity is a lot less likely to be "white".

I'd say that in Denmark, darker skinned people in interaction with people they don't know are treated worse than lighter skinned people as a general rule, but the average person is likely to have an idea if a dark brown person they interact with is African-American, Tamil, Ghanaian or Somali, for example, at least subconsciously, and those ethnic groups are not lumped together, and they are not ranked together when it comes to the general respect the average xenophobe feels for them. Even in police reports, witnesses generally have a much more definite idea of a perpetrator's ethnicity than just the color of their skin.

Re: here via metafandom

[solvent90.livejournal.com]

I meant to say that referring to the concept of white privilege demonstrated how the commenter was speaking from a North American perspective. It's certainly an issue in European countries that people are judged by the color of their skin, but depending on the individual country (the UK being more of a melting pot than Denmark), perceived ethnicity is a lot less likely to be "white".

I see your point and agree; the American model of 'race' in society is very different from the European model and of course all of it is made more complicated by the fact that there is no monolithic European model. *g* I have to say I do find the concept of "white privilege" at least provisionally useful in thinking about the UK but I can see that it might be less useful in other countries that don't share the UK's particular colonial history. Thanks again for the clarification. I am conscious of having somewhat derailed the discussion here so I'll leave it at that.

Pretend I didn't just veer off topic like this...

[noracharles]

I don't want to derail the discussion either, but you're right, it is an interesting and important topic. I would like to examine to what extent white privilege exists here! The point I was trying to make was not that it doesn't exist here, but that referring to that concept demonstrated a certain perspective.

If you asked one of my xenophobic countrymen who he'd trust, a Pole or a Palestinian, the answer would probably be neither of them. Both of those ethnic groups are treated very poorly here. But if you asked him which he'd rather trust, the answer would probably be the Pole, because of religion and skin color.

On the other hand, he'd trust an African-American over the Pole, and a Dane adopted from South Korea over the African-American. Skin color is important and obvious as an ethnic marker, but Danes value ethnicity over color, and distinguish between ethnicity and color, to a much larger degree than what I have called melting pot societies do.

Re: Pretend I didn't just veer off topic like this...

[kaz]

If you asked one of my xenophobic countrymen who he'd trust, a Pole or a Palestinian, the answer would probably be neither of them. Both of those ethnic groups are treated very poorly here. But if you asked him which he'd rather trust, the answer would probably be the Pole, because of religion and skin color.

On the other hand, he'd trust an African-American over the Pole, and a Dane adopted from South Korea over the African-American. Skin color is important and obvious as an ethnic marker, but Danes value ethnicity over color, and distinguish between ethnicity and color, to a much larger degree than what I have called melting pot societies do.

That sounds about right for Germany, if you replaced "Dane" by "German" in the adopted from South Korea example. (In fact, there was a Korean adoptee in my class. I can't talk about whether he experienced racism or not, but as far as I could tell the Russian-German boy, the Dutch boy and the girl from former Eastern Germany got a /lot/ more shit from our class. I can't recall anyone ever mentioning his race, whereas some of the boys made making horrible comments about people from Eastern Europe and the former East into a bloody competitive sport.)

It's... I think white privilege *exists* in Europe, but it's hugely complicated because its intersection based on nationality and ethnicity tangles things up immensely - so e.g. an African-American may garner prejudice and discrimination based on skin colour mixed in with "omg you're so cool!" on account of being American - and a lot of the times US people don't realise that in discussion. The big example I can think of here is how if people bring up "but X white group was discriminated against!" there will sometimes be an answer of "oh yeah, but that was way back and nowadays that sort of thing doesn't happen anymore!" Which, well, no. (And I can understand that they want to shut down the discussion so it doesn't derail, similarly to how talking about skin colour is a derail from this topic - oooops - but still, that statement as it stands just isn't true.)

Re: Pretend I didn't just veer off topic like this...

[west_side]

I agree, just as race is more important in America, ethnicity is valued over race in Europe. Some of the conflicts go back centuries. But when you mention ugly specifics,(government issued discriminating policies, ethnic wars, etc) most of the comments from Americans lie along "let them eat cake" lines. It used to be annoying at first. But in retrospect, I think I'd take these comments any day over the maddening ethnic-consciousness of my no-more-home.

Re: Pretend I didn't just veer off topic like this...

[noracharles]

Ha, yes. I am against color-blindness and ethnicity-blindness, but I'll take it over rabid ethnicity hyper-awareness.

Re: here via metafandom

[yvi]

And for many, being Eastern European or Turkish is visible. Probably not as undeniably other as skin colour, but it's still there.

Fellow German here and yes, seconding this. And many people living here wouldn't ask someone if they are Turkish or Russian or Polish - many think it's very obvious and thus don't feel the need to ask. So solvent90 being asked instead of their friends can be less "no-one cares about ethnicity here" (people here do care a lot, unfortunately) and more it being obvious enough to not ask.

Re: here via metafandom

[solvent90.livejournal.com]

So solvent90 being asked instead of their friends can be less "no-one cares about ethnicity here" (people here do care a lot, unfortunately) and more it being obvious enough to not ask.

I'll accept that that's likely to be true in Germany. In Britain, however, I don't think that's what's going on; I don't think my brownness makes me less "obviously" non-English than a white person from Russia.

Re: here via metafandom

[spiralsheep]

I agree with your comment in general so I hope you won't mind if I nitpick one small aspect.

Germany, for example, wasn't a country with many immigrants for the longest time. In the 60s, immigration became a topic for the first time

Hmm, yes, but... the first wave of black Germans weren't immigrants, they were the so-called "Rhineland blacks" who were born in Germany as German citizens.

Sample link: http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?ModuleId=10005479

Re: here via metafandom

[noracharles]

I meant only to illustrate how the comment I quoted in my original post showed a North America centric perspective, missing the point that the discussion was about online interaction among people from different nations, not different ethnicities in a North American country.

You are right that perceived ethnicity and actual ethnicity are not always the same in Europe, and that people do get treated differently because of the color of their skin. Discussing this is valid, but it was not valid or relevant in that particular discussion.

By melting pot society, I meant that many people whose families have lived for generations in that society have only a vague idea of where their ancestors were from before they immigrated, and they consider their own ethnicity to be one of the macro "ethnicities". Ethnic markers are not so much less visible (though that too), as society in general ignores them and dismisses them as irrelevant. Many Americans who have preserved their ethnic identity find this constant dismissal of it very hurtful.

Re: here via metafandom

[solvent90.livejournal.com]

Discussing this is valid, but it was not valid or relevant in that particular discussion.

Thank you for that clarification. That makes sense to me.

[nojojojo]

Hmm... I'm not sure I agree that the actual/perceived ethnicity difference is only valid for the US and Canada. Or that the term "white privilege" has no meaning in Europe -- that part I strongly disagree with, because I've spoken to enough European PoC to know it's not true. It may be rooted in ethnic differences, but color is a major factor in determining those ethnic differences. But I don't want to derail the convo, so I won't go into this.

I think what brings your point home is this: Europeans don't think white ethnic groups look alike.

OK, I get this, and now I see how the statement in your OP can be insulting. USians do notice the difference between white ethnic groups too (and black ethnic groups, for that matter); it's human nature to notice such differences. They just don't matter here as much as skin color, for most interactions that involve privilege. To apply US-centric language to a world where nuance matters is definitely a privilege thing, not to mention ignorance. Thanks for clarifying that.

That said, though... it cannot be denied that there is privilege in coming from lighter-skinned ethnic groups in most of Europe. Seen and experienced that for myself, particularly in southern Italy (Sicily). So what does one call that, if not white privilege? I've heard some people use "light skin privilege", but I always find that confusing because it's also used to refer to intra-PoC issues of colorism.

[noracharles]

Thank you, you have explained it much better than I did. You are right, people are judged by the color of their skin, and generally speaking, lighter skinned people are treated with less prejudice than darker skinned people.

I was trying to explain how and why I saw the concept as North America centric, and you got that perfectly, not trying to pretend like skin color is irrelevant in Europe.

[kaz]

Jumping in here...

As another European (German), I tend to think that white privilege does exist but it's very very strongly intertangled with ethnicity-based, culture-based and nationality-based prejudice. If you look at how a Pole, an African American, a Turkish person or a German adopted from Korea are treated in Germany, it's going to be massively different for all of them depending on situation and how the interplay between the various elements works out. And then there are things like the incredible prejudice and discrimination towards the Roma and other travelling people and the dreadful treatment they tend to be subjected to - and skin-colour wise they're pretty much white.

Which is to say, I think ethnicity, nationality and culture often gets treated as more important than skin colour over here, and it can be frustrating when it seems as though someone coming from an outside pov wants to dismiss the first three entirely.

[Note: As a white ethnically/nationally/culturally western German woman I'm pretty privileged wrt all of these - I live in the UK and worry about people reacting badly because I'm German, but so far I haven't had any problems - so that should probably be taken into consideration.]

I should add that I have a tough time differentiating between white ethnic groups, *but* I suspect that's mainly because I'm autistic and may have a mild degree of face-blindness on top too. But even with that, ethnicity = big deal.

[jonquil]

"On the internet we all look alike, so unless we identify ourselves as a member of an unprivileged group we get treated to everyone's unfiltered privileged shit, of the sort they wouldn't say if they were physically in a room with us."

I completely agree with the first part, but, alas, people *do* say that sort of thing when people are physically present, all the time, because they don't even think of it as offensive. See icon.

Thanks for the overall education. I hadn't even considered the issues you list. Man, kyriarchy is *complicated*.

[noracharles]

LOL. Yes, some people will say anything to anyone, and feel perfectly justified because they're just that privileged and oblivious. I love your icon. There's something to keep in mind :-)

[(Anonymous)]

But it remains incredibly America-centric to talk of "white privilege".



OMG I FRIGGING GIVE UP!!!