Reading for Treasure: Racist!?

 Reading for Treasure is my list of articles (and other readings) that are worth your attention. Click here for an introduction!

 

I don’t want our focus on racial justice to vanish as the protests leave the front pages and our television screens become filled with other topics. What makes something (or someone) racist? How should we have conversations regarding race and racism? Here are some articles that ask and answer some important questions about race.

 

“When Using Racist, Define Your Terms”: This article from The Atlantic explores the different definitions of racism and then argues that people, but especially journalists, must make it very clear what they mean by that term when they use it.

“When to Call Someone Out or Call Them In Over Racist Behavior”: This excerpt from a book by Tiffany Jewel starts by differentiating between calling someone in (addressing racist behavior privately) or calling someone out (addressing it in front of others). She then presents a series of questions about the nature of the behavior and situation that can guide your choice of whether to call someone in or out.

 

“The ‘I’m not a racist’ defense”: After you point out to someone that what they said or did was racist, almost always they turn that into an accusation that they are racist. In this opinion piece from CNN, Elliot Williams urges us to look beyond the label and see that it is not the intent of actions, but their impact that really makes something racist and that apologies and denials hide that sometimes White people do things that are racist and need to both acknowledge them and then do something about them.

 

“The Difference Between Being ‘Not Racist’ and ‘Anti-Racist’”: This article from Lifehacker clearly defines the terms “racist” and “anti-racist” and provides clear examples of behavior for each. It is a quick, easy, and important read.

 

 “What Drives Support for the Alt-Right”: This article from Psychology Today reports on a study that looked at the psychological profiles of people who identified with the Alt-right movement. It describes three clear takeaways from this report and looks at what is the motivation of Alt-right, their bias, and their comparison to supports of Antifa.

 

“What We Get Wrong About ‘People of Color’”: This article from Wired was written before people began using BIPOC or (Black, Indigenous, People of Color), but I wonder if the point would be the same. The author asks if we are using POC as a euphemism to avoid naming more specific groups.

 

“Open Letter to White People”: This piece suggests that the “what can I do” response to racist events is an empty question and White people become paralyzed by it. This article, written by a White person, works to get us past that paralysis by tapping into our empathy and taking action!

 

Seeing White Podcast: While many of us are considered White, our skin color is not really White. How did the idea of White (and Black) come about? Who were the people who made this distinction and why? I am willing to bet that many of the historical events this podcast describes will be new to you (especially if you are White).  It is outstanding and I cannot recommend it highly enough. Seeing White is part of a podcast called Scene on Radio.

 

“This Presidency Has Exposed My White Christian Friends”: The title makes the focus of this blog post very clear. Written by a pastor of a large church who is shocked by the beliefs of people he thought claimed to “love Jesus.” He says that the election of the current president has given people permission to stop pretending and take off their masks (metaphorically, of course – this article was written before the pandemic).  

 

 

I am currently reading Lovecraft Country by Matt Ruff

Order of Operations: The Virus First!

The question is: “what problem must be solved first?” This is not Jeopardy. This is not difficult to unravel. While multiple problems plague us, there is usually a key central issue. That is the case in the United States now. 

Before we can open the economy, we must bring down the number of cases of COVID-19.

 

Before we can open schools, we must be able to successfully treat and prevent COVID-19.

 

Before we can have sports, large group gatherings, or attend religious services, we must be free from the fear of spreading COVID-19.

 

To insist on reopening restaurants and bars, schools, or bring players back to the field is to put the proverbial horse before the cart. Nothing works unless we have the disease under control. Dealing with the disease comes before all other issues.

 

Of course, people need to work. There are businesses dying as well as people. Of course, children do better when they are in a school surrounded by their peers and adults who work with them in person. There should be no debate about these facts.

 

The debate is much more elemental: we argue about wearing masks, putting teachers and students back in classrooms, and how many deaths are acceptable if we are opening up.

 

The answer: none. No deaths are acceptable. No one should get this disease when we can prevent it. While there are significant and painful questions to be debated, they all sit behind the first and most important issue: our physical health!

 

And no, we cannot do them simultaneously. Once the disease is under control, then we can fight the war on multiple fronts. However, until the enemy is defeated or at least contained, no other battle can be won – and such divided efforts will hinder our ability to defeat the virus!

 

If we get kids back in school, then their parents can go back to work, then the economy can recover and then…millions more get the virus.  We can’t divide and conquer, we can only divide and die.

 

One step at a time. First things first.

 

It won’t be easy. There are terrible sacrifices being made and to be made and they aren’t being shared equally. As so many have pointed out, this crisis has highlighted the fatal inequities of our current system. Everyone must have healthcare. Everyone must be able to weather a financial storm. None of us are safe from this virus unless all of us are safe from this virus.

 

And let’s say what sits underneath all of this: we are going to do this again. This is not going to be the only time in our lifetimes that the world will shut down to get control of a deadly disease. The next one might be more infectious. The next one might have even more devastating effects. The next one might move far more quickly and be far more deadly.

 

Ready? Not even close.

 

We must be fed and sheltered, yes. We must have healthcare workers and those who create and move our essential products from producer to consumer. We must have basic government services.

 

The rest of our resources and resolve go into making us safe from the disease.

 

Then we can reopen everything – and plan to do it better next time.

The World Science Fiction Convention Online!

The coronavirus prevented people from traveling to Wellington, New Zealand for the 78^th annual World Science Fiction Convention. I was not planning on making the long trek down under. I was, of course, a supporting member, and planned on participated in voting for the Hugos and site selection from afar. When the convention went virtual, I signed up to attend – online. It was an opportunity to go to a Worldcon from my home in Illinois. What a great opportunity!  

For those readers who don’t know about Worldcons, science fiction conventions, or the wonderful world of fandom, take a look at this report from the Worldcon in London a few years back to get an idea of the scope, scale, and focus of these wonderful celebrations!

The virtual Worldcon a great experience. The organizers of CoNZealand did an outstanding job of creating both an analog experience and a new way to engage with fandom. I am so grateful to the many people who worked hours and hours to transform a traditional Worldcon into a meaningful online event.

 

I am a panel person. I enjoy many aspects of conventions, but the discussions at panels are my favorite part. The panel selection at CoNZealand was strong, but the online transformation of panels enhanced my experience significantly.

 

By any convention standards, the panels were great. The panelists were expert and articulate, the moderators did a great job of structuring the conversation. There was higher quality interaction between the audience and the panelists (and among the panelists) than at a typical live convention.

 

One of my biggest panel pet peeves is the people (often in the front row) who believe they are panelists and keep participating no matter what the moderator does. We had none of these! It wasn’t possible. There was strong information for moderators and a programming and/or tech person in the background helping structure the panel and making sure the technical details worked. It showed. Things ran beautifully!

 

The use of the Q&A and chat functions in Zoom also enhanced the panel significantly. Those who wanted to participate and provide a running commentary could use the chat feature. This felt both appropriate and a good way to channel (sorry) the need to provide a running commentary on the panel. Many times, panelists pulled ideas and comments from the chat into the panel! It was a multi-leveled conversation.

 

The Q&A function was a great replacement for hands up. Questions could be voted up or down and moderators could control how they asked them. The structure helped create panels that moved forward instead of the constant “back to what so-in-so said ten comments ago.”  

Continuing the panel discussion on Discord added yet another improvement to the convention panels. For me, the only way to continue the conversation started at a panel is to talk to my friends with whom I saw it. If I am lucky enough to spot a panelist, I might be able to bring up points from the panel (which has its own problems). CoNZealand created a dedicated avenue where panelists and audience members could continue their conversation on a Discord channel! This is a great way to deepen engagement and help foster stronger relationships between convention-goers.

 

Since the panels were on Zoom, they were recorded and these recordings were available shortly after the panel and for a week following the con. I attended many panels live but saw even more afterward. I got to see every panel I wanted to attend! I’m still watching them. Of course, I didn’t get the chat and the Discord follow up when I saw the recorded panel, but just being able to see multiple panels that were scheduled at the same time or at a time when I could not attend was a huge bonus! I felt like I got much more from this convention from the sheer number of panels I got to see!

 

I attended some of the parties on Zoom, sat at a fan table for a few hours, and toured the virtual exhibit hall, dealer’s room, and art show, too. While I would have preferred to interact with these in person, I liked being able to see the displays and take as much time as I wanted. I could linger at the art show and browse the dealers’ websites. I even appreciated the ambient sound of a busy convention hall that accompanied this area.

 

I am hoping to be in attendance in D.C. for the next WorldCon, and I do prefer being present in-person to a virtual experience. Yet, there are aspects of the online convention that could be integrated into a live one. Providing an online chat for panels, recording them, having an online discussion area would all be great enhancements. Are these worth the cost and people power to make them happen? I am not sure.

 

Having a virtual track on future conventions does make it more accessible and provides more value for all attendees. Yet, it would require much more work on the part of the organizers. As we envision a post-COVID world, we may need to both prepare for the possibility of an entirely online convention and provide ways for those who cannot travel to participate. CoNZealand did an outstanding job of exploring this brave new world of virtual conventions and I am very grateful! Bravo!