things mean a lot

I’ll preface my answer with a disclaimer: I haven’t read the books and I don’t intend to. This isn’t to say I think people should refrain from expressing feelings and opinions about books they haven’t read (we all do it: the practice is part of a vibrant and passionate literary culture); just that I realise I don’t know everything there is to know about them and that it’s possible I got some of the details wrong. The reason why the books sound bad to me is not that they’re erotica, it’s that from the excerpts I’ve seen the writing seems pretty awful (I keep seeing knowledgeable people point out that there’s much better written erotica out there), and also that most of the commentary I’ve read indicates that the story’s approach to relationships and gender roles is deeply conservative (although it’s possible that, as with Twilight, some people read it in more subversive ways).

But however much that puts me off personally, I don’t see the trilogy’s popularity as a sign of the impeding literary apocalypse or anything like that. Let’s start by assuming, for the sake of argument, that the large numbers of people who have been reading and enjoying the books buy into the reactionary view of gender and sexuality they present wholesale. If that were true it wouldn’t be something I’d find very shocking – we do live in a deeply sexist world, after all. At any point in time you’ll find a considerable number of incredibly sexist (or otherwise icky) and poorly scripted movies and TV shows become hits. Obviously that doesn’t mean we should just go, “Oh well, that’s the way the world is always going to be” and give up – we should carry on challenging stereotypes, providing thoughtful commentary that calls shenanigans on these things, and making room for alternative views. But some of the reactions to the 50 Shades phenomenon make me think that people believe literature should be entirely separate from the rest of pop culture; that it should be “purer” than other media, and that’s what I don’t get. I mean, I happen to like books better than anything else, sure, but that doesn’t mean I don’t think they’ll always be (and, importantly, have always been) a mixed bag. Bad books don’t erase the good ones and don’t “corrupt” literature as a whole – they just exist, and are read by some people and ignored by others.

Read More →

You don’t sound creepy at all. And I may be lucky enough to have made some great friends online, but hey, there’s always room for more. Just saying. Best of luck with everything. *hugs*

*hugs* I know how you feel. I have a couple of people I think of as close friends and who I’m incredibly grateful for (& also a bunch of casual acquaintances I’m creepily overly attached to), but they’re all people I met in the past 5 to 10 years. Definitely no one from my childhood; no Diana Barry to my Anne Shirley. They’re also all people I’m in touch with sporadically rather than every day, because they all have really busy lives. I’m not saying this bitterly or resentfully – I’m so very grateful for the time they do make for me. But that’s what really scared me about the NYT piece: I don’t know that I’ll be put in a position where I’m thrown together with people on a daily basis ever again; where I have an “excuse” to be in their lives and don’t feel like I’m trespassing or forcing myself on them. And it can be really hard not to let fear paralyse you and end up drifting apart otherwise.

I also know exactly what you mean about being an introvert who is painfully shy to boot and who has trouble finding people with similar interests (add social anxiety to the mix and the result is no fun). Honestly, all the way until the end of middle school I was pretty unlucky with my peers. I was the sole nerdy, quiet bookworm around, I was bullied horribly, and it’s no wonder at all I didn’t form any deeper or lasting connections. When I was in high school and college I did meet people I connected with, people whose friendship had a huge impact on me and helped make me the person I am today. But once again, I have sucked at keeping in touch. The reason why all this stuff has been on my mind lately is exactly that I’m having trouble figuring how to keep social ties alive when life has isolated me and put me in a position where any interactions I have with people are going to have to be deliberate rather than casual (well, that and the fact that I read this really great book by Aidan Chambers called Dying to Know You).

Read More →

Don’t worry, Anon, I’m well aware of the fact that it doesn’t make me cool. I’m not in the habit of making things up to make myself look interesting online, but if I were, I’d be smart enough to come up with things that are, you know, actually interesting, rather than with random little anecdotes that do nothing more than show the world just how dorky I am.

Posting about my twenty seconds of randomly spotting Sufjan didn’t make me feel cool - on the contrary, it made me feel awkward and vulnerable and it made me worry I came across as stalkerish for revealing that casually seeing someone I don’t even know for a few brief moments is a memorable thing that actually means something to me. As I explained last year, I’m well aware of all the potential awkwardness involved in being so personally invested in people you don’t know but whose art means so much to you. I’ve been slightly in love with him for a good 9 years now (and I use this expression very loosely rather than in a romantic sense, though obviously I’m immensely drawn to him), but that feeling goes hand in hand with a sane and healthy awareness of the fact that he is in fact a complete stranger on whose privacy I’d never intrude. More importantly, I want nothing whatsoever from him - I hope he’ll continue to make music and that I’ll continue to have the privilege to occasionally watch him, but even that is not a demand. 

So why did I mention it at all, you ask? Because I have ~feelings~, because it did mean something to me, because I know people who feel similar things and sharing it with them makes me smile. I’ve been on the Internet for a good 15 years now, and giving myself permission to talk freely about the things and people I love has proved a great way to connect with others. And also because I’m fannish, and this is not something I ever want to be ashamed of.

Of course, if you decided right away I was making this silly little thing up, there’s probably nothing I can say that will convince you otherwise. But happily for me, in the grand scheme of things I don’t really care. I got a couple of messages along these lines after the Lisbon gig last year (“pictures or it didn’t happen”, etc) and I just completely ignored them. In retrospect that was a far wiser stragegy than giving this more time, energy and words than it deserves. Blame the mental place I’m in right now.

The book is fairly easy: Cordelia Fine’s Delusions of Gender. Back when I read it I said it made me want to go stand on a random street corner giving away copies to anyone who walked by, and I still stand by that. It’s one of those rare books where pretty much every page makes me want to stand up and shout, “THIS, THIS, THIS!”

The six influential people part is a bit more difficult. I would generally want as many influential people in education as possible to read it - people responsible for drafting policies; people who make key decisions; people whose investment in bogus ideas about how boys and girls are “wired” differently affect kids’ lives on a day to day basis. But I’ve come to realise that just having someone read a book like this is not enough. It’s not that Fine’s writing isn’t clear and persuasive; it’s not that she doesn’t do a wonderful job of presenting the facts and inviting readers to see for themselves how they add up. But the way people make up this minds about contentious subjects (and gender is definitely one) is complicated, and emotional factors often come into play.

I’m not placing myself above this, btw - I obviously think I’m factually right in rejecting gender essentialism in favour of a social approach to gender roles, but the process through which I came to develop my current stance is more complicated than just being presented with information and making a correct, rational decision based on facts alone. Basically, I needed context for those facts, and the whole of my personal, political and educational background was what provided this context. All this to say that a single book, no matter how accessible it seems to me, is never going to be enough. I still want as many people as possible to read Delusions of Gender, and if they’re influential people, all the better. But I know this will always be a small step in the development of a more nuanced understanding of gender in our society. 

Now, is asking you the exact same question considered cheating? :P