In “VIDA Counts The Rumpus” two female writers from VIDA: Women in Literary Arts “crunch the numbers and let us know how The Rumpus is doing in the gender disparity department.” The verdict: we’re kinda sexist, but not as sexist as most places; that’s what the numbers say at least.
But what do the people–the women, us motherfuckers–behind the numbers say? I said the following in the comments section of “VIDA Counts The Rumpus,” and I repost it now as a suggested addendum to the piece.
**
Dear Susan and Cate and Rumpus readers and all women and all men and everyone in-between:
While I find the mission and effort behind this article important, the reductionist quality of this list fails to capture the full picture of how women are represented at The Rumpus. Now, I’m the first to play the numbers game and expose the sexist literary world for what it really is and bemoan to my girlfriends about the lack of [insert what you think is lacking here: tampons, for instance].
But the VIDA numbers don’t address what I did last night.
Last night I missed The Rumpus Summer Shakedown co-hosted and co-produced by Rumpus regular contributor and powerhouse Rozalia Jovanovic. I missed seeing Jessi Klein and Sara Marcus and Corrina Bain in New York. I missed The Monthly Rumpus in San Francisco and couldn’t see one of my favorite writers and friends, the unmatched Katie Crouch. Last night/this morning I worked until 4am on the Funny Women column, our 31st, for today, written by the talented Jennine Capó Crucet. Last night I talked to senior literary editor Julie Greicius about sending Rumpus Women, Volume I to the printer. Here are some numbers for that: 20 female contributors, 2 female editors, 1 first book by The Rumpus Paper Internets.
VIDA, I think the work you do is awe-inspiring. I stand behind it, and I’ll stand beside you.
But I wanted to provide a real human woman’s voice who works behind the numbers you’ve listed. I needed to say something because numbers alone divide and underrepresent the tremendous work I, and countless other Rumpus volunteers, try to do for women and for people in general. I started Funny Women for the express purpose of giving women a room of their own on the Internet. But your numbers don’t reflect that. The numbers don’t reflect my entire life’s mission, nor do they capture one of my life’s challenges . . . see my question to Dearest Sugar that provoked my dad, worried and upset with what I wrote, to question why I write at all if it can hurt so much and if people can read it.
He asked me, “Why write for The Rumpus? Why make this public?” And it was difficult to answer him. “For money.” No, I don’t get paid at all. “For fame.” No, I don’t have enough Twitter followers. “For other women like me to read and identify and learn as I learn.” Yeah, that’s why I do it. That’s why I make it public. I do it for women like me, and I do it for me, because I have something to say–something that I think (hope, pray) other people want to hear, and I’m lucky to have a platform and a community of writers who let me speak my truth and help me edit books & columns and push me to be better.
And when I say “push me to be better,” I mean “push me to stop thinking I need to be better,” which is the point I’m trying to make regarding your article. While I think The Rumpus needs to be better in light of your findings, I think even more that we need to refocus on how fucking awesome we already are.
7 responses
Why does this get to be the addendum to the piece? It’s too combative, too angry, too, well, self-aggrandizing to represent the conversation in the comments section.
May I submit these comments instead. Addendum addendum, if you will.
1. Julianna Baggott:
A female reader –
A. I’m not worried about Cate and Susan writing something to take off the top of my head. I appreciate your concerns over their writing time. But, too, you could be annoyed with me as a writer playing too much badminton. We all decide where our time goes. This seems a worthy use of it for women writers everywhere. In fact, a generous gift. Why?
B. Because Every time a female writer states what so many of us believe to be true — that male writers get more print and accolades — there’s always someone who says: prove it. Cate and Susan have set to work to do just that.
C. Why are numbers important? Because I don’t think anyone is intentionally trying to keep female writers down. Not at all. This is a blind bias. Once we see the numbers, acknowledge it’s there, then we can talk about it, think about it.
D. No one’s talking quotas. Discussion sounds good to me, though.
All my best,
Julianna Baggott
2. Brian Spears:
I fear that the politics of polarization VIDA is pursuing will cause us to focus on the wrong things in literature: He v. She, instead of: What’s in the work, and is it the best work, and does it advance the cause of literature?
I emphasized that part because it seems to me that whenever this sort of conversation starts, someone makes this argument, and frankly, it drives me insane, because it suggests that there is some objective way to measure what is the best work. There isn’t. We all, as writers or readers or both, value different things in writing, and so what one person finds to be the best writing, another finds to be tedious and unreadable. And I’m not just talking about differences in personal taste here either. I’m talking about what different readers, different critics, different writers value, what they consider necessary to a piece of literature for it to be great.
I think that the way publishers and reviewers approach work written by women and people of color and the LGBT community and other ignored and under-represented communities is just as important as what’s in the work because most people will never know what’s in those books if reviewers don’t face their unconscious biases and start presenting those voices to the mainstream of readers. To act as though great work from underrepresented communities will somehow magically bubble to the surface is to ignore all evidence to the contrary, and it’s become clear from the general response to this movement that the major players 1) aren’t paying attention to those underrepresented communities and 2) that if they’re going to change, it won’t be because they discovered the problem on their own. I think that if you want to advance the cause of literature, you have to do things like what VIDA is doing, because otherwise the gatekeepers will continue to privilege straight white male authors and limit access from everyone else.
Can’t we just all get along?
Why, Sven? Because she said so, that’s why. You have the right to your editorial suggestion, but at the Rumpus, female editors have the right to assert their opinions, sometimes above all others. Terribly unfair, isn’t it?
Elissa and Sven~ When I first discovered The Rumpus, I noticed that most of the columnists were dudes (whom I respect and like a lot), most of the books reviewed were written by guys and outside of his erotic interests, most of Stephen Elliott’s compliments were directed towards male authors, artists and his man-crushes.
It’s not a blame-game, it’s a fact: women writers are often discredited, under-represented and dismissed. We have to work harder for recognition and be tenacious as fuck-Elissa spoke to this in her expanded letter above.
Sven insinuated that in order to advance literature, we have to call out publishers on this problem or “the gatekeepers will continue to privilege straight while ale authors and limit access from everyone else.” I can’t imagine anyone disagreeing with that. The publishing industry has always been a men’s club. It’s a symptom of the culture we live in. VIDA’s numbers prove that but It’s nothing new. There are the facts. Now, what do we do about it?
In defense of the hard-working-for-free editors and columnists at The Rumpus, I know one thing is certain: The editors would not accept a piece if it wasn’t GOOD. They are astute editors. Straight shooters. I think they would consider themselves sensitive to women’s issues.
How many submissions does the Rumpus get from women? Do we need to get more women to submit?
What are we going to do about it?
I propose this:
1. Write like crazy every day for hours
2. Submit like a motherfucker
3. Never, never give up
I know that the film section wasn’t counted for some reason, but I’ll weigh in anyhow with my experience, apropos of Antonia’s comment above.
Last year and earlier this year when I had much more time for editing, I made a concerted effort to cultivate women who were interested in contributing to the section. And I had some success with that, but not enough to satisfy me. I don’t know how the number of female contributors vs. male contributors breaks down in the film section, but it was really pretty much impossible to keep up the parity given the fact that over time, way more men have submitted pieces and pitches to me (and they’ve submitted more of them) than women have — even when I actively solicit reviews from previous contributors. Why this has been so is something I don’t really have an answer for, lots of hypotheses but few facts. All I’m saying is: I’ve been trying. The submission pool has not really been supporting my aims in that department.
As to the actual number of pieces written by men as opposed to those by women, in 2010 the situation has been like this: a few guys who contribute prolifically, and a few gals who contribute sporadically, and a good number of contributors of both genders who have written one or a couple things and then I never hear from them again.
I wanted to add: I do know why 2010 has been like this in terms of the raw number of pieces by men vs. those by women: the men I mentioned who have contributed a lot, as far as I understand they are older and have settled lives, whereas the women who have been contributing are much younger and consequently have more life disruptions to deal with, and the Rumpus is (understandably) at the bottom of their list of worries.
Jeremy Hatch and the four people who are still reading this,
My apologies for the typo in my quote from Sven. It should read, “The gatekeepers will continue to privilege straight white male authors and limit access from everyone else.†I am going on very little sleep. My writing life is currently being interrupted with my occupation which involves swinging from poles in a chimney (stripclub) in New Orleans. I’m not saying I don’t enjoy it somewhat, it’s just what’s happening.
Your comments are thoughtful, and suggest an awareness of class and privilege, which is what this conversation is about.
It seems the solution is: we need more women to submit to The Rumpus, we need more women to write good books, and we need more women reviewing them.
Click here to subscribe today and leave your comment, or log in if you’re already a paid subscriber.