thuvia ptarth

Hey! Are people still here? Have you all run off to Tumblr and Twitter?

I will be at VVC this year. If you are here and you will be there, let's hang out!

I am even more discombobulated about prep than usual, so you will be able to recognize me as the least fashionable and most undressed-up person at Club Vivid.

Oh, hey, I should probably mention that I'm going to VVC this year. Let's hang out!

I haven't been in much of a mood for vids this year, but I'm hoping VVC will change that. It usually does.

In the meantime, also please rec me vids for:

Agent Carter*
The 100
The Legend of Korra
Orphan Black
Penny Dreadful

and also possibly:

Community
Parks and Recreation
The Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt

Recs for new vids about my eternal loves (Buffy/Angel, The X Files, Terminator: SCC, etc.) also welcome.


* Unless they focus on any of the white dudes except Jarvis, because I just don't care. Sorry, fans of the other white dudes! I totally support your interests. I just don't share them.

Hello, flist & dwircle,

Does anyone not attending want a VVC DVD set? They are $15 + whatever it costs me to ship them to you, which will probably be cheaper than a non-attending membership, which also comes with a DVD set. The non-attending membership sets, however, will probably get mailed to you much more promptly.

I love these vids as much as I love all the vids I recced earlier, but I am tired and out of energy so I probably will not sound like I do. Also, the comments will be spectacularly inane. The vids are much better, I swear.

( Club Vivid )

( Challenge vids )

I loved the diversity of this year's premieres -- in sources, in racial representation, in genre, in mood. I think it was the most light-hearted Premieres show in several years, with a greater sprinkling of comedy and light-hearted vids than has become usual.

I won't be commenting on every vid, not even every one I liked, and I hope to manage actual feedback on a lot more vids than I will be mentioning here. But these are my favorites, at least for today.

The Vividcon Shows Playlists, with links to online vids

( Premieres Show )

hazelk, Notes to self: vid warnings at VVC
I like this because it considers both the benefit to people w/triggers who need warnings and the cost to people w/triggers for whom this compromises their efforts for self-protection.

impertinence, this is not a furious screed; it is a constructive post
This talks about the difference between an entire con selecting (or de facto being) "Choose not to warn" and individuals selecting "Choose not to warn," even if it's for their entire body of work.

I thought I'd seen a post that made the point that there are people with triggers who need warnings and people with triggers who need to not be required to warn, but all I can find is this thread at thingswithwings.

I have three vids showing this year.

( Content notes )

Please feel welcome to email me at thuviaptarth[at]gmail[dot]com if you need more information on vid contents. Although I choose not to warn in public for "Light of Day," I will be happy to answer individual questions about it.

What I would like implemented is such_heights's suggestion in the Vividcon Open Policy Suggestion Post. This is, that as a default the con makes available a list of vids which have common triggers (graphic violence, sexual violence, migraine/epilepsy triggers) for people who want it, online before the con and in a stack of 20-40 copies in the Con Suite during the con. The concom can also be contacted by individuals with other triggers and ask for a list tailored to that requirement.

What I like about this:

• For some number of people, access becomes institutionalized -- the disability is incorporated into the model of likely default human abilities instead of treated as a one-off peculiarity that requires the person with disabilities to ask explicitly for help. People with less common triggers still need to ask for individual assistance, but I think that is unavoidable; as many people have remarked, it is not possible to be aware of every possible trigger.
  
  
• People who do not have triggers but who prefer to be warned for those common triggers also have access to this information.
  
  
• It provides more complete information than the distribution among vidders previously suggested, under which many vids would have the question mark label of "Choose not to warn".
  
  
• People who feel that the program offers an adequate guide to triggering information can continue to manage their triggers as they have in the past. That is, this doesn't seem to interfere with the methods that some people with triggers are already satisfied with.
  
  
• People who prefer not to be warned can easily avoid the warnings.
  
  
• Vidders who prefer not to label their vids, even with "Choose not to warn," do not need take on the task of warning or not warning.
  
  
• The compilation work for the most common triggers gets pulled together ahead of time, which seems a little more efficient than waiting for and answering individual requests as they come in and on an individual basis.
  

What I dislike about this:

• I really liked the way making this a community project sort of normalized the idea of triggers and made them a default part of the community worldview and not an addendum. However, it's clear a lot of the community doesn't want them to be a default, and this way that section of the community aren't forced into something they dislike.
  

In the post itself, astolat suggests that all requests be sent to the Concom, who will respond to them individually.

What I like about this:

• It provides a clear way for people to get personalized warning information. This may have been the con policy all along, but that has not been clear to people. It's a huge improvement just to have a clearly defined and reliable way to get the information.
  

What I dislike about this:

• This is actually what I passionately hate about this. To be open with you, when I saw that line in the (generally vast improved! and clearly provisional!) revised policy statement, I burst into tears. As someone with clinical depression, there have frequently been times in my life when I have undergone great losses or suffered easily avoidable penalties because I could not bear the energy and emotional requirements of carrying on basic and simple human interactions. I don't (currently) have triggers, but I can easily imagine a situation in which it would be easier for me to suffer the anxiety of watching possibly triggery vids or the disappointment of not participating in major parts of the con than to have to put together the words of the email request and allow someone else to see my vulnerability, anonymous or not. It is an additional burden and it would feel like an additional stigma -- this is the another way I am not a normal person and am more effort than I'm worth and make trouble for everyone and don't deserve to live blah depressive thinking blah.
  
  In addition to requiring extra effort from someone who is more likely not to have much extra to give, there's the way this still positions the person with triggers as an isolated individual who is an extra burden. Psychologically, having to email would make me feel like I was asking for a favor, not making use of an access right.
  
  As I said above, I don't see a way to avoid putting some people with triggers into that situation. But I do see a way to make it fewer people than it would otherwise be.
  
  To be very clear, this is my individual take based on my personality, experience, and opinions about human psychology. It does not necessarily apply to other people with clinical depression or to people with triggers or to people who belong to both of those groups. It is possible I am projecting my feelings in a way that is inaccurate.

I am closing comments because I don't feel up to hosting discussion on this issue. There are ongoing discussions about this and other parts of the con accessibility policy at astolat's. There are discussions about trigger warnings here and here. Please check to see if discussion on this is currently open before you post; there have already been some requests for people to take a break for a cooling down period.

Links

• laurashapiro, Vividcon 2009: Some observations about race, gender, and accessibility (DW | LJ)
  
• obsessive24, Loaded thinkies from vividcon (race, criticism)
  
• bitter_crimson, A N00B in Vividcon 2009 (also incl. accessibility & trans & genderqueer issues)
  
• bradcpu, Home, a few more VVC thoughts (incl. newbie[?] issues -- not clear yet, I hope Brad will have time and energy to expand on this)
  
• bop_radar, On inclusion and exclusion in vidding fandom: personal reflections (authority, nation, race, gender, other issues)
  

[ETA: Have corrected some references to genderqueerness to refer to transsexuality and/or genderqueerness depending on the particulars.]

The past year has included a lot of fighting with my friends and communities about issues of access, representation, and social justice. I don't actually like fighting with my friends. I don't even like fighting with people who aren't my friends. I am tired of being frustrated and alienated, and I am tired of frustrating and alienating people. So I copped out of a lot of discussion at the con, and would probably be copping out right now, if it weren't for Deepa's example at the con and Laura's example online.

I'm going to throw out some criticisms and some suggestions here. I'm not convinced the suggestions are the best way to fix the problems, but I figure it's better to get brainstorming started, and sometimes knowing what's a bad idea can lead you to a good one.

[ETA: I'm posting these as suggestions for community feedback, not as demands to be acted upon.]

So, first, I recognize that the Vividcon Concom works extremely hard and has been attempting to deal with some of these issues. In general, I think it's a beautifully run con, and I'm grateful to the people who put the hours in. I'm going to talk about issues of racism, sexism, ableism, transphobia, discrimination against genderqueer people, and some general institutional failures to guard against hierarchy or to incorporate or welcome the contributions of newer fans not because I think that people have been malicious or intentionally prejudicial, but because we exist in a sexist, racist, ableist, authoritarian society that does not encourage us to question how our own privileges adversely affect our understanding of our power. If I thought the majority of people at VVC intended to harm those with less privilege than themselves on some axis, I would not bother talking about this at all. But I am not talking about individual intent; I'm talking about systemic effects.

Second, while I'm going to talk about a bunch of these issues together and I think all of them need to be addressed for the health of the con and the vidding community, I don't think they operate identically or are of equal importance. I'm talking about them together because I think they intersect and reinforce each other, but I do not think issues of status within the fan community have the same weight as institutionalized oppression based on race, sex, sexuality, gender identity, and ability, although the former can be affected by the latter. I would also like to acknowledge that sexism plays out very differently in the vidding/transformative works community than it does in society in general, because vidding/transformative works is a predominantly female community, and white, middle-class, able-bodied, straight, cis-gendered women are in a position of even greater relative power there than they are in society in general. Nevertheless, we do not walk away from the effects and internalizations of sexism when we walk into a predominantly female space, and sexism is still very much in operation.

Second, while I'm making suggestions based on my experience elsewhere, I realize that these suggestions may not work in the particular context of Vividcon.

These are some of the problems I see:

I don't run cons. I have, however, worked at a bunch of different tech start-ups during booms and busts, and in my experience 100 and 150 are big thresholds for companies, because they're points at which previously successful ad hoc internal communications and work arrangements break down; smart, driven, introverted workaholics can no longer handle the workload by devoting more hours to it and have to delegate or bust (lots of them bust); and institutional experience can become insularity and exclusion. I don't think these are the only things driving the perception of newer vidders that VVC is elitist and insular, but I don't think they help, either.

Some suggestions:

• Make the incorporation of new attendees into the con an explicit priority, possibly with a Concom member assigned as newbie liaison.
  
  
• vidderkidder suggested buddy arrangements for established VVC goers/newcomers
  
  
• Have a vidding/betaing workshop either concurrently with the con or the Thursday before, breaking out into sessions of 1-2 vid in progress, 1 experienced vidder or beta, and 3-4 newer vidders/betas. This would probably need to be at least 2 hours long, with a break in the middle; it should follow the model of writing workshops where the person whose work is being workshopped is silent during the critique.
  
  
• Have a randomized meal sign-up for one or more meals, where people get randomly assigned to a small group of 3-4 people outside their usual fannish affinity group.
  
  
• Have an officially organized newbie dinner the night before the con or breakfast the first day of the con.
  
  
• The Vid Review and the In-Depth Vid Review were both co-moderated by mixed-generation/mixed-affinity-group pairs of fans. This is great! Please keep this up.
  
  
• Be more proactive in addressing [trans and] genderqueer issues. At Wiscon, there are suites on one of the main con floors open for small programming and overflow programming, and the bathroom for one of them is marked as unisex, as is the bathroom in the Con suite. I'm not sure it's possible to do the same at VVC given the different hotel setup, but it's worth investigating. For both genderqueer [sexual and gender identity] and accessibility issues, I am disturbed by how the onus is put on the people without privilege to complain, rather than on the rest of us to educate ourselves and make accomodation.
  
  
• Be more proactive in addressing disability/accessibility issues. U.S. culture in particular is so biased towards extreme individualism and against interdependence or sensible accomodation of disability that it puts the onus for accomodating disabilities on the individuals with disabilities rather than on society at large. This can make it painful or humiliating for people with disabilities to have to ask for specific accomodation, especially when it ought to be a default arrangement. I know the Concom has worked with people with disabilities to make sure they have accomodation, but I think there is still room for improvement. Here are some things that I have seen other cons--okay, here are some things I have seen Wiscon--do:
  
  
  
  
  • Include a checkbox and text field in registration for "I am a person with a disability/traveling with a person with a disability and may require additional accomodation" and have a dedicated Concom liason for following up with everyone who checks this and makes sure that the needs are met. [ETA: Response from mobility aide.]
    
    
  • Reserve seats for people with hearing, visual, neurotypical or mobility impairments [disabilities] at the front of the room and near exits, usually just by putting stripes of blue masking tape on the seats.
    
    
  • Mark off wheelchair spaces at the front of the room and/or near the exit for people with mobility impairments.
    
    
  • I was happy to see the large text programs in the Con Suite this year. I think people generally realize this is something that is too expensive to make the default, but I'd love to see this offered as an individual option in Registration next year so people can preorder large text programs if they need them.
    
    
  • In crowded or frequently traveled hallways, tape off sections to keep some part of the hallway clear for people to move. For most of us, the crush of people is just inconvenient. For people with mobility issues, it can be exhausting and debilitating.
    
    
  • [ETA: Concerns raised about my disability/accessibility suggestions in general] [ETA2: Please also see Morgan Dawn's post.]
    
  
  
  
• Use the Con Suite and Overflow Room for post-Premieres small discussion groups.
  
  
• There's been a lot of discussion from newbies--and, on my part, honestly, not so newbies--about how difficult it can be to find people after official programming ends. Is it possible to keep the Con Suite and Comet Room open 24/7, or later than programming? (No, I do not think Melina should take speed for the duration of the con. I think other people also need to be responsible.) During the con, elyn suggested a message board outside the Con Suite for when it's closed, which I also second.
  
  
• A lot of people are hugely stressed out by Premieres, but newer vidders are even more stressed out than experienced ones. Do Premieres need to be on Saturday? What do we lose and what do we gain if we swap the nights for Premieres and Club Vivid?
  
  
• The Concom is all white and with a sole exception drawn from a circle of acquaintances with a similar fannish background. This is understandable. But given the con's growth, requests for changes that the existing Concom doesn't have the time to accomodate, and ongoing issues with exclusions of people of color and newer vidders, and, not least, the possibility of burnout on Concom staff, I would strongly recommend the active recruitment of new Concom members, particularly aimed at newer vidders and people of color. For people of color, you need multiple people on the Concom; just adding one person is tokenizing, frustrating, and generally unhelpful. It is probably also worth it for me to make explicit that the responsibility for addressing racial issues is not the sole responsibility of people of color and that you should be inviting people to take on particular tasks or projects and not to be your Colored Person Advisor.
  
  
• Decide whether the Vidding Town Hall is going to be the state of vidding discussion or a progress report from the OTW. I was startled that this focused entirely on the issues of outsider visibility and not on any of the controversies that injured many people in our community this year, particularly the neverending RaceFail. Great, we're the scrappy underdog fighting the power who fits neatly into a tradition of white middle-class feminist protest about white middle-class feminist issues. When are we going to talk about the divisions and fractures among us? The IDIC challenge theme, unfortunately, fits all too well into this comfortable approach to power issues: it doesn't require anyone to confront anything that's uncomfortable, and when it fails to produce much that addresses racial or sexual diversity, conveniently the responsibility cannot be placed on any individual; it just happened.
  
  
• At the con, at least one person was mistaken for another of the same ethnicity/race, even though she was wearing a name tag. Other people of color noted visible and sometimes audible reactions because they weren't white and yet hadn't notified people of this ahead of time.
  
  Dear my fellow white people, I do not think you're evil for making these mistakes. The people you offended probably don't think you're evil. I do think you're rude, thoughtless, and privileged by your race in ways you ought to take more notice of. And it really pains me to say this, because I am saying it to people I like and respect.
  
  Read the name tags. If you make a mistake, apologize.
  
  
• [ETA: This point is not addressed to the Concom or white attendees. I'm throwing out for the consideration of people of color, as something I've seen work elsewhere. I'm not interested in forcing people of color into this or even arguing more strenuously for it if you're not interested. If you are interested and/or want to talk to people who've tried it, I can point you at online discussions and/or set up introductions with people of color who made use of the setup. But seriously, throwing this out for your consideration and now dropping the subject. Not interested in talking you into something you don't want to do!]
  
  Something that worked really well at Wiscon was (a) people-of-color-only meetups at a meal at the beginning of the con and at the end of the con, for people of color who wanted to network with each other, deal with particular concerns of racism and white privilege, talk fannishly without fearing racefail, and decompress at the end of the con; and (b) dedicated people-of-color space for people who wanted a break from the overwhelming whiteness of the con. I hesitated to suggest this before VVC, and I'm hesitant to suggest it now, because it doesn't do much good for a white person to make an outside suggestion. Absolutely I am NOT suggesting this as a mandatory thing for people who aren't interested. But I would strongly urge people to consider implementing this/asking the Concom to make accomodation for this, because, honestly, the difference in energy and enthusiasm I saw among my friends afterward was amazing. (I don't have time to look up individual links right now, but K. Tempest Bradford posted about it a lot.)
  
  
• Honestly, I am a little reluctant to suggest the same thing for men. I feel that a lot of the discussion of men in vidding looks at men as a numeric minority without considering the effects of sexism and male privilege, which do not disappear when men enter a predominantly female space. A lot of the reactions I see to Laura's comments and other discussions of men in live-action vidding fandom or the history of vidding as a predominantly female art form do not acknowledge sexism as an institution or the erasure of female contributions to culture, society, and art as an ongoing and centuries-old problem; they treat sexism as a matter of individual prejudice. The problem is not that the men who vid or attend Vividcon are not nice guys, anymore than the racial problems with Vividcon are due to the white people in charge not being nice people. I have personally benefited from the willingness of several men in the community to share knowledge and advice, and enjoyed the work of many more. The problem is the way men are socialized to take up space and women are trained not to; the problem is who gets paid attention to, and who gets forgotten. The problem is that women are really, really, REALLY used to the masculine supposedly being inclusive of the feminine, and neither men nor women are at all used to the converse.
  
  So while men are even more of a numerical minority at the con than people of color (and I know it's extra fun for people who are both), the fact is that outside the con is a world where men have substantial power and privilege by virtue of their sex, and people of color have the reverse. (Yes, even in countries that are not white or Western. Colonialism: Bringing the global effects of racism to a continent near you since 1492.)
  
  That said, yeah, men are a numerical minority at the con, they're really visible as a numerical minority at the con, and that can suck. So I would support a men's meetup/men's space at the con for them to talk about the issues that come out of that if they're interested in that.
  
  

Vid links are here.

( Preface )

( Comments that do not belong in Vid Review )

( Vid Review )