Motivations to Attend Conventions

Frolicon 2010

I've attended a decent about of science fiction, fantasy, and BDSM conventions over the years but this year I have only two scheduled -- on in July and one in September.  So today I wanted to share with you all my thoughts on why I'm doing so few and whether or not I want to do more in the future.  Notice: I'm going to say a lot of things in this post today and it may seem rambling. Primarily I just want to share the experiences and thoughts of one independent author so that other authors/artists and convention organizers might learn something.  I do not have all the answers nor am I a saint.  You have been warned.

My very first convention way back in NYC in the mid-1990s was a convention I was invested in.  That means that I wasn't just attending for fun but as part of the organizing body that arranged the convention. I've only attended one convention in my entire life purely for fun and that was a horror convention with my friend The Prosy Rose who is one of the other writers on this blog. I can't say that I had a great deal of fun at the convention because of the convention but in spite of it in many ways.  I fear I'd get bored if I were just one of the crowd going to see the latest movie promos, chat up artists, meet fellow gamers, or just plain get my geek on.  I just need to be more involved I guess.

Assistant at Utopicon Table 2012

Conventions are expensive even if they are in you home city and you volunteer to defer the expenses and I know this so I always feel a bit of empathy for those folks to whom I'm trying to sell a book or two.  Part of my motivation for going to a convention is self-promotion; I make no claims otherwise.  At the end of every year my husband and I look back at each convention, weighing costs and book sales, weighing the fun we each had (or I had if a friend took me to the convention instead), and any hassles I had to face while there. Sadly the vast majority of conventions I've attended have been cut because the hassle outweighed the fun or the organization of the event made it nearly impossible to do any book sales.

Duckcon Table Share 2009

A great convention sees a few more dollars (literally) in my pocket than what I had to pay out; a good convention breaks even.  Writing is my career, I'm not a teacher or a healthcare worker or an office drone taking a break to hang with my geeky or nerdy peeps, I must keep these financial matters in my mind and I know that annoys the crap out of so many people.  I know you get annoyed when I say "Hi, want to check out the books?" again when you walk by the table or booth but please try to realize that I won't remember if you've passed by before unless we've had a conversation or you've bought a book that year -- in those cases I'll just smile but not try to entice you to buy because I got the answer for that year.

Duckcon Panel 2010

That brings me to my other reason to attend conventions -- entertain or educate. I know that conventions are expensive for me and for you, too.  So I'm never the person who buys a vendor table and then just hangs out all the time pushing my goods... you might think I am given how often you see me.  Nope, I'm doing at last three and often as many as 6+ panels, workshops, or games while I'm at the convention, too, and in exchange I get in the convention for free... just the cost of the convention pass by the way, not hotel, not food, and generally not my assistant (husband or friend) who is making it possible for me to do any of those things. Why do I do all of that?  Part of it the knowledge that being seen and heard outside the vending space makes it more likely someone might buy a book but far more than that it is my drive to entertain and educate.

Duckcon Reading 2011

I'm a writer and most of what I've had published has been fiction.  That means I'm an entertainer at some core part of my identity.  I'm also a feedback junky, I love to see and hear reactions when I'm talking to or with people.  To know that I've made someone blush or wiggle or even cause his or her mouth to hang agape is a huge thrill for me.  That means emotionally it hurts a lot when only a handful show up for a panel or reading from time to time but if I can get specific reactions from that audience (better yet sales) it can make up for smaller numbers of raw turnout.

I was a college instructor for a few years and for several other years I've been a human sexuality educator as well.  I love helping people make discoveries of facts and further getting them to think about those facts and apply them.  You can do that at conventions if you are willing to put yourself out there with the knowledge that not everyone is going to want to think, going to want to learn, or going to be interested in your subject.  Again I can be thrilled merely from helping one single individual learn something new or think about something in a different way so these conventions can be great outlets for the teacher in me.  My motivation then is to feel like I'm being a professor once more though I hope in a cool way.

Inconjunction RPG 2009

I'm also motivated by my love of creating... every moment at a convention I am creating whether it is the persona of an author trying to sell a book, a DM running a game, a workshop leader or panel specialist, or working on the next projects or encouraging someone else's creativity.  That isn't to say that you see a fake me at conventions, I'm still 85-90% me but that other 10-15% is a cranking up or a toning down of myself for the required moment.  I'm playing various roles, creating what I need to interact with other people.  One of the best creative things I do at conventions is try to run RPGs, a specific game that will have it's 9th consecutive run at Inconjunction this July.

Marcon Table 2010

You might think that I'm a people person but I can get uncomfortable around people easily. I'm not a very patient person nor am I very tolerant of stupidity or lack of rational logic most of the time.  So one reason I go to conventions is to force myself to get more practice with being all of those things.  I have to work on being more socially skilled when a racist a-hole decides he/she needs to bitch about the president for no reason at all or a sexist jerk feels the pressing need to reassure their fragile ego by proclaiming his (it's almost always a his) worth at the cost of another or a self-righteous little thing that has to make a snippy comment about those books to deflect how hard/wet the thought is making them or a self-indulgent twit who has to giggle about all the ugly/fat people to feel more attractive.

See those people really piss me off but in the convention I have "play nice" even if they don't feel the same obligation.  Making myself go forces me to learn to be more diplomatic without giving up my own moral/ethical code or opinions.  Practice hasn't made me perfect but I think it's made me better in social settings.

Duckcon Table Share 2010

For many people fun is the main reason they go to a convention and I do what to have that as well.  Unfortunately as long as the margin between costs and books sales is too great that is a stressor and if I still have a panel or workshop my mind is on that.  I have my most fun in the last few hours when I have little else to do and look forward to the week ahead -- assuming I don't get concrud. I do enjoy seeing people I may only see on FB or G+ or whom I don't even see online but only at conventions.  I hesitated over using the word "friends" here in this paragraph simply because I consider a friend to be someone I interact with regularly and the vast majority of folks at conventions I simply never talk with or see until the next event comes around.  I can be friendly without being friends and that is something I've learned too over the years at conventions. Every now and I again I do make acquaintances that become friends.

Millennicon 2010 RPG

There are a few thoughts for the upcoming conventions.  Only two this year -- one a tried and true event and one brand new.  I do miss other conventions and would love to go back if the expense wasn't so great or the distance so far.  I wanted to go to another new convention not far from us in June but the cost for an artist/author table was $150!  Really?  I'm not Stephen King, dudes?  Plus they were "family friendly" and I was worried they might kick me out if they saw my books after I paid that.  Anyway, I'd love to find other conventions if anyone out there wants me and can help me meet some of my motivations and concerns.  I also realize after putting this together that I need to start taking more photographs from these events -- you have been warned!

Has Consent Been Erased?

This article on TruthOut by Jill D. Weinberg got me thinking about consent, vanilla sex, BDSM, and the portrayals each "side" creates of each other.  The article looks at the entire "Fifty Shade" brand in regards to how it might be harmful to folks who are starting to engage in S&M (and it's associated forms of sexuality or sexual play) and those who have been doing it for some time. While I think the article makes some good points it leaves out an honest look at the history of and the current culture of BDSM so I want to address that as someone who has been doing all of this for over 24 years now and who has done some research into the history of the Scene and a lot of talking/reading about the changes to the Scene over these two and a half decades.

"Fifty Shades" may be more honest about how some kinky relationships work than we want to believe.



While I have no doubt that Weinberg's subjects (52 of them according to the post) told her that consent was really important, very common, and taken very seriously, I've seen many online discussions and even live debates about the need (or not) for safewords and contracts growing over the past decade.  The correct answer you are "supposed" to give to any researcher is that these (safewords, contracts, negotiation) are important because you don't want to show the community or yourself in a poor light.  This correct not only because "we" want to prove we aren't crazies or serial killers but because the idea that we are better than vanillas is touted in every Scene community I've been part of or visited.  Vanilla (folks who don't identify as part of BDSM/SM/Kink) aren't as self-aware, they don't discuss things, they don't think things through, they just fly on instinct and tradition or so we tell ourselves repeatedly.

Abuse happens in the Scene, it happens every day.  Even though I applaud the NCSF's attempt to research issues of abuse I have my worries about how honest people will be even in a blind study. Their previous study on the value of consent vs. the reality can be found here.  The NCSF discovered rate of consent violations in that study isn't the 2 out of 52 that Weinberg reports but over 30%!

It simply isn't true that most people use contracts any more.  That I do makes me an oddity and even then my current contact is not ideal in any sense of the word but it is the outgrowth of doing all of this for years and years with one partner; we are not role-models for new relationships. I have my doubts that the majority ever did use contracts even though the value of them was promoted back in the early to mid-1990s when I was starting into the public community. Repeated today we are told how unlegal our contracts are, that they are more a matter of mutual honor or a why to lay things out so you both know what you are getting into.  Well, duh!  I was never told our contracts were legal documents and these discussions often have the tone of warning about them -- don't be fooled into thinking you can't leave just because you have a contract, little girl.

At the other edge of the contract discussion though are those who report on ways they have legally found to tie their partner to them.  Doing these things (and we aren't talking legal marriage, folks) is said to make things more "real" and take away the slave's right to just walk away.  I have my doubts about such advice since most of the documents being discussed would require the submissive to be proven to be mentally unable to make decisions... in that case how are they making the decision to be in the relationship in the first place?

If you pay attention to these discussions going around the Scene today it feels like consent and safewords are what "real" masters/slaves don't need or are only for the newbies.  Sure we tell the younguns that they need a safeword, maybe even a safecall though I've found that less and less discussed, but they are also told not to use it "control the scene."  This idea confuses safewords as being all the same and that wasn't what I taught many years back.  Safewords are ways to give information but the anti-safeword folks often say "just communicate" ignoring the fact that some folks want to say things in Scene that would communicate that things should stop even if that isn't what they want.  The Scene can be linguistically complicated, safewords were an idea to address those complications.  Safewords then become tools for the newest members or for those too unskilled in communication.

Then there are the safewords are for fake folks.  This idea can primarily be found on master-slave boards online.  Here people brag about how they don't have safewords or that having one would make them unreal.  I totally get bragging about how little your partner may need to use a safeword after years together as a sign of how well you've gotten to know each other but bragging that not having any way to communicate beyond the linguistic complications makes you more real seems odd to me.  Of course these folks also tend to preach that real slaves can't leave, can't make choices, and furthermore never want to do so.  I agree with the Weinberg article that I mentioned first in this essay -- having a slave stay because he choses to is far more sexy than having one who feels they have no choice. But there are folks in BDSM who strongly disagree.

So if folks in the community are currently disagreeing about the need or value of safewords, contracts, and even ongoing consent do they at least agree that rape and assault can happen and should be avoided?

I have seen many discussions online, in organizations, and at events about the rate of sexual assault (and whether or not it is real, an insult to say the least to those who have been assaulted) in the Scene and the responsibility of the community to do anything about it other than educate and provide resources for "victims."  People who speak up about violations of their limits or flat out assaults and rapes are often warned by those in charge to stop and sometimes they are kicked off of online and meatlife communities.  As a "community" I have seen far more accused believed than accusers even when the accuser have bruises, hospital records, and evidence of threats to back up their claims.  The standard lines I've read and heard from those poo pooing the claims -- you just weren't a good enough slave, you could have walked away any time, and even that you want to get revenge on your ex.

Wow!  Those seem very similar to charges that survivors of domestic abuse heard and continue to hear, doesn't it?  Apparently the talk of consent, safewords, and contracts isn't taken seriously when we are smacked in the head by a complaint.  It is easier to fall back onto the ideal of what the Scene is like than to realistically look at the folks we munch with, chat with, and play with.

I've never seen or heard anyone claim that an unpartnered dom or sub should give up safewords or not have their consent respected.  But once you starting using those magic words owner and slave (and the variations of them) suddenly folks come out to say you aren't real if you need safewords, or that they have "moved beyond" the need for safewords or contracts, or that it lessens their dynamic if those are involved.  We talk about these things in brief in our book if you want to check it out:



I see this far more often in the maledom/femsub community than in the femdom/malesub.  Is this a carry over of the idea that men need to be in charge and that women just "naturally" submit to them especially in the bedroom?  If you have tell someone to submit, if you have to show her how to do that, if you have to keep driving home the fact that her uterus makes her less, then it isn't natural.  There are naturally submissive folks out there, there are people who love to serve others, but that's not a gender thing, it's an individual thing.  I can't say how frequent this idea of "no safeword = more real" is in the lesbian or gay communities really but I'd be surprised if these same discussions about the unnecessary safewords and contracts for real owner-slave households aren't going on.

One problem unlining this is the idea that some peoples' relationship are more "real" than others. This might be a type of competitiveness or a way to bolster your own feelings by making yourself seem more important compared to others.  It may also be a romantic view of the past before the advent of the Internet and the popularization of kink into the mainstream -- complaints I hear even more often than arguments about safewords and consent.

If you want to see the past of BDSM then you need to look at the honest histories of the "Old Guard" but also some of the underground clubs and circles that existed prior to the late 1980s when it all started to become more "public". Hopefully next year there will be a history book out about several of these things but for now, for anyone believing in an "golden age of kink" before the Internet debased it all, I recommend you read V.M. Johnson's "To Love, To Obey, To Serve: Diary of an Old Guard Slave" that the tops club I used to run read and discussed soon after it came out.  Not a single person in that club wanted to go back to those "good old days" even though they would have been in the more powerful positions.



That these discussions about consent, the responsibility of the community to police itself, and the "realness" of relationships points out several things about the Scene today.  We are an expanding community and as such the variety of opinions will be greater.  We will also attract people who have no interest in BDSM at all and merely see our meeting spaces as arena in which to hunt for new victims.  One of the most common traits of serial rapists and abusers is their ability to hide very well in mainstream society; in kink communities these people can recite the words, play in public, even take on leadership positions then abuse their "slaves" in private.  Our community is primarily online now ranging from folks who never meet offline to those organizations that have been around for 40+ years using the Internet to communicate.  The Internet allows us to lie, it encourages us to lie, so the self-proclaimed great master can get a following much later than the leather daddy who was a founder member of a Old Guard club.

Lies are the foundation of abuse. Lies strip people's ability to get information they need to give consent or withdraw it.  It is so easy for someone to lie about themselves at any time.  I learned to not tell my potential partners my own limits and interests during initial negotiations after repeated discoveries that things my partners claimed they were into were things they either just tolerated or actually hated.  On occasion that could have been intentional lies but often it was merely adapting their answers to reflect mine because they wanted so badly to get into the Scene or try it out with me.  As a result for many years now I haven't told potentials my limits or preferences in formal negotiations until after we've documented theirs.  (I'm a freak about negotiating as fully informed as possible.)  Regardless of why they lied, the lies damaged any foundation we might have built upon.  Abusers constantly lie to trick their victims and those around them so they can continue their abuse.

I think we can educate all we want but until we tackle the "need" to lie, the need to be in "real" relationship, and even the idea that you must be in a relationship to be kinky we will continue to struggle with abuse in BDSM.  Until we as a greater society deal with our constructed ideals of gender and sex and accept the naturalness of individualism then books like "Fifty Shades" will resonate with some people and reflect the reality of some people's lives.  It isn't erasing consent, it's pointing out the serious problems we have with consent right here, right now.

So those are my thoughts on the reality of kink and consent.  What's your experience?

Being a Writer or Wife or Mother IS a Full-time Job

The following are something things I've been carrying around in my heart for a long, long time now but a recent "offer" because I'm a "respected author" of a particular genre really has annoyed me this past week so I thought, what the heck, why not write about it?

My life didn't turn out the way I planned.  Big surprise to most women, heck most people, huh?  Life generally goes as it does and we can either deny reality or adjust.

I tried to adjust when it was taking too long to get through school and full secure enough for us to have kids... then it was simply too late and we were too happy with our adult only life to want to change things.

I tried to adjust when people I thought would be part of my household long term turned out to be liars or simply made economic choices that left us out of their futures.

I tried to adjust when the brilliance of the USA attitude resulted in less educational spending than our world competition as the economy went south in 2007 just as I was on the job market finally.

I tried to adjust when we realized that I needed more interactions than being a freelance author by volunteering for things that are important to me in education and the arts.

I tried to adjust as my partners went on to more stressful but higher paying jobs by taking on more responsibilities at home without becoming everyone's mom or maid and making sure we all work on domestic matters.

But there is something I simply cannot and will not adjust to: People's belief that I have nothing to do and therefore they can call on me last minute, assume the things I do for or with them are the only things I have to do, and in general acting like I don't need to plan things out.

How do people show me the above?

They refuse or are unwilling to give me the information I need to make plans.

(For the love of... this is probably my biggest pet peeve for not being respected. Want cookies for your event? Tell me how many!  Want me to come and bring my books?  Tell me realistically how many sales I can expect.  Want me to speak to your group?  Given a topic or feedback on my ideas so I am appropriated for the audience!  Want me to come and have fun?  Then let me know the place and time for goodness sakes not this general afternoon or evening crap!)

They call me out of the blue to just talk about nothing, often interrupting something I had planned.

(You know what is great for just shooting the breeze?  Face-to-face chatting and email.  The first is just part of hanging out; the second allows both people to chat when they can.)

They make assumptions that I can just show up with only 24 hours or less notice and act so put out when I have plans or simply want to be with my family.

(I realize that not everyone is a planner or can be a planner.  See comments at the end for how I try to understand that but to be blunt, I often have to plan my freetime so I can do things "spontaneously.")

They can't seem to help put things away after we do something together -- leaving glasses, plates, napkins, etc. just laying around for me to pick up.

(When I visit someone. I always ask "where is your trash can" or "what should I do with this?" when I'm doing using something.  If I'm a repeat visitor I'll learn this and not bother my host any more with these questions but I try to leave the space I've been invited into at least as good as when I left it if at all possible.)

They make comments about my not having a "real job" or that it must be so good to have so much free time.

(This is so easy to do!  I've done it myself but it is still rude and annoying no matter who is doing it.)

They make me "promotional offers" that are really nothing more than an additional person for their event and expect me to do it for free or worse pay all my expenses even though I'm the "expert" they are asking for.

(I don't want to make money at conventions or lectures simply by having the event pay me.  I know there are people out there who charge speaker's fees but I don't not simply because I'm only a tiny fish but because I find it a way to separate yourself from the communities I think you should feel part of, if you don't admit it is only a business for you.  BUT I also am not wealthy, not even slightly, and if you want me to help you at an event because I'm published/smart/fun/whatever then help me cover my basic expenses.)

I consider the above attitudes and beliefs to be beyond rude and indeed downright insulting.

I'm a radical feminist, have been since before I was a teenager, and contrary to what neocons would have you believe, radical feminist has never degraded women who stayed at home to raise a family, take care of their house, did volunteer work, or were themselves engaged in the arts at home.  The entire point of radical feminism was to empower the woman (and by extension her children and future generations of men and women) to have the freedom to make choices about life.

Let's be realistic.  Choices are never completely free, never limitless.  Being able to make a choice involves having information about what is possible and having the support to make the choice and pursue the outcome you hope for.

When you act like you don't need to plan things out, when you walk out of my life suddenly, or when you lie to me, you are denying me the ability to make a choice just as much as if a government agency decided to limit my right to vote or make a medical decision.

In fact when we do this to each other, when we act like we shouldn't care about other people's lives in our private interactions, then why are we surprised by public and government insults to us.

We don't all act the same, not all of us are planners or volunteers or can grasp that time isn't readily available to everyone else.  But if you want to be with others, if you want to have your choices empowered, you better be willing to meet others halfway to how they do things or you may find yourself alone.

I try really hard to go halfway, to accept when plans don't work out, to adjust to life, to be realistic.

Sometimes I just have to say "I'm worth more" and demand the level of respect I try very hard to give to others.

Anyone else ever feel this way?

I'm betting you have, I'm betting you do, so please leave a comment and let me know.

Gut-Level Academics

I'm watching a television series with my partner, in this case "SeaQuest," and their third episode involves the finding of the sunken Library of Alexandria. The Academic in me, the one who is an ancient historian with graduate level work in archaeology and folklore, is going nuts as the dive teams are touching, unrolling, and just poorly storing every bloody artifact they find. I'm watching and cringing, making horrified noises, and from time to time yelling at the characters.

Your wet and you take out a scroll, why would that possibly be a problem?

 Of course I know this is just a television show and nothing they are touching or "finding" is real but this is a great example of how difficult it can be to enjoy popular culture when you an "expert".

 I'm sure most of you reading this have training or education or experiences that cause similar reactions when you are watching a TV show, a movie, reading a book, or checking out a play or piece of music even. Usually I can control this gut-level academic reaction so I can enjoy things with my family and friends. 

Today I would like to walk you through the steps I take to try to I enjoy what I'm watching/reading/etc without over-reacting. Let me say that I have a a very different expectation for scholarly or science documentaries about the ancient world than the expectations I have for pop culture or entertainment media.

 I have zero tolerance for misrepresentations of facts for documentaries and educational material but entertainment should first and foremost entertain the target audience and secondarily get the facts right.

 Yes, pop cultural use of history should still be historical, fictionalized events should still be logical and rational, reflecting the best information and playing with the unknown or the data that is debated. I think most mass media historical recreations or forays into the science of archaeology and related fields could be just as entertaining with the correct facts as with pure imagination. You just have to have better writers, better directors, better actors, and higher production values.

If you are on the History Channel or a documentary that is claiming to be fact then you have zero excuse for messing things up.  If you can't do better than a freshman in one of my university classes, you have no business being involved in making this program or show.

 When I'm watching something that is going to have a trigger period or science for me I try to do a few things so I can enjoy it.

 1. Repeat to myself -- it's just TV/movie/book... this can get tiresome depending on how bad the show is.  I find my tolerance is also based on other things going on in my life.

2. Watch with someone who knows nothing -- as they enjoy I hope to get caught up in their feelings.

3. Focus on the actors, costumes, set, etc. -- this works particularly well if the actors are attractive to me or are one of my favorites.

4. Research the show so I am aware of any problems -- this might seem like it would only rile me up more but actually I'm one of those folks who doesn't mind knowing the plot or the ending because I'm more interested in the journey. I find that knowing what is wrong before I start watching/reading/listening helps me ignore it, sort of a "someone else all ready bashed this, I can enjoy it!" feeling. For example before seeing "Troy" starring Brad Pitt you might want to read this review.

5. Remember that I can always turn it off -- unless I need to watch it for a class or because I've been asked to write a review, I don't have to watch it.  In a theater?  I can still walk out.  Have it on DVD?  Return it; this works great with Netflix because I get unlimited rentals each month so who cares if this one sucks.

So there you have it.  Yup, I can enjoy the ancient world in all aspects and still feel like a historian... usually.

Please tell me what you do to enjoy entertainment and still keep your expertise satisfied while you are watching mass media.

Note: The image is from http://blackandgoldreview.com, borrowed simply because I do not have the skills to capture my own stills from something I'm watching.

Another Author Reflects on: Fifty Shades & Lean In

As an author I am always asking myself what my responsibility to my audience is.  Recently two literary phenomena -- the Lean In proposal and the success of the Fifty Shades trilogy -- caught my attention in Vanessa Garcia's article in the online news and blog website called the Huffington Post.  In several ways I was in agreement with Garcia, and yet something really annoyed about her essay, almost as annoyed as I was with the four books, their popularity, and the discussions of these books I see at least weekly.  Let me see if I can get that out there for you all to think about and respond to, please.

General criticisms of E.L. James's trilogy look at the story’s poorly edited and weakly constructed nature, a fanfiction that became popular enough to justify tweeting and publication by Vintage Books.  Who is to blame for the less-than-sterling prose and predictable, often frustrating plot?  At the foundation the author is claiming responsibility because she "created" the story; however, if readers had not flocked to the story online, she might not have continued it and very likely would not have re-crafted it for mainstream publication.  However, as an author I can tell you that the errors that plague these books fall very heavily onto the shoulders of the editors and proofreaders at Vintage Books, too.  An author can get easily lost in her own creation, so having a second, third, even fourth pair of eyes and an engaged mind is very important for us: that is a role that agents and editors should be playing.

Further complaints about the trilogy look at the relationship between the two main characters. These complaints come from a range of people: feminists angry at the submissive model of Anastasia; anti-sex folks annoyed at what they call vulgar passages; kinky folks both thrilled and terrified that it will attract others to BDSM.  If you are a kinky person and have these worries, Peter Tupper's book to the left (the icon on the left) may help you understand what is going on in this series.  The Fifty Shades trilogy has been called anything from "romantic," to "eye-opening," to "trash," and even "dangerous" for the readers. However, these fears and praises seem to buy into a few stereotypes that are simply not correct though a recent study suggests that the relationships shown in the book are undoubtedly abusive.

First, there is this very odd but very common belief that if you read a book and enjoy it, that must mean you will try to behave and think exactly like the characters in the book. The same concern exists for the Lean In book from Sheryl Sandberg, if you look at some of the criticisms her non-fiction book has received. Several critics have suggested that if women follow her advice it will set women as a group back by decades in the workforce.

Let's be honest: Authors have no magical power to control their readers.  Hell, if we did, we wouldn't be making only 5-10% royalties, and we wouldn't have to work our tails off marketing our own books. Not to mention the fact that our world would be incredibly unstable as the new book of the week shifted all of its readers' behaviors and attitudes. The reality is that just because you read a book, it does not mean it will change your life. As an author I can say that I hope what I write gets my reader to think, but given some of the emails I've gotten over the years I have to say that what someone gets out of my work may have very little to do with what I had in mind or the actual words I used. Sometimes my readers' reactions are a bit disconcerting for me when they fall in love with the baddie or walk away with a message different from the one I was trying to convey.  The reader's life and beliefs, heck, even what he smoked today or what she drank last night, can change how they understand any book, fiction or non-fiction.

What about if you enjoy the book?  Surely someone who enjoys a book will put those ideas into action, right?  Really?  Do I even have to address this one?  How many of you out there have self-help books just lying about your place that you've read, felt really connected with you, and then, well, you just never got around to it?  Yup, that's right.  Most readers will never take that next step for even the most general of self-help books, so what makes anyone think they are actually going to put a fictional scenario into practice for more than a few dates or scenes?  For all of the kink groups that have seen an up-tick in attendance, how many of them will see those same newcomers in a year, or two, or a decade from now?  You can't even keep folks who found kink by themselves in your clubs for more than a few years at most before there is burnout or just plain disgust with all the politicking.

There will be a minority of people who do try out the ideas in these four books. In the case of Sandberg's ideas, they might work for some women, and they might not for others, but the fact is that anyone who works at any type of job and those of us who stay home are constantly negotiating our position in the world, in our families, and in our own minds.  If Lean In sounds like something that might help you, give it a try; just don't expect your coworker to try it, too.  In the Fifty Shades trilogy the issue is perhaps a bit more risky.  Poorly-understood and -described sex might be copied and prove damaging to those trying things out.  If you are going to write about sex, I'm a big believer in figuring out what works and writing it realistically.  On the other hand, readers should be adult enough to do enough research or go slowly enough that they minimize risk, but we also know we live in a lawsuit-crazy society where folks sue companies over hot coffee that was surprisingly hot.  Authors vary in how much responsibility they want to take for such depictions.

The other area of potential harm that many critics cite is the relationship models shown in the books.  In short, these critics claim that all four books promote a sexist view; they encourage women (mostly) and men to continue to live in a way that is harmful to women (and somewhat to men).  I don't think any of the five authors on Butt-Kicking Women Write About It are cool with sexism, but this worry, which I've seen expressed about all four of these books, is really very burdened by its own sexism.  Let me try to explain what I mean.

Just as you really can't believe that everyone who reads and enjoys a book will do what the book says, neither can you believe that readers must identify only with a character of the same sex, race, or any other category they might fall into.  Over the generations enough little girls have grown up to reject the "boys as active, girls as support systems" model from literature to create political and social movements as well as private lives that demonstrated that those models were more a matter of nurture than of nature. Little boys, too, did not always buy into the role models they were given in books or anywhere else, and those men then supported the changes in the laws, and society as well, that have increased rights for people who did not look like them.  While it may seem more reasonable that one would identify with a character or author of the same sex, that implies that humans beings always behave in a reasonable and predictable fashion.  As a historian I can tell you that such generalities are never universals.  To be more specific to these four books, when the Fifty Shades series was getting the first media attention, I recall several reports in which male readers who were interviewed explicitly identified with Anastasia and not Christian at all. This finding would not surprise anyone who recalls the studies of Nancy Friday and other sex researchers before and after her.  Of course, there were some people interviewed who said they didn't identify with either character, too, but who cares about those folks, right?

So if the problem can't really be about the reader identifying with one particular character or situation and then putting that identification into action, what is the real problem these criticisms are trying to get at?

The problem these critics are trying to express in greater or lesser degrees all deal with the idea that women should be or are submissive.  This rubs me wrong in two main ways, not because I wouldn't have a problem with this idea (I do) or that it hasn't been used repeatedly to control women (it has and is) but that there are innate problems with some of the interpretations of this idea.

The first is that submission is weakness, that it is an extreme loss of power, and that lacking equality is an incredibly horrific condition for anyone to exist in.  While I cannot personally grok the appeal of sexual (or other types of) submission, I am not foolish enough to think that I have never and will never have to submit to another human being.  We submit to other human beings all the time. Why is submission a good thing in one situation but a bad thing in another?  For some it is a matter of force versus consent.  For others it is a matter of nature versus nurture.  The issue of submission is very complex, and few criticisms of James or Sandberg spend the time necessary to really grapple with it.  Just saying that it's wrong to show women as submissive is shortchanging the realities of human life. Just saying that it makes you uncomfortable and therefore it must be wrong, period, seems like a last-ditch attack from a grade schooler.

The second problem that I see with the criticism of these books is one of overinterpreting what the author is saying.  This happens increasingly all the time online and even in discussions held among friends.  The problem is that unless an author states clearly and every time that she (or he) is only talking about a very specific person or small group, the readers (fans and critics alike) often assume she (or he) is talking about everyone.  This assumption somehow attempts to make the author responsible both for the words she wrote and the ones she didn't write.  Sometimes authors are indeed putting forth such general ideas that they are pushing a sexist or racist or whatever -ist agenda that you can imagine.  When they do that, you can rightly critique that view.  But often it isn't a matter of what the author writes (or doesn't), but what the reader feels or thinks, that is the cause of this "it applies to every (fill in the category)."  As an author I need to take responsibility for what I write; as a reader you need to take responsibility for any interpretations that go beyond my words.

If these four books really did say, “every woman needs to be submissive,” I would feel that some criticisms of them are justified, simply because this idea is just a flat-out lie.  I don’t think they do say this; please, someone out there, if I’m incorrect in my understanding of them, prove this to me.

But even if these books did say that every woman should be/must be submissive, they wouldn’t be saying anything new, nor would they be promoting the only message out there for women and men to read.  That's a cultural problem, one that goes beyond the individual author into the history of our world and the way we raise children and reward each other for our behaviors and attitudes.

The Fifty Shades trilogy and Lean In are just the latest books to cause a furor about sex and gender roles.  The books don't, and can't, create sexism, any more than they can magically cure it.  Instead of getting angry with the authors, look to yourself and ask yourself if you are willing to admit that you, too, are buying into the stereotypes. Then ask if you are willing to do something about it, such as buying other books and spread the word, or even writing and publishing your own.  I do want to thank Garcia for her article that created my desire to write this week, because she has taken that step, even if I don't agree with everything she wrote, by making it personal and  not applying her response to every woman out there.

See you next Friday and go have a piece of good chocolate this weekend!