Stranger the Reader: Diversity

Showing posts with label Diversity. Show all posts

I think at this point, we all know why diversity is important. I don't think there's a hotter topic in the publishing world right now, and that's kind of awesome. But while reading and writing diversity is awesome, another way to be a good diversity advocate is to be aware of how you review diverse books.

More often than not, there is a lot of microaggression in reviews of diverse books. For those of you who don't know, microaggressions, as used by Columbia professor Derald Sue, are, “brief and commonplace daily verbal, behavioral, or environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative racial slights and insults toward people of color.” In other words, it's when you say things that are meant as a compliment or as an innocent question, but instead come across as insulting and hurtful toward the group you are speaking too. Microaggressions are things like:

"What are you?"

"You're pretty for a black girl."

"Can you teach me how to twerk?"

"Can you read these Asian characters?"

"So did your parents come here illegally?"

"I know you're gay, but have you ever had real sex?"

I hope those sounded jerky to you guys, because they're just a small taste of what marginalized folk have to deal with on a daily basis. Things like this are so commonplace that they manage to dodge the asshole-barometer because people truly think they've said nothing wrong.

In the book blogging world, I've noticed some microaggressions frequently popping up when reviewing diverse books. For example, when people say that diversity needs to be "justified:"

If you need diversity to be justified. You are saying that anyone who isn't white, cis, abled, straight, etc. Must justify their existence.
— Jeanne (@fangirlJeanne) May 19, 2015

Ouch. I know, I know, you didn't mean it that way, but that's how it honestly comes out.

Other reviews commend books for not be "issue" books, or making diverse characters relatable to the everyday reader. Some are angry that there is too much diversity and feel as though an agenda is being pushed on them. *cringe*

So I thought, how should I approach this topic for a blog post? Making a lecture-style post on how people should review seemed to be the wrong approach, and people get touchy when you tell them how to blog.

Luckily, @fangirlJeanne created two lovely hashtags #White4thesakeofWhite and #Straight4thesakeof Straight to show the ridiculousness of microaggressive attitude towards diversity.

In the spirit of the hashtag, I'm going to review some non-diverse books the same way I've seen diverse books reviewed. I kid you not, some of these examples are things I've seen, word for word.

Divergent by Veronica Roth

"I'm not racist, but it seems a little implausible to have two white leads in a futuristic Chicago."

"Diversity is great, but I did feel like the heterosexual romance was a bit contrived."

The Fault in Our Stars by John Green

"At some points, it felt like there were too many issues (c'mon, the characters were white, straight, AND middle-class???), but overall I think the author did a good job of making sure this rose above the standard issue book."

Tempest by Julie Cross

"To be honest, I felt like all of the white culture in this book was hard to relate to. The author could have toned it down a bit to make sure readers didn't get overwhelmed."

A Thousand Pieces of You by Claudia Gray

"Okay, there is not one, but THREE instances of straight romance. I'm not saying that straights don't exist, but I find it hard to believe that Marguerite is conveniently running into so many straights in this book. They don't even make up that much of the population."

Delirium by Lauren Oliver

"I think readers will be surprised to discover that this book depicts a predominantly able-bodied society. It's a little hard to take seriously, but I guess that's why it's fiction and not reality."

Cinder by Marissa Meyer

"I liked all the characters, but Cinder seemed to be the token white girl. Was there really a reason she needed to be white?"

City of Bones by Cassandra Clare

"Did this author follow the diversity checklist? I mean the character's already a white female, but then the author had to add that she was heterosexual, her best friend is a white guy, and she's in love with this another white guy? Yes, diversity is good, but you're telling me that there is only one gay couple in all of New York? Please."

Landline by Rainbow Rowell

"Honestly, this book is an example of political correctness gone wrong. It depicted straight relationship as COMPLETELY NORMAL. I'm mean, there's nothing wrong with including a straight or two in a story, but you're saying that everything was just peachy and no one was disgusted by it? I found that to be a very idealistic depiction of straights in society."

So what do you think? Have you noticed any microaggressions in book reviews? Are you guilty of a few yourself (it's okay, we can't all be perfect like Thranduil)? What do you think of the hashtags?

Twitter-sized sass:

Are we microaggressive in our book reviews? @AnahSpiers creates sassy reviews to find out http://bit.ly/1Fbft2b (click to tweet)

That sure is an attention grabbing title, isn't it? However don't be alarmed, this post is not bashing or stereotyping white people. It's more of a counter-post for Stori Tori's post, which is a counter-post for this post, which you could say is a counter-post for society in general.

It won't come as a surprise to anyone that diversity is a huge topic in today's book world. With organizations like We Need Diverse Books trying to change the publishing landscape from the all-white, heterosexual, cisgendered, etc, it's quickly catching the attention of others. Of course, when any new thing starts making waves, some people feel left out or upset. With diversity, there are some writers, mostly all the things I listed before, who feel as though they are being pressured to write diversity. If they don't, they're racist or something else-ist.

What I'm about to say might sound a little callous, but here it goes:

This isn't about you, white people.

Of course, diversity is relevant to everyone. Everyone gets something out of the push for diversity, not just minorities. So it is about you, in a sense, but not in the way you think it is.

Diversity is not a contest. It is not a game. You do not write diversity and get diversity points. Not writing diversity doesn't mean you move back two spaces in Diversity Monopoly. You shouldn't feel some enormous pressure to write about characters unlike yourself. It is however encouraged.

When you see a post featuring minorities sharing their stories, your first reaction should not be, "Hey, not all white people are like that!" You should think, "Wow, sucks they had to deal with that. Can't believe there are still assholes like that out there." If you've suddenly gotten the feeling that you've become the representative of your race, or that people have a certain view about you , well . . . welcome to what it's like being a minority.

This doesn't mean that we should fight racism with racism. Being mean to white people because they're white is just as bad as being mean to a black person because they're black. If you see someone doing that, call them out on it! However, it's important to note that the oppressed sharing in a joke about their oppressors is completely different!

But Anah, why are only white people being targeted? I don't see anyone telling minorities to be more diverse and include white people?

Well actually, white people aren't being targeted, but let's continue with this thought. Who do you think controls the power in the publishing industry? Answer: White people. It's not a secret that there are more white authors, white agents, and white editors than minorities. A lot of the times, if change is to truly to happen, than we have to change the majority too. We have to get them to care about our causes. It's why a straight men has to pretend to be gay and tell other homophobes about how awful it is before anyone gets it.

Also, I think it would be pretty salty to tell people who are already underrepresented in every form of media that they need to include more of the majority.

The reason people would think an editor is racist because they told a minorities author to include a white person in their story, and not vice versa, is because there are many different forms of whitewashing that minority authors are subjected to: being told to whitewash their characters, to stop making it so ethnic, how are the white readers supposed to understand? Cue white tears.

I do agree that author's shouldn't write diversity for the sake of some political agenda, but again no one is talking about forcing diversity everywhere, only in places where it's realistic in possible. No one's going to send an author hate mail because there are no black people in 1492 China.

When it comes to fantasy, I find the lack of diversity to be more alarming. You're telling me you can create entire worlds, religions, species, and magic, but you can't create non-whites? Why is everyone in a made up world still European based. The comment argument I see is that their world isn't based on ours, therefore it wouldn't be realistic to have other races. Problem: These worlds are often based on specific European mythology and medieval culture, which is, guess what, from our world. Second problem: You're pretty much saying that white is the default race and anything else is unrealistic.

But, Anah, I don't see any white people being upset-

I think we all know that minorities and white people have completely different experiences. Trying to justify something by saying that the oppressors don't get mad about that is counterproductive. There is no point to this argument. So what, that white people don't get upset about being stereotyped? One of the reasons for this is that they don't have to live their entire lives being the butt of someone's fried chicken or ching chong jokes.

People get upset about the one black guy getting killed because it happens far too often. Writers are basically saying, "We need someone to die to up the stakes, but we can't kill any of these important white people, so let's just kill the black guy who served no additional purpose other than being that one black guy."

I think it's important for people to realize that connotation and history is everything. There is a reason some things are awful, but when the reserve happens, no one cares. That doesn't make it right, but it answers many of the questions I see people asking about why x is okay and z is bad.

I'm not even sure if I've managed to articulately explain my points. It's so hard to politely explain my feelings on the subject of diversity, because I get so passionate about it. The intent of this post wasn't to target anyone, or make them feel bad about their opinions. I just wanted to finally share mine on a subject I haven't written about.

Also, I'm sorry that this post was mostly about skin color. All diversity is important, whether it's sexuality, gender, religion, race/ethnicity, disability, economic status, or anything else. I focused on skin color, though, because the post I was responding to focused on that as well.

Now, to end on a more positive note, here's a cute picture of a cat:

Subscribe to: Posts ( Atom )

featured Slider