And he apologizes, but...

[leahbobet]

So I'm the last on this one, because my sleep cycle is screwed and I went to bed early, trying to fix it.

Would you believe that, having left the Hugo ceremonies immediately after my part in it, while it was still in progress ... and having left the hall entirely ... yet having been around later that night for Kieth Kato's traditional chili party ... and having taken off next morning for return home ... and not having the internet facility to open "journalfen" (or whatever it is), I was unaware of any problem proceeding from my intendedly-childlike grabbing of Connie Willis's left breast, as she was exhorting me to behave.

Nonetheless, despite my only becoming aware of this brouhaha right this moment (12 noon LA time, Tuesday the 29th), three days after the digital spasm that seems to be in uproar ...YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT!!!

IT IS UNCONSCIONABLE FOR A MAN TO GRAB A WOMAN'S BREAST WITHOUT HER EXPLICIT PERMISSION. To do otherwise is to go 'way over the line in terms of invasion of someone's personal space. It is crude behavior at best, and actionable behavior at worst. When George W. Bush massaged the back of the neck of that female foreign dignitary, we were all justly appalled. For me to grab Connie's breast is in excusable, indefensible, gauche, and properly offensive to any observers or those who heard of it later.

I agree wholeheartedly.

I've called Connie. Haven't heard back from her yet. Maybe I never will.

So. What now, folks? It's not as if I haven't been a politically incorrect creature in the past. But apparently, Lynne, my 72 years of indefensible, gauche (yet for the most part classy), horrifying, jaw-dropping, sophomoric, sometimes imbecile behavior hasn't--till now--reached your level of outrage.

I'm glad, at last, to have transcended your expectations. I stand naked and defenseless before your absolutely correct chiding.

With genuine thanks for the post, and celestial affection, I remain, puckishly,

Yr. pal, Harlan

P.S. You have my permission to repost this reply anywhere you choose, on journalfen, at SFWA, on every blog in the universe, and even as graffiti on the Great Wall of China.


Followed up by...


HARLAN ELLISON
- Tuesday, August 29 2006 12:26:56
CONNIE WILLIS'S LEFT BREAST, REDUX

Did I fail to mention, I am 100% guilty as charged, and NO ONE should attempt to cobble up mitigating excuses for my behavior? As with everything else I REALLY DO (as opposed to the bullshit that is gossiped third-hand by dolts), I am responsible for my actions 100% and am prepared to shoulder all consequences, instead of shunting them off to Vice-President ScaryGuy.

Adultly said, Yr. pal, Harlan

HARLAN ELLISON
- Tuesday, August 29 2006 12:28:31
REDUX, REDUX'D

This may be what killed vaudeville.

he

HARLAN ELLISON
- Tuesday, August 29 2006 12:31:1
REDUX TERTIUS

How's chances of me playing either the "I'm an old man and my brain is leaking out of my ass" card ... or ... even better ...

"I'm an old Jew and this is just another example of anti-Semitism because all you goyim are pissed that Jews really DO control the whole world."

I can go either way.

Yr. pal, Harlan

HARLAN ELLISON
- Tuesday, August 29 2006 12:43:2
ONCE MORE INTO THE BREACH

On a more serious note: if, in fact, Connie (or Courtney, or Cordelia) were/are/might in any way be offended by this latest demonstration of give'n'take jackanapery between Connie and Harlan (now in its longest-run on Broadway), you may all rest assured I will apologize vehemently, will crawl to Colorado through broken glass and steaming embers, and beg her (their) forgiveness. I need no one to prompt me.

Harlan Ellison, a friend of Connie Willis


Full original text and beyond here

Discussion at Patrick Nielsen Hayden's place, Jim C. Hines's place, Elizabeth Bear's place, Catherine Morrison's place (and part two), Lis Riba's place, Edward Champion for starters. And of all places, Fandom Wank.



I do not have half the blood in my eye that I did when I posted initially, at which point I was sort of pacing my kitchen with clenched fists, trying to do my lunch dishes by afraid I might throw them instead. So, mad enough to forgo the rule I usually have about the internet and being really mad about something. I'm wasn't sure if it was a good idea even an hour afterward, but that's about methods of presentation -- asking myself if snarky, not-funny-humor-angry was the best way to make the point that I still feel needs making.

Here's why I was that angry:

I was raised to believe that I could be anything I wanted: a fireman, a scientist, a lawyer, a construction worker, whichever: anything within my ability and range of interest. Being a woman and being part of a (granted, not visible) minority should not be a barrier to what I wanted to do with my time. What would be noted and respected -- or not -- was my intellect, ability, and accomplishments: how valid or invalid the words coming out of my mouth would be.

What pnh characterized as the message of such a gesture:

"Remember, you may think you have standing, status, and normal, everyday adult dignity, but we can take it back at any time. If you are female, you'll never be safe. You can be the political leader of the most powerful country in Europe. You can be the most honored female writer in modern science fiction. We can still demean you, if we feel like it, and at random intervals, just to keep you in line, we will."

--still stands.

I can't remember the first time I got that message smacked into my face in full -- it was at a job, though. I can remember the first time it happened in a convention setting. I was sitting with a group of (male) friends in a room party at a local convention, and a guy came along with a cooler of beer. He talked with us for a bit, and then asked who wanted a beer. We were all legal to drink at that point. A few of us said yes. He gave them to my male friends, and then said to me: "the top of that cooler comes off when your top comes off."

Y'see, to anonymous guy with the cooler I could win the Hugo, the Nobel Prize, cure cancer, end war, and at the end of the day I'd still be a pair of tits. That's his sole interest in me as a human being: the two mammary bits on my chest. That's all I am.

Cue the uncomfortable laughter from my friends. None of them say hey, this isn't appropriate. I took it to security and made a complaint, with my male friends trailing along behind me, and one of them asked uncomfortably why I was making such a big deal of it.

These two attitudes -- that you can harass a woman verbally or physically in this community, and that when it happens it isn't in fact illegal, unwelcome, and wrong enough to merit even the official channels but should be forgiven by the woman -- are what I have a problem with. Harlan Ellison acting those two attitudes on two colleagues -- one a multiple Hugo winner and one much younger with her first book, a bestselling memoir, out this year -- is like this example grown large of what we let people get away with all the time in the welcoming, equal, inclusive SF community.

This incident, its participants and venue, spike the comfortable idea that you can get respected enough to not have to deal with this shit, to somehow remove yourself from the category that the rest of the women at conventions are in. It's the same idea that says you can not wear a revealing costume and not get bothered, or you can be a panelist and not get bothered, or you can sell a book and not get bothered. That you have any personal control over how you and your body will be treated in the place you go for your fun and professional activity, that there are any limits.

And you know what? This is our house too. This is our workplace.

So we have an apology, one that in the linked discussions has been read as variously sincere, unconcerned, flippant, offensive, and a host of other reactions, but I hope this explains why there is the distinct taste of dissatisfaction stuck to the roof of my mouth.

The apology is tendered, but the message remains.



Down in the comments of the angry post, cheshyre raises taking something positive from this, using it to make some positive change. I would damn well like to make some positive change here. This is past due.

But I really cannot say how. Public condemnation is useful, but only so useful as each person's capacity to realize that this applies to them and their potential or past actions, to their conscious and subconsious attitudes. We're up against the same problem if we want to make changes -- that the source of any inequality is in the held (unexamined or examined) attitudes of the people who perpetrate the inequality. I get the feeling this is the Big Question (tm) of any issue of rights: how to change the mind of someone who already looks at you as less than them.

So.

No fun tickybox polls on this post, folks, but I'd like to hear your ideas on how we get across that this kind of behaviour is no longer tolerated in our house, starting now.


ETA: Jim C. Hines already has a suggestion.

Comments

[kriz1818.livejournal.com]

So nice to know there's another "morning person" on LJ. Not that I managed to get up as early as usual today, but still.

As I see it, the biggest problem in dealing with this kind of thing is the differential between perceptions of male and female sexuality. In general and historically, male sexuality has not been used to demean the humanity and dignity of men. As a result, asking a guy how he would feel about being treated that way tends to backfire, because to a great many of them the idea of being groped by a lusty female doesn't seem like a bad thing. (Being groped by a lusty male might get a different reaction, but let's not bring homophobia into this, okay?)

So the problem is, what analogy or argument would actually *work*? "How'd you like it if somebody treated your mother/sister/girlfriend/wife like that?" is also unsatisfactory to me, because it draws on the "women are possessions to be hoarded" (whore-ded?) meme. So, what? I've been stumped.

Writing this out has made me think, though, why do we need to convince men that *they* wouldn't like like it? Damn, but that power differential has seeped into my *bones.* It should be enough to convince them that *we* don't like it, and that that's a good enough reason to not assault us AND to protest when other guys do!

[stevenagy.livejournal.com]

Public condemnation is useful, but only so useful as each person's capacity to realize that this applies to them and their potential or past actions, to their conscious and subconsious attitudes.

Very well said. You have to learn from your mistakes -- and the mistakes of others.

[hawkwing-lb.livejournal.com]

Because I get angry at a fundamental level about this kind of crap, my personal inclination would be to respond to any kind of sexual harassment, however mild, with violence.

But, this is not a useful response.

I think the issue at hand is the fact that a lot of guys don't recognise that what sexual harassment does is view your body as someone else's possession. Which is a fundamental violation of you as an autonomous individual (using 'you' in the general sense). And guys don't have the same flinch reflex as women, here, because their - our - culture has never really viewed them as property. Whereas women in most places still have to struggle to achieve practical (if no longer theoretical) equality.

Most of them don't see that violation, or don't care, I suppose. Getting them to see it as a fundamental violation of your right as an individual to determine what happens to your body - you don't submit to invasive surgery without your consent, and that is probably going to do something that benefits you, as opposed to harassment, which benefits only the harasser - would be a start, but I really don't know how one would go about doing that.

You can't make people acknowledge things they're determined to avoid looking at, really.

[noizangel.livejournal.com]

I struggled with a lot of this when I went on my kick vs. Pimp the Backhanding and White Wolf. Also, I'm re-reading 'Lip Service' by Kate Fillion, so there's a lot about mal and female tangled up in my head; I don't know how coherent it will be.

I've found that, in 'geek' cultures, there's a sort of weird throwback time bubble - for whatever reason (lack of female visibility for some time, etc.), women are rarely treated as equals, and this shows up in behaviour, cover art, wording... and so on and so on. I think there's a lot of leeway that men are given because SF/Anime/Gamer men are supposedly socially backwards - so even the guys who should know better display behaviour that is unacceptable.

I don't know if there's something to the idea that men use the accepting nature of fandom as an excuse - surely, if there's room for everyone, there should be room for sexism - or 'male rights' or something.

I like Hines' idea of the flyer if it's going to be enforced - if so, it could go a long way to making people feel safer. And that's all people, as I understand from friends that gay men can get a lot of the same crap.

Visibility, to me, is key. Speaking out is key. For every discouraging 'you take all this too seriously' crap comment, I like to believe there's at least one person that agrees.

I wish I'd gone to TTrek this year - I was supposed to be on a panel about how not to be a social moron with women at cons. It might have been interesting.

[commodorified.livejournal.com]

I once went to the Saturday night of a con wearing several rounds of that bright yellow tape that says CAUTION DO NOT CROSS THIS LINE looped over my outfit.

Reactions were good, and often thoughtful.

The stuff is cheap, it goes with everything, it can be brought along and distributed easily by as little as one person per con, and it is very very visible.

It's not too much more expensive, IIRC, to get yourself a bunch of it printed up with any message you like, but even just CAUTION is good.

And people will say "what's with the tape?" and you can tell them.

some early morning ramblings from the west coast...

[obake.livejournal.com]

I haven't been to a proper sci-fi/fantasy convention in years, so I guess I'm really out of the loop. I do regularly attend Camarilla (White Wolf) conventions and I have to say that the attitude there is really different. It is absolutely unconscionable to grope someone (male or female) like that. I've thought about it and I think there's a cultural divide. One of the primary LARP rules is No Touching without permission and I think that game rule somehow carries over to the social aspect of the convention.

So, with that in mind, I don't think you should focus on how to change the mind of someone who already looks at you as less than them, but rather how to change the culture in which this sort of behavior is acceptable. Generalization: men do it because they don't think there's anything wrong with it and women take it because "it's what men do" or they don't believe they can do anything about it. Up until recently, women were considered property, just like slaves, cattle, and land. I think the over-culture is slowly changing so that the rights of women (culturally, not legally speaking) are catching up to what are perceived to be the rights of men. Over-cultural equality will take generations.

Sub-cultures can change faster, but it will still take years. It has to start with an agreement from a core group of the sub-culture as to what the cultural standards will be. Then it will take persistent reinforcement. Posted signs will be looked at strangely at first, then laughed at and made fun of, and then it will settle into the subconscious. When you (the people who want to enact change) see something that is counter to your change, then you must confront it and explain why the behavior is unacceptable. Constantly and consistently.

I was a tomboy growing up and still am to a degree (though since high school I have learned how not to fall over in high heels, how to sit in a skirt, and how to put on make-up). I've been fighting the male over-culture all my life. And it is a constant, everyday fight--from looking men right in the eye to giving firm handshakes to quoting their sexist bullshit right back at them. In order to enact a cultural change, that's the kind of work you're looking at.

outside looking in

[(Anonymous)]

COming in late here but I've known about it since it happened.

Everything that's been said here and a seemingly a million other places is hearsay unless it was said by Connie or Harlan.

You're all getting offended for someone who is more than capable of defending herself should the need arise and who may have not been offended at all since Harlan is an old, old friend and apparently this sort of thing has been going on between the two of them for quite some time.

I will say that I personally have been groped, spanked and stroked by friends of both sexes in jest and never found myself offended or defended; I didn't need the latter because the former never occured and was never intended and that's enough for me even if it did occasionally go too far.

I'm going to wait until Connie weighs in on the subject before I, who wasn't there and didn't participate, decide what really happened and how I feel about it.

Kell