Comments in the JF post here are adding more information in comments, so check back regularly for updates.
For anyone who has been skimming and is getting the impression this is just another fannish wank, this really, really isn't. I'm not the only one that went to flock when I started reading to get a better idea what the hell was going on and decided to post publicly after it went up on Unfunny Business. This isn't fannish gossip as usual; I didn't come out of this boggling about the wankiness of fandom, because this is not fannish wankery.
I'm going to go to something that's lingered with me, though, about safety in fannish spaces like cons and the people that run it.
The Concomm's actions are important, above and beyond a simple ban, in placing a line down about what is and what is not appropriate at the private con they are running, and even more importantly, they've set a standard on an issue that for a lot of us feels hazy and uncomfortable to have to think about.
A lot of us attend cons regularly, and a lot of us do this at these types of cons without really thinking through "what do I do if x goes wrong" or "should I say what happened at y that made me uncomfortable?" This is not something I've thought consciously ever, but I think I've always thought subconsciously when I go to VividCon, and when I went to ConText, that if I went to the organizers or any of the volunteers, I'd be listened to, and helped as best they can do, and more importantly than those things, that I'd be safe when I did so. Not because some of them were friends, but because by their actions in open fannish spaces I knew they were the kind of people that did value the safety of the women that attend, that respect their boundaries, that would listen.
I don't attend the megacons for a lot of reasons, not least of which is that I'm really spoiled by the ones run by women in fandom, by the certainty that safety, security, and openness are the rule and not exception--and while this public explosion was horrific, it shows Wincon's Concomm personifies those traits that all of us, I think, really want at a place that intersects our fannish lives and real lives.
For people who have been wary about going to these conventions, or after reading this feel more wary, these kind of actions on their part are a sign of how hard they work to keep these spaces as safe as possible, and that they'll listen and act when necessary. To me, at least, Wincon is on that list of cons that are places it's safe to allow that intersection to occur, that it's safe to attend, and I think they've proven beyond a shadow of a doubt this is a good con to attend, where those who run it are willing to enforce that safety and security for its members.
That may have been overlooked a little in the entirety of this, but I'm hoping that much does get across; they made a judgment call on behalf of the safety and security of their members, and they made the right one.
ETA: One day I will not have an entry without an eta. Maybe.
Con-space, comfort levels, transgression by merryish (in my defense, I just read this) with some thoughts on female oriented spaces and how harm doesn't have to be intentional to still be harm.
ETA 2: Two more extremely relevant links in this:
Here, thenyxie's 2008 roommates speak out.
Here, thenyxie attempts an apology.
ETA 3: Posted by cesare at UNF:
Brihana25 on the pressure put on LJ regarding the original anonymous accounts of the women affected, along with the threat that LJ would be compelled to release the IP numbers of those same women.
I have no idea how to even think about that one for a while.
ETA 4: thenyxie has frozen her entry, so comments aren't visible. Screencaps can be found here at Unfunny Business.
All links are also up at the post at Unfunny Business as well.
Posted at Dreamwidth: http://seperis.dreamwidth.org/17821.html. | You can reply here or there. | comments