Editor of SFWA Bulletin resigns - Page 2

andyh2000 · 06-06-2013, 05:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

What nonsense. At least as many fantasy books portray scantily clad men on the cover. Does this illustrate a lack of respect for men?

Like it or not, semi-nude heroic figures (of both men and women) on covers are a staple of the fantasy genre, and have been since at least the 1920s.

It's not the same thing though. Articles like this express it better than I could: http://goodcomics.comicbookresources...its-not-equal/ (brief and inaccurate summary - it's all for men; men want to be the unrealistic heroes, and want to be with the unrealistic heroines).

And just because it's been going on since the 1920's doesn't mean it shouldn't stop.

Andrew

HarryT · 06-06-2013, 05:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andyh2000

It's not the same thing though. Articles like this express it better than I could: http://goodcomics.comicbookresources...its-not-equal/ (brief and inaccurate summary - it's all for men; men want to be the unrealistic heroes, and want to be with the unrealistic heroines).

And just because it's been going on since the 1920's doesn't mean it shouldn't stop.

Andrew

It's worth noting that a lot of this stuff is written by women these days. Eg, look at Esther Friesner's books published by Baen: "Chicks 'n Chained Males", "Fangs for the Mammaries", etc. It's inaccurate to blame it all on sexist male authors.

DiapDealer · 06-06-2013, 06:55 AM

My genitalia have asked me to pass on their sincerest apologies for the words/deeds of some of their brethren's organic transportation units.

Soldim · 06-06-2013, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jgaiser

Weil, as it's just a statement from the current President, John Scalzi, I'm not surprised. As she was the editor when the columns were published, she was ultimately responsible. So, yes. Falling on her own sword.

Hmmm, isn't is a policy of many publications that columnists do not necessarily reflect the opinions and views of the publication they are writing for?

kennyc · 06-06-2013, 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

What nonsense. At least as many fantasy books portray scantily clad men on the cover. Does this illustrate a lack of respect for men?

Like it or not, semi-nude heroic figures (of both men and women) on covers are a staple of the fantasy genre, and have been since at least the 1920s.

and romance novels....

This whole thing is very much a soap opera.

Greg Anos · 06-06-2013, 08:07 AM

Most of the ones I read say so...

DiapDealer · 06-06-2013, 08:13 AM

http://www.sfwa.org/2013/06/presiden...sfwa-bulletin/

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Scalzi

By our organization’s current bylaws, the president of SFWA has unilateral control of, and therefore is ultimately responsible for, the organization’s publications. This includes the Bulletin. This means that when all is said and done, I personally am responsible for the Bulletin and what is published between its covers.

Quote:

This whole thing is very much a soap opera.

This. I especially love the fact that the "appropriate" response by several of the offended parties (at least the most vocal of them) seems quite often to be expletive laden diatribes against "old men."

"How dare you speak in a way I find offensive you old, f***ng loser d**kbag, you!! DIE!"

jersysman · 06-06-2013, 09:23 AM

I just don't see where all the angst is coming from. If it is the column, then I can understand that, but as others have stated what is depicted on the cover has been the staple of that genre for a long time. Do a google search on female warriors and see what is found. I just don't get the furor over the cover.

Rbneader · 06-06-2013, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jersysman

I just don't see where all the angst is coming from. If it is the column, then I can understand that, but as others have stated what is depicted on the cover has been the staple of that genre for a long time. Do a google search on female warriors and see what is found. I just don't get the furor over the cover.

2 points:

1) Covers like that have been a source of frustration for a long time. Just because something has happened doesn't mean everyone was OK with it. It just means that the people who weren't OK with it got ignored, which is also part of what's feeding this discussion - speaking against sexism is OK now where it wasn't in the past. Yes, it's similar to covers in the past. The point is some significant fraction of sci fi authors / fans want a change.

2) Any one thing - cover, article, whiny blog post response - could have been dealt with more easily. The combination shows that concerns about equality and representation have been brushed aside and ignored, that the SFWA is continuing to isolate and ignore members and that some significant fraction, or at least a vocal minority, is OK with that. Well, the members who were ignored aren't OK with it and now they can start a dialogue (shouting match?) more easily than before so they're going to.

TL;DR This isn't the end of the world. It *is* a bad and stupid thing that shows the SFWA is not doing a good job of acting in its members' interests, and also that sci fi is still stuck with a lot of the embarrassing views from earlier decades.

The way the situation kept going, and no one at the Bulletin reined Resnick in for 3 issues, makes this more than one author or one cover. That shows this is a pervasive issue with SFWA and that needs to be fixed.

HarryT · 06-06-2013, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rbneader

1) Covers like that have been a source of frustration for a long time. Just because something has happened doesn't mean everyone was OK with it. It just means that the people who weren't OK with it got ignored, which is also part of what's feeding this discussion - speaking against sexism is OK now where it wasn't in the past. Yes, it's similar to covers in the past. The point is some significant fraction of sci fi authors / fans want a change.

Why is it any more sexist than this cover?

I don't understand why it's "sexist" to show semi-naked women, but not semi-naked men. Or are you saying that you think this Edgar Rice Burroughs cover is sexist, too?

pdurrant · 06-06-2013, 09:53 AM

That cover is really just a different male fantasy. You'd have more of a case with some Romance covers.

HarryT · 06-06-2013, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pdurrant

That cover is really just a different male fantasy.

It is, but the suggestion has been made that it's sexist to have half-naked women on book covers. What I'm asking is why it's not sexist to have half-naked men.

Rbneader · 06-06-2013, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

It is, but the suggestion has been made that it's sexist to have half-naked women on book covers. What I'm asking is why it's not sexist to have half-naked men.

I never said it wasn't.

HarryT · 06-06-2013, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rbneader

I never said it wasn't.

But WHY do you think it is? What's wrong with pictures of muscle-bound warriors, whether male or female? What is it about such pictures that offends you?

BearMountainBooks · 06-06-2013, 10:07 AM

The cover controversy is ongoing and will always be. I can tell you I had a devil of a time finding models for the covers of my UF that weren't scantily clad models. There's apparently a HUGE demand for half naked photos because when you start sorting pictures, believe me, you find far more men without shirts and women who are barely in shirts than you do women and men in jeans. I am half-amused, half-annoyed when I'm looking for a dangerous guy with a sword, and every photographer out there apparently envisions heroes without shirts and sometimes without pants.

And everyone knows that we women jump out of bed in our bra and panties, grab a gun --STOP TO PUT ON HEELS -- and rush outside to protect our domain. Sometimes we throw on a trench coat.

I generally laugh at the covers and move on. Are some of them insulting to both men and women? Of course. Does the audience demand such covers? I have no idea. I really don't.

BUT. I've followed a few of the articles and discussions. I've also read Resnick's articles in the past and some of his fiction. I was pretty surprised at his attitude. It's one thing to understand the marketing behind it, it's kind of another to ignore that there are potential issues and to also recognize that some people are going to be insulted by the "art" and attitudes.

I think we can all understand "art" and marketing and we all buy what we choose to buy. But that doesn't mean that some of it isn't belittling. It also doesn't mean that some of it shouldn't be used and not out of a sense of political correctness-but because art can be effective, beautiful AND respectful all at the same time. Catering to one perceived common denominator is sheer laziness.

There's nothing wrong with trying a little harder to do a nice cover with a more realistic image. There's also nothing wrong with stepping back and thinking a little harder about your entire audience before slapping a "typical" cover on a magazine or book.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Greek Weather Bulletin	hargikas	Recipes	0	12-02-2011 02:14 PM
SFWA removes Amazon.com links from website	kjk	News	22	02-06-2010 02:10 PM
Famous CC-licensed novel taken down by SFWA	Alexander Turcic	News	32	09-06-2007 02:56 AM
E Ink bulletin advertising	TadW	Lounge	0	04-09-2007 02:05 PM

06-06-2013, 06:55 AM	#18
DiapDealer Grand Sorcerer Posts: 27,547 Karma: 193191846 Join Date: Jan 2010 Device: Nexus 7, Kindle Fire HD	My genitalia have asked me to pass on their sincerest apologies for the words/deeds of some of their brethren's organic transportation units.

06-06-2013, 08:07 AM	#21
Greg Anos Grand Sorcerer Posts: 11,247 Karma: 35000000 Join Date: Jan 2008 Device: Pocketbook	Most of the ones I read say so...

06-06-2013, 09:23 AM	#23
jersysman Wizard Posts: 1,747 Karma: 3761220 Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Pennsylvania Device: T1 Red, Kindle Fire, Kindle PW, PW2, Nook HD+, Kobo Mini, Aura HD	I just don't see where all the angst is coming from. If it is the column, then I can understand that, but as others have stated what is depicted on the cover has been the staple of that genre for a long time. Do a google search on female warriors and see what is found. I just don't get the furor over the cover.

06-06-2013, 09:53 AM	#26
pdurrant The Grand Mouse 高貴的老鼠 Posts: 71,504 Karma: 306214458 Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Norfolk, England Device: Kindle Voyage	That cover is really just a different male fantasy. You'd have more of a case with some Romance covers.

06-06-2013, 10:07 AM	#30
BearMountainBooks Maria Schneider Posts: 3,746 Karma: 26439330 Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Near Austin, Texas Device: 3g Kindle Keyboard	The cover controversy is ongoing and will always be. I can tell you I had a devil of a time finding models for the covers of my UF that weren't scantily clad models. There's apparently a HUGE demand for half naked photos because when you start sorting pictures, believe me, you find far more men without shirts and women who are barely in shirts than you do women and men in jeans. I am half-amused, half-annoyed when I'm looking for a dangerous guy with a sword, and every photographer out there apparently envisions heroes without shirts and sometimes without pants. And everyone knows that we women jump out of bed in our bra and panties, grab a gun --STOP TO PUT ON HEELS -- and rush outside to protect our domain. Sometimes we throw on a trench coat. I generally laugh at the covers and move on. Are some of them insulting to both men and women? Of course. Does the audience demand such covers? I have no idea. I really don't. BUT. I've followed a few of the articles and discussions. I've also read Resnick's articles in the past and some of his fiction. I was pretty surprised at his attitude. It's one thing to understand the marketing behind it, it's kind of another to ignore that there are potential issues and to also recognize that some people are going to be insulted by the "art" and attitudes. I think we can all understand "art" and marketing and we all buy what we choose to buy. But that doesn't mean that some of it isn't belittling. It also doesn't mean that some of it shouldn't be used and not out of a sense of political correctness-but because art can be effective, beautiful AND respectful all at the same time. Catering to one perceived common denominator is sheer laziness. There's nothing wrong with trying a little harder to do a nice cover with a more realistic image. There's also nothing wrong with stepping back and thinking a little harder about your entire audience before slapping a "typical" cover on a magazine or book.