renaissance poisson

in response to the latest ellison incident, there are some people who actually want to do something to improve respect for personal space at SF cons, rather than to just rail about it online.

there is a new community, bellwether_talk for the discussion. if you go to cons, and you are concerned about the issue, please participate. i've always been impressed with the people who populate alt.polyamory and soc.singles.moderated as being willing to discuss issues of personal boundaries, and to do something about them at their gatherings (sticker codes for hug/ask/no, guidelines about photography, etc); i figure those of you on my flist who also go to SF cons might have a lot to contribute to that discussion.

me, i don't go to cons (i've been to two and any groping was consensual, in private -- oh, whom am i kidding, there was no groping, we were too tired), so i am not the best person to talk about what happens there. :) also, i am old now and assertive, and nobody gropes me anymore. but hey, i hear things, so i know it still happens. it certainly happens frequently in greater society. and i remember myself at 18, when at college parties people (usually inebriated) used to grope me repeatedly and didn't react to me inching away and pushing their hands off. i would end up leaving those parties and feel ashamed, like a prude who didn't know how to have any fun. it would have been great to have a code of conduct that the community discussed and published and reminded people of via sticker codes or signs at the door.

this kind of violation is usually clueless, not indicative of the oppression of the patriarchy or worthy of calling the cops and suing somebody for sexual harassment. but it still needs to STOP.

so, harlan ellison grabbed connie willis's boob at the hugos. the sfnal blogosphere has erupted and wants to collectively kick harlan in the 'nads. which might be a good idea. i think he could use a good 'nad kicking, and has done so for a long time. and i mean that metaphorically; just sayin'.

while i am merely moved to play with photoshop. *sigh* -- but really, that's a darn good job there if i say so myself; i got the colours of the heads adjusted really well. ok. i better say what i think about the incident.

yes, it was wrong. no, his notoriety and fame are no excuse. he apparently thought it was time to put the "terrible" back into his enfant -- i don't grok mr ellison's personal behaviour. i think much of his writing is brilliant, but i am not a fan who defends his antics, some of which are truly eyeroll-inducing, and he strikes me as a spoiled brat and a bully, which is not a good thing in a grown man. while i've never heard a bad thing about connie willis -- i go out and buy everything she writes; she's one of my personal favourites. if somebody truly embarrassed her in a moment of triumph, i'd find that really nasty. and if that happened, he should be censured by whatever agency has that right (the SFWA?). but they ought to damn well talk to her first.

there are undertones in the discussions that bother me. i don't know either ellison or willis personally. while looking for source images for the above perversion of rembrandt's work, i found quite a number in which they were close, standing arm in arm and very obviously friendly; not just mugging it up for the camera. and there is a photo from the awards ceremony in which they're giving each other a sound smooch right on the mouth; i don't know whether that happened before or after the boob grab, and who started it -- is it possible she did the kissing, and he got her back by grabbing her boob? did he grab first, and then she smooched him as in-kind payback? he also apparently fellated the microphone -- was this whole thing an act? were either of them having alcohol? i don't know these people, so i don't know whether anything brought this on, or whether he is just a total arsehole.

it sounds all very grand to talk about how this is an example of how men have the power to put women back in their place anytime, even if those women are highly accomplished professionals. is that what ellison did? is that what connie willis thinks he did? then shouldn't she be the one to be outraged? it's not like he can ruin her career, which might keep a less experienced, newer writer from speaking up. is she a meek flower who has been socialized to not be critical of men in public? she doesn't sound meek in her writing, but that's her writing.

as i said, it was wrong; but i don't know whether it was a badly timed joke in a personal relationship that allows for such jokes in private, or an assault on her professional standing. and i think it gives him way too much power to assume it was the latter. the lack of outraged reaction from ms willis makes it wonder whether it was the former, and i dislike it when people proclaim those bits about socialization as if that were the only thing that might keep a person from immediate payback. maybe she actually didn't take it that seriously. maybe it's a lot more embarrassing to have everybody and zir brother yapping about it now, including those of us who weren't even there. i'm willing to bite the head off a stranger who touches me inappropriately, while somebody who is a friend might touch me inappropriately and i'd react differently -- but not because of my socialization, but because i care about this person, and i'd rather settle this in person than in public.

i sometimes wonder about the impression total strangers get of the paramour and my relationship when they inadvertantly overhear our banter. because man, that impression wouldn't be good. and yet we have a marvelous relationship; there isn't even a remote presence of power games and all that rot. i hope we'd know better than to let it all hang out at an awards ceremony, but if we did because one of us was badly off our meds and overexcited, i would resent it if people concluded that the ostensible woman in our r'ship is socialized to not defend herself. that, too, is patronizing.