I haven’t spoken specifically about the whole BfP/Amanda Marcotte situation because I figured my readers who gave a shit about it already know about it and my readers who don’t would find it to be too inside baseball.
Suffice to say, I thought that BfP was exactly right. It seemed to me that what she was saying is “Look here. Here are two women who write well, who care about the issues of immigration and how they overlap with the issues of feminism. One woman has been an activist whose writing has focused specifically on these issues for years. The other woman seems to have recently really gotten the urgency of the situation, even though she’s been reading the first woman for years. Isn’t it weird that the second woman would get invited to speak about this issue in ever larger forums?”
And this is what I meant by appropriation–taking a spot that seems, logically, to belong to someone else.
I had refrained from talking about this for a few reasons. 1. It seems completely apparent to me that BfP had a legitimate complaint. She was right to be angry. It’s one thing when someone’s making a controversial point to chime in and be all “Oh, she’s absolutely right” but it seemed to me kind of patronizing for me, as a white woman, to jump in and give praise for something so clear.
To use a science analogy, if BfP had come to the world and said “I have discovered a way to slightly modify the cars we have now so that they run on water instead of gasoline,” that would have been clearly praiseworthy. If she said, “As others have recognized before me, but which I now see from my own experience, water is wet,” I think it would have seemed weird and patronizing for me to have been all “Oh, that brilliant BfP.”
But apparently saying “It is fucked up that this less-qualified white woman is repeatedly getting opportunities that more qualified non-white women don’t get” isn’t as obvious as I thought it was. So, I apologize for not speaking out sooner, just from that angle.
2. I didn’t say anything because there’s a lot more going on here than just this. There’s a long history of stuff that I’m only semi-aware of and there are email groups and listserves and stuff that I am not privy to. Nor do I want to be privy to them. This is where my writing is. I think email is a great way for friends to give each other support, but when it turns into some unacknowledged way of strategizing against other folks who are also using email to strategize against the first group without being clear that that’s what’s going on… I don’t know. It seems to me that there’s some line between “We are friends supporting each other and that’s not the world’s business” to “We are trying to influence things while keeping ambiguous who this ‘we’ is” and while I’m all for the first, I’m dead set against the second among progressives and especially among women who self-identify as feminists.
This behind the scenes manipulations and strategizing and acting, but not in public, is exactly the kind of influence many of us have been told is the only influence we can have on the world, because, you know, we’re girls.
Continuing to participate in that bullshit, even after we know better, is wrong. Plain wrong. If you want to act in the world and influence others, be up-front about what you’re up to and why.
3. I think I hoped, deep in my heart, that Marcotte was just self-destructing, that what BfP said got to her and, instead of causing her to take a step back and a deep breath, she curdled. When she needed to react from a place of generosity and understanding and listening, for the welfare of everyone involved, she reacted out of fear and anger.
I, myself (though I know you may find this hard to believe), often do this. But eventually, I think things through and I mull it over and I try to get back to trying to be open and understanding, because that’s just going to be what it takes for people who are very different to achieve the common goals they have.
And I have read Marcotte for a long time and her writing and her fuck-you attitude have had a great deal of influence on my own thought (for better or for worse). People I’ve come to consider cherished commenters and dear friends have come to me through her and I still get a little thrill when I see their names around the blogosphere–Oh, hey, that’s Church Secretary! Oh, shoot, there’s a comment Theriomorph made and I found her through Chris Clarke who I found through Marcotte and I know I want to see what she has to say and read it over. And, shoot, every day I hope that Steve Pick returns to the blogosphere, because I miss him terribly.
So, I wanted to believe that this was just her majorly fucking up, but, if folks took a step back, she would take a step back and everyone would take a deep breath and we’d all move forward. As her reader, I wanted to grant her the time and space to be fucked-up hurt and confused. Because I trusted that she would come back and say “Okay, I thought about this and BfP is right. Here’s the thing: I do care passionately about this and I knew that if I didn’t write about it, it wasn’t like those folks were going to search out someone like BfP to write it, because, let’s face it, we live in a society set up to ignore the voices of non-whites. So, I did it because I, as a white woman, could get heard. It’s fucked up that I can get heard when these other women can’t, but the situation is urgent and I just felt like someone had to say something and, if I can get people to listen to me, I should. Where I fucked up is that, in realizing that it was imperative for me to take this opportunity to talk about this important subject, I should have taken it a step further and realized that it was imperative for me to call bullshit on the fact that I’m the one who can get heard. I should have said ‘Yes, here are these women you are not listening to, and you should be.’ I was wrong to not do that and I apologize.”
It wouldn’t heal everyone’s wounds and people would rightly still be mistrustful of her, but it would have been something.
That’s not coming. I know that now.
And it’s not coming because… I don’t know why, frankly. But it’s not.
Here’s the moment it hit me, not just in an intellectual way, but really deep in my heart, that I was going to have to stop reading her for my own sake.
After all this–and I mean the whole history, since clearly the book was in production before this latest round of stuff–there exists in the world an educated white woman who does a ton of pop culture analysis and who claims to feel passionately about social justice for everyone, who still lets a book with those illustrations go out under her name.
No.
No, no, no. There is just no way that anyone, any feminist, who is making a good-faith effort “fucks up” that bad. There is not an editor on the planet, not a designer, not at a fucking feminist press, who “fucks up” that bad.
That is not a fuck up. That is an on purpose.
And I apologize for not realizing that sooner.
Filed under: Fun with Feminism



I was just thinking… well, not exactly the same thing, but something very very similar. Inspired by the same comment. There comes a point, when you’re called out on the same thing over and over and over again, and you keep doing it, that people are going to start thinking you’re doing it on purpose. And with good reason.
I’ve been finding it increasingly difficult to believe that a professional writer as smart as her can fuck up accidentally in exactly the same way so many times in a row.
I’m also still spitting chips after the threadful of ableist commenters at Feministe (and thankyou to Cara for drawing that little nest of vipers out of the woodwork).
Hey Tiny cat pants, I have always thought that a little feminism was a healthy thing but then, what do I know? I’m just another male chauvanist pig. I love your sense of humor. It is quite obvious you have been bitten by the muse. Sharp tooths them muses have, what? Chaz
I shared your “got it” moment and really can’t fathom any rational feminist defense for the book cover–even though AM didn’t really offer any compelling excuses for it aside from its commerciality. And as for her receiving credit due to BfP, today’s Pandagon page revealed to me that AM is not only, as we knew, white, but has the added advantages of being young, thin, and attractive as well. Hmm.
Mm. I’d already come to that conclusion, but I’m pretty sure I’m far more
obsessedinvolved with that set of issues than most of your readers. Inside baseball indeed.That said… having watched Seal Press’s conduct recently, I can’t say that particular problem – the egregiously bad imagery – surprises me at all. The willful blindness that comes out of that press is… impressive. They say they’re trying to change, and I’m willing to extend them the benefit of the doubt and say that they are doing what they think will help… but I think they’ve got a long way to go and they aren’t going about it too well.
I went over to that link, and read most of the thread about this. I don’t know any of these people, I only just started reading Pandagon on occasion (found them on TCP), so I have no personal/blogger involvement, and I am one of the people who didn’t know anything about it.
So here’s the deal: I find those illustrations to be fucked up. I find it to be fucked up that they were allowed. I have dealt with a similar racist exoticism in my life as a professional actor (Being Asian, it comes up.)
But why would they do that “on purpose”? I honestly don’t understand what the payoff is for that kind of “on purpose.”
I’m not trying to be a shit-starter, B., and I’m totally out of/new to the feminist/blogger loop, so I’m sure there are historical items that I am not aware of which would make this clear for me. I’m not trying to defend AM, or anyone – I just wanted to understand why you think she – or whomever – did that on purpose, and what they stood to gain from it – was it simply that it was a big book deal and she didn’t want to make waves and lose the book?
I’ve got the book, and though I can understand why it rankles some people, I just don’t get offended. I didn’t give the art much thought when I was reading the book; I just figured it was tongue-in-cheek.
I read Pandagon on a fairly regular basis, stopping there at least once or twice a day when I’m at home (of course, TCP gets more frequent visits, but what would you expect?). I didn’t notice any of Amanda Marcotte’s writings on immigration, but then she writes about so many different things that there’s probably much that I miss. That’s not to say that I doubt the veracity or seriousness of your allegations, B.; I’m just saying that I’m largely ignorant of what’s going on. The main reason for that is likely that I have been neglecting to seek out and read more of the blogs written by women of color. I guess if there’s any point to this rambling comment, that’s it. Instead of cursing and swearing off Marcotte (though some might find good reason to do so), I’ll keep reading her writings while I also do what I should have been doing all along, which is to read more from people like BfP. The best thing we can do for our sisters of color is value their voices; for me, that means giving them some traffic.
If you only read P’gon and avoid the other blogs in this mess, you’ve likely missed the many, many, many times she’s put her foot in it. I can’t even think of a good place to start with it anymore, it’s so big.
Grammy, I don’t know. I really don’t. So, no, I don’t think you’re stirring shit for the sake of stirring shit. I think it’s that, frankly, this whole thing is so weird (and again, to be clear, because it’s hard to keep all these things straight; there is a long, long history).
Why would someone who purports to be progressive and who self-identifies as a feminist and who clearly seems astute about the ways in which messages we would never accept if we heard them are slipped by us through visual means.
I mean, few people would stand by if a total stranger were accosting young girls on the street and saying to them “fuck you, you’re so fucking fat and ugly and just wrong compared to these other women” because we’d see it as abusive and sick. But we rarely think about how that’s what young women are taking from the images in the media.
So, here’s the thing, just to be clear. I’m not calling for any boycott or for everyone to join me on the WTF, Amanda train (and, to be clear, I’m no where near the front of that train). It is perfectly fine, I think, for anyone who wants to to read and enjoy Pandagon.
But for me, it’s not good for my soul. I don’t need to continue to expose myself and, even in some small way, continue to identify with someone who willfully refuses to acknowledge when she’s fucked up.
Because I need, every day, to learn to be graceful in admitting when I have fucked up.
And I have been very fortunate to have opportunities I otherwise would not have had because of this blog and some of those opportunities are unavailable to other women.
I need to learn to be the kind of woman who can say “I will say this now, because you might hear me, and what I’m saying needs to be heard, right now, but I will not be complicit in you continuing to overlook these folks and the work they do.” That’s what I aspire to.
Other people don’t have the same hangups I do nor the same journey to make.
I see. And I did not think you were calling for a boycott, that’s not how I read your post – it is very clear that you are doing what you need to to do for you.
Thanks for your thoughtful reply to someone who is really new to this whole bloggy thing, I appreciate it. I know it’s a bit like that kid at school who is always showing up for the tail end of something, saying, “What? Who? What are you guys talking about?”
Ya know, I have started to wonder how much of the Amanda/BfP blowup would have happened a year ago. Because while I was a few days late coming to that controversy (I used to go over to BfP once or twice a week, and it all blew up and she closed the blog down in between visits, and I just thought what a shame it was that she was having tech problems the day I had a chance to read her), my immediate thought was that Amanda would naturally listen to valid criticism, have a little lightbulb moment, and apologize. I was kind of shocked to discover how wrong I was. And maybe the reason she didn’t is that Donohue guy. Maybe now criticism makes her dig in her heels in ways I don’t remember it doing before. Not that that makes it OK, and maybe it is just that having a book deal gives one infinite superiority, but at this point I’m trying to understand why more than anything else.
It’s not just the Donohue thing, and it’s not new. She’s been doing this on a smaller scale for years. There’s quite a list of bloggers who have had similar encounters with her… most of whom have simply opted not to speak (because how could they prove it? And did they really want to conjure up a shitstorm?).
She has been mean and nasty in the comments of small WoC blogs time and again, and a lot of seriously cruel stuff has happened behind closed doors. This is just a lot of that coming out in the open now.
thanks for posting this.
I have made a similar decision. I was disappointed by the pettiness of Amanda’s reaction, the way she lashed out at her critics, and also really sad about Amanda’s refusal to give even the tiniest bit, upon reflection. It didn’t seem so big to me, and in the end it does seem like bad faith. I also agree that the bit about the book illustrations drives that home. (O that thread made me furious! both her interjections and the bit about the pictures. Do people not listen to themselves?).
See, I don’t think it was that kind of on-purpose. I think she was excited about her new book, and that Seal Press was in charge of putting it together and they proposed the images. She thought they were cute and went with her theme, and didn’t bother to say anything. Seal Press has repeatedly demonstrated a completely tin ear for racial issues, and probably either didn’t think about it or didn’t care. Up to that point, it’s just … a series of unfortunate, privileged events.
The thing is, she was also paranoid about what would happen. Ever since the FFF thing she had been saying publicly that people would be ‘out to get [her]‘ when her book came out, and that those people (read: WoC) would be spouting their “joy killing” narrative (her words, not mine). And she has a long and chronicled history of not giving credence to racial issues in general (see: the LeBron James/King Kong cover, the cover of her own book, the cover of FFF, the “pickanniny” thing). So when people pointed out that her initial cover was racist, she jumped on it as an example of everyone being out to get her and stifle her work. After all, she knows she’s not racist, and she thinks that all of these silly little arguments about racist imagery and naming are useless, so clearly this must be about jealousy.
And, of course, Seal Press would have agreed completely with her. (Y’all are up on that mess, right? Because otherwise I need to go digging for a bunch of links and I’m supposed to be writing a workshop right now.)
… which gives you your “on purpose.” It’s not that anyone said “hey, let’s go do some egregiously racist shit!” it’s that they didn’t think they were doing anything wrong and they thought that everyone who said differently was just jealous. What would have been a blatant but relatively unremarkable case of massive white privilege morphed into something persistent and ugly.
So given the way the past few weeks have gone – Seal Press, Amanda’s appropriation, and the aftermath – it’s unsurprising (if frustrating) to see that she’s completely dug in. The same general group of people who criticized her initially (and who she has been alternately cribbing from, ignoring, and outright fighting for years) have gotten into it with her press (even though they started it), and are now talking about her bad behavior on yet another front (the appropriation thing); it’s no wonder she feels attacked. And in true form, she’s fighting back with every ugly tactic she can think of.
Tellingly, if you’re only a P’gon reader, you wouldn’t have seen any of this. (Except the initial book thread, and that was scrolled off the screen lickety split when it happened.) She hasn’t posted about it, or mentioned anything near her usual stomping grounds. Not a peep. Everything has taken place in the comments at various blogs… both big (Alas, Feministe) and small (too many to name).
I don’t know, Mag. I keep finding myself staring off at my desk thinking about this. First, I don’t want to speak for all white people, but I think (as much as we sit around and talk about how racism isn’t a problem anymore because we’re so enlightened) that a lot of us have made a little fucked-up compromise with our consciences. This is where we know people who are openly and blatantly racist, but we like them, and we feel like liking them is wrong, because being racist is wrong, but we don’t want to confront them, so we do some mental gymnastics about how they aren’t racist like that. And who the hell knows what “like that” means? It just means it’s not how the person we like is.
So, we get to draw our line in the sand–I will not stand for that real racism–even as we get to make excuses for the people we like.
I see a lot of that going on; white people who like Marcotte making these complicated mental tumbles to keep from seeing that this is some kind of willful wrongness, that we should have recognized, should recognize now, and should react to.
In other words, I think one reason this has gone on as long as it has is because we white people are not just doing this when it comes to Marcotte. We’re doing this about a lot of people in our everyday lives (again, to reiterate, I’m speaking in broad generalities). So, the stakes are high, because it’s not just a matter of saying “Marcotte is being racist.” It’s a matter of saying “Marcotte is being racist, just like my Uncle Sam is being racist, and, if I recognize that what Marcotte is doing is wrong and deserves censure then I have to recognize that what my beloved Uncle Same is doing is wrong and deserves censure.”
And I think–though I could be wrong–that she’s well aware of that and uses it to her advantage.
To sidetrack for a minute, unless the Seal Press contract is vastly different than other book contracts, Marcotte did have final say over every image that went in that book or on the cover. She may not have picked the art, especially if it doesn’t go directly with the text, but she would have had to sign off on it.
Why Seal Press didn’t recognize the racist problems is that they are, as “good” feminists, probably unfamiliar both with the long history of racist art that uses similar tropes and that they clearly have nobody on staff who is aware of this stuff and feels empowered to say “No. Just no.”
Anyway, back to my point. Here’s what I keep thinking. Why does someone do something that hurts other people. And it seems to me that there are only a few reasons: they don’t know it’s hurting other people; they know it’s hurting other people, but they don’t know some better way to do things; they know it’s hurting other people, but they don’t care; and they know it’s hurting other people because that’s what they intended.
Clearly, the first one doesn’t fit. By this time, the second one doesn’t fit. We are clearly in the third scenario and I think the evidence is mounting that we are in the fourth scenario.
And on the one hand, I am curious about why a person would want to hurt other people. On the other hand, I have my theories (though I don’t care to sit here and play arm-chair psychologist, so I’ll keep them to myself). And on the third hand, so what?
If she kept making the same kinds of mistakes without meaning to, it would be useful to figure out what was going wrong where, if only to be on the look-out for the blindspot in ourselves.
But, really, if she means to make them, then that’s all I need to know.
If she kept making the same kinds of mistakes without meaning to, it would be useful to figure out what was going wrong where, if only to be on the look-out for the blindspot in ourselves.
I think that’s why I speculate about the Donohue blowup. Not to excuse (and Mag is right, I’m sure, that it’s been going on longer than that anyway–now that I think about it, Donohue wasn’t all that long ago; it’s just the election campaign making it seem long), but to figure it out.
Because I hate to think that someone I have admired really does just appropriate for the sake of her own success.
I honestly think a lot of this started with the third suggestion. It might even have slid from 1-3 as time went on, but by the time I started becoming active in the blogosphere, she was well into 2-3 territory. (This was when P’gon still had Sheelzebub and Chris Clarke and Ilyka, so they were doing the heavy lifting on racial stuff anyway. Sometimes you could excuse it as “but maybe she doesn’t know better” because there were plenty of cobloggers to help her through it, but most of the time it seemed like she didn’t care.)
I’m pretty sure that the cover and images and whatnot were mostly a 3 problem. Sure, they might hurt people… but those people are whiny and not really people and just out to get her. But the reaction? The appropriation? The rampant and insistent hole-digging in comments? (Especially the consistent digs at any critics as people arguing in bad faith and out to get her because they’re jealous of her success) That all seems, at this point, like the fourth option. She has a fairly clear idea of who she thinks is wronging her and she wants to hurt them back. (Especially as evidenced when she starts naming names. That’s… pretty clear.)
I really do think that it started with an honest blindspot. But she doesn’t react to criticism well (I mean, even looking back at Donohue… he was completely and utterly out of line, but her response was “But I’m right (and he’s a dickweed!)” rather than “I realize it might seem this way to people coming in from the outside, and I want to make it clear that I’m not anti-Catholic. This is all political anyway, and look, here is my nuanced opinion on these issues.” It was all about how she was right and he was wrong, and not at all addressing the other issues that were, however inadvertently, brought up.), and she really, really wants to be successful.
(No, seriously. I’d go into that in more detail, but I want to respect the privacy of the people who gave me the information.)
So.. blindspot + defensiveness + yearning for success + paranoia = recipie for increasing badness. She doesn’t get the issue, she doesn’t want to be criticized on the issue, she wants to be famous (and for that you have to look like you’re good on the issue whether you care or not), and she thinks we’re all out to sabotage her success.
Which, of course, in the context of the blogosphere (because we’re not just a movement, we’re also a community whether we like each other or not) and the social history thereof… leads to foaming-at-the-mouth idiocy.
This is why I (heart) Aunt B. This is probably the best things I’ve read about the whole thing anywhere. And I have to agree with what you’ve said. I think Amanda Marcette is a really good writer, but the other stuff, “Do Not Want!”
Fortunately most of what I like there apparently came from Pam Spaulding so I’ll probably not notice the change that much.
This was when P’gon still had Sheelzebub and Chris Clarke and Ilyka, so they were doing the heavy lifting on racial stuff anyway.
Thanks for the vote of confidence, Mags, but — speaking only for myself, and not for Sheelz and Ilyka, whose excellent work there I do not mean in any way to lessen — I think Pam continuously did the heavy lifting, and I got the kudos because A White Guy Said It.
Yes, what Mags said.
And I put it in the 3/4 range from the start too.
I seriously don’t get how and why people read the blog of someone endlessly talking about ‘framing,’ marketing and spin as the new tactic of the left who then frames, spins, and markets herself as the thin beautiful successful genius writer of whom everyone is jealous (?) without questioning this meme. It’s called propaganda. It’s called manipulating public opinion to one’s own benefit. It’s called crafting a narrative which serves the goal (her personal success, not social justice).
She’s a competent writer on the level of sentences, but I have never seen anything that wasn’t skimmed from other blogs, news outlets, or wherever and simply rephrased in basic feminist terms of the simplest kind, with a healthy dose of snark and cliqueishness. This is journalism at best, plagiarism at worst. We’re not talking about immense talent here, we’re talking about a blogger with a high school lunchroom ethos cranking out speed of light posts culled from other places and generally behaving like a bully. I was done with Pgon when she denied she chose the King Kong image and played persecuted by Seal Press (who suck, but there are plenty of legitimate things to hold them accountable for, and I do not believe that’s one of them).
Add in the lying and the hate? The abusive defense of privilege? Not much to stand by, not a feminist I want ‘representing’ justice. Having someone like this at the front of movements for justice does more harm than good. Not having any accountability at all does too.
That’s how I feel about it, anyway.
And Chris, you wrote some great stuff (the famously ignored Haiti post, anyone?) there, but the reason your work on racism and oppression is good is because you acknowledge, as you just did, not only why you’re going to get heard but whose work people should be reading. Which is what an ally does.
>>So.. blindspot + defensiveness + yearning for success + paranoia = recipie for increasing badness. >>
mhm.
“So here’s the deal: I find those illustrations to be fucked up. I find it to be fucked up that they were allowed. I have dealt with a similar racist exoticism in my life as a professional actor (Being Asian, it comes up.)
But why would they do that “on purpose”? I honestly don’t understand what the payoff is for that kind of “on purpose.”
***
Well, I don’t think she/they were deliberately trying to provoke a “godDAM that was racist” response, if that’s what you mean. Or indeed appeal covertly to overt white supremacist types who just happen to be reading a feminist book, no.
I do think that there’s a certain…something sort of Bush-administration-ish about the way she (she’s not the only one) seems to have bought into the idea that if you’re criticized on something, the proper response is to dig in HARDER and maybe even do it MORE just to show that you can’t be pushed around. because you CANNOT BE WRONG EVER EVER EVER.
I’m not saying I think someone chose to put those illustrations in after the book cover was changed deliberately, along those lines. I do think that her changing the cover at all was a rare concession to public opinion, and the fact that the pics are still inside the book clearly um illustrates that she and/or Seal Press never really got what the problem was and was just trying to get people off her back.
but in general, well…the term “willfully clueless” comes to mind.
>>Anyway, back to my point. Here’s what I keep thinking. Why does someone do something that hurts other people. And it seems to me that there are only a few reasons: they don’t know it’s hurting other people; they know it’s hurting other people, but they don’t know some better way to do things; they know it’s hurting other people, but they don’t care; and they know it’s hurting other people because that’s what they intended.>>
Well, not exactly. This can be more subtle:
>> they know it’s hurting other people, but they don’t care>>
–> “they don’t know it’s hurting other people, because they don’t WANT to know, because then they’d have to care. So, they un-know it, and enlist all sorts of defenses and enablers to help them do it.”
It makes me wonder if there was something else going on inthe Edwards campaign other than Donahue’s machinations (which I don’t agree with) goingi on.
“Well, I don’t think she/they were deliberately trying to provoke a “godDAM that was racist” response, if that’s what you mean. Or indeed appeal covertly to overt white supremacist types who just happen to be reading a feminist book, no.”
No, I didn’t mean that. I was just wondering what would be the payoff for someone to blatantly ignore something like that on purpose – a question which contains the assumption that they knew the illustrations were offensive and why – which, it sounds like she doesn’t, and if that is the case, then that answers my question. I mean, that she knew people were offended, but chose to dismiss that feedback instead of delving into the issue and trying to understand it.
Anyway – my question is but a small piece of the bigger thing going on, which I know next to nothing about. I really hope that something good will come from all of the controversy, and that it will not be something which divides a community that already has enough challenges coming in from other directions.
Well, I don’t have any better answers at this point, just more questions. Because I was in Barnes & Rubble today and took a look at The Book. and yeah, those illustrations are just as bad as described and then some. It’s totally bizarre too, because they have like -nothing- to do with the content, which from a quick skim of itself I’d probably find relatively innocuous, even a bit better put together and more coherent for what it is than FFF, if not exactly the Second Coming Of The Pentecostal Feminist Fire, which I don’t imagine it was supposed to be in the first place (please just be quiet now, Hugo, kthxbai).
I just can’t imagine wtf she/they were thinking?? Even if none of this other shit had gone down, even if the cover hadn’t already blown up: I can’t BELIEVE someone wouldn’t have eventually gone, um, guys…?
and what really staggers me is, okay, she didn’t want to change the cover but eventually she did, presumably because she kind of sort of saw the problem, even from a PR perspective if nothing else? So, WHY THE FUCK would she include or let them include MUCH DODGIER illustrations inside? Did she think no one would notice? Was it a “screw you guys, it’s my hot contract and I can do what I WANT!”? Is it -possible- that she and/or Seal -actually didn’t consider- that whereas people were complaining about the symbolism of a big black ape as “racist,” actual “natives” with like bones in their noses and spears would be -totally fine??- And finally: um, why was this supposed to be funny in the first place?
“I am amazed, and do not know what to say.”
SRSLY.
I honestly don’t understand what the payoff is for that kind of “on purpose.”
What’s the payoff for any racist act or belief? You don’t have to put any effort into being an ally, you can keep believing you’re the king or queen of the world, you can keep on being convinced that you thoroughly deserve every. little. bit. of your privileged position and that anyone who isn’t as privileged clearly just didn’t work hard enough.
Sounds like a pretty big payoff to me.
Ditto exactly, Aunt B, and I had the same “moment” you had.
Wow am I behind on my blog-reading, but yes,
“I haven’t spoken specifically about the whole BfP/Amanda Marcotte situation because I figured my readers who gave a shit about it already know about it”
I did check to see if you said anything on it at the time, because I was pretty sure you’d be all, “hey BFP is right folks”. Since you didn’t say anything I just figured the above quote was the score.
And I’d like to give a big shout out to Magniloquence for being part of how I’m no longer a total moron about these things, and to B for being how I found Mags.