(no subject)

Date: 2010-01-12 12:11 am (UTC)
I think the flak they're getting about this has more to do with editor Doug Cohen's comments on the issue of sexism in the genre in previous debates, than anything else. He very clearly didn't "get it" in those earlier discussions. Coupled with the fact that the initial announcement for the all-women issue contained problematic language and showed that they really hadn't thought about what they wanted much (e.g., the issue of women-themed vs. women-written; they don't seem to realize they could easily end up with a bunch of male-centric stories written by women, which rather defeats the point), I think the general sense of apprehension floating around is understandable. There's nothing worse than diversity gestures done by people who don't know what they're doing and may not really care.

I'm kind of meh about the whole thing. RoF was never as problematic on publishing women as the Big Three; that's not really their issue when it comes to women. So I don't really care that they're doing an all-women issue now. (Though I am waiting to see if they post a cover with a sexually objectified man for this issue.) Whether I submit to RoF has nothing to do with my feelings about their willingness to accept women. It's got far more to do with whether I really feel like letting a story of mine sit in limbo for 6-8 months, as has happened on nearly every occasion I submit there. (On the bright side, I usually get sent up to Shawna. On the not-so-bright side, I can sell the same story to six other markets in the time it takes me to get rejected there. Which is why I only send something to RoF once every other year or so.)
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
No Subject Icon Selected
More info about formatting

Profile

julieandrews: (Default)
julieandrews

May 2014

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627 28293031

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags