A thought about the readercon thing

[dancingsinging]

So, when I first read the Readercon official statement, I was like, "Hey, that makes sense! I'm glad there was another explanation than that established/influential people get special treatment. How awesome to transform creepers into feminist allies!" So when I started reading peoples' negative reactions to it, I was kind of puzzled for a while. But then I thought about this awesome essay in this year's Wiscon Chronicles (when I have more time, I'll look up the author and give credit) about Moonfail, and how important it is to pay attention to whose point of view you're paying attention to. Like, instead of thinking of the poor distressed author, think of the poor distressed Muslim folks she was attacking. I see a strong parallel here--instead of poor, contrite stalker, maybe it's better to focus on the person who was stalked, and what might make her and the guy's other victims feel comfortable at Readercon.

Comments

[wild_irises]

I see your point. But I also think the Readercon statement is really "established/influential people get special treatment" in a not-very-thin disguise. Plus it concentrates on the abuser. Plus it makes guesses about why people harass and then says "but this guy isn't like that."

All they had to do was ban him for life and then "forgive" him in two years if there are no more accusations. Or, better still, have a policy that doesn't require banning people for life in the first place.

[jinian]

Not even victims. I'd never heard of the guy, and, though I always wanted to go to Readercon, I won't go with things as they stand.