Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Thread gallery
6
TempestTost · 02/12/2023 19:35

Yeah, I don't think fiction is by any means overwhelmingly male dominated.

ArthurbellaScott · 02/12/2023 20:48

AppleCrispMacchiato · 02/12/2023 16:56

It wasn't the same student making both statements

Then surely that's just the case that different people have different opinions?

90-95% of published authors are white, only a tiny handful ever become the subject of a Twitter campaign or "cancelled" (and being "cancelled" rarely amounts to more than a few tweets, some people have received massive career boosts and received a huge amount of PR from claiming to have been cancelled), so clearly the current situation is perfectly fine for the vast, vast majority of white writers who write anything they like and don't get criticised for it.

I don't know why we're acting like this is a major problem, when evidently there are thousands of white writers happily writing books that are exclusively about white characters without any criticism, and thousands of white writers writing books about minority characters without any criticism?

Writing, and also giving preference to "diverse" candidates in other employment areas.
But that's obviously not the case when the overwhelming majority of people working in publishing are privately educated and white British, 90-95% of published author are white, and overwhelmingly male-dominated to boot.

Where's your stats coming from, please?

ArthurbellaScott · 02/12/2023 20:52

TempestTost · 02/12/2023 19:35

Yeah, I don't think fiction is by any means overwhelmingly male dominated.

Depends which parts. Certain parts of the industry are male dominated, some others are female dominated.

I found some stats that correlate roughly with those a pp posted, from ALCS.

https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/international/international-book-news/article/79990-u-k-writing-scene-is-overwhelmingly-white-study-finds.html

'A total of 94% of authors in the U.K. are white, with 2% Asian, 2% mixed race, and 1% black. (4% identify as "other.") The most recent census, in 2011, put the white population of the U.K. at 86%'

U.K. Writing Scene Is 'Overwhelmingly White,' Study Finds

New research shows 94% of British professional authors are white, which Society of Authors chief executive Nicola Solomon says has implications for writing becoming an elitist profession.

https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/international/international-book-news/article/79990-u-k-writing-scene-is-overwhelmingly-white-study-finds.html

AppleCrispMacchiato · 02/12/2023 21:21

Pretty surprising to see Feminist Chat argue that publishing doesn't have a sexism problem.

Look at actual peer reviewed journal articles, and not woke newspapers like the Guardian. Overwhelmingly, men are more likely to be published, more likely to be nominated for awards, more likely to receive media attention, and the publishing industry itself has a gender pay gap. There's also a lot of systemic sexism within publishing, with women perceived as only fit to write certain genres, and those genres being undermined due to their perception as being feminist.

Talk to any working female author about their experiences of the publishing industry, it's still a very very sexist industry. The 'wokeness' is just for show. Publishing isn't diverse or woke at all.

BinturongsSmellOfPopcorn · 02/12/2023 21:38

those genres being undermined due to their perception as being feminist

Female, rather than feminist?

WoollyBat · 02/12/2023 21:38

This reply has been withdrawn

This message has been withdrawn at the poster's request

AppleCrispMacchiato · 02/12/2023 21:43

BinturongsSmellOfPopcorn · 02/12/2023 21:38

those genres being undermined due to their perception as being feminist

Female, rather than feminist?

Wow, Freudian slip there!

Yes, I meant female.

Gender identity must be an absolute godsend to employers who want to score well on measures of diversity and equality without actually doing the expensive and difficult work necessary to recruit and retain a truly diverse workforce.

Yep, exactly.

They’re still white posh middle/upper class people and their use of gender identity to tick the DEI box means publishing can stay that way.

EXACTLY!! I was just ranting about that the other day, the team comprises six Eton grads but they're "diverse" because 2 of them identify as non-binary.

ArthurbellaScott · 02/12/2023 23:21

AppleCrispMacchiato · 02/12/2023 21:21

Pretty surprising to see Feminist Chat argue that publishing doesn't have a sexism problem.

Look at actual peer reviewed journal articles, and not woke newspapers like the Guardian. Overwhelmingly, men are more likely to be published, more likely to be nominated for awards, more likely to receive media attention, and the publishing industry itself has a gender pay gap. There's also a lot of systemic sexism within publishing, with women perceived as only fit to write certain genres, and those genres being undermined due to their perception as being feminist.

Talk to any working female author about their experiences of the publishing industry, it's still a very very sexist industry. The 'wokeness' is just for show. Publishing isn't diverse or woke at all.

Who's argued that there isn't sexism?

The VIDA count used to be good for looking at different aspects of sex in publishing, although it has since gone down the 'all identities' route so lost its focus entirely.

While there are more books published by women (it's not true that men are more likely to be published, at least not in fiction, that could differ if you look at different sectors), the review/award situation is ... interesting.

(I think the fourth paper you quote is 'women published in computer science', as far as I can tell? APSEC is to do with that field? It's a bit niche!)

ArthurbellaScott · 02/12/2023 23:22

'in editorial it’s only a slight exaggeration to say everyone is from private school, 28, white, straight and called Harriet or Sarah. Until you get to higher management level then they are all 45+, white, straight, shagging Harriet or Sarah (but married to whoever was Harriet or Sarah 10 years ago and is now at home with the kids) went to private school and called Paul or Nigel.'

😂

Barbadossunset · 03/12/2023 00:00

EXACTLY!! I was just ranting about that the other day, the team comprises six Eton grads but they're "diverse" because 2 of them identify as non-binary.

Which publishing company is this?

AppleCrisp

MorrisZapp · 03/12/2023 00:14

ArthurbellaScott · 02/12/2023 23:22

'in editorial it’s only a slight exaggeration to say everyone is from private school, 28, white, straight and called Harriet or Sarah. Until you get to higher management level then they are all 45+, white, straight, shagging Harriet or Sarah (but married to whoever was Harriet or Sarah 10 years ago and is now at home with the kids) went to private school and called Paul or Nigel.'

😂

This is brilliant!

WoollyBat · 03/12/2023 10:12

I feel bad about saying that now! Because I actually work with some really nice people who don’t all fit the description. And even if they do it’s not really their fault for getting themselves a job that tends to be looking for them IYSWIM.

But the sexism in the hierarchical structures is really obvious and everyone is just so posh. I feel like the class non-diversity is the most powerful one in publishing, though others are significant too.

WoollyBat · 03/12/2023 10:47

As for the DEI thing in general - both using gender identity as a handy non-status-quo-disrupting DEI, and signing up / putting call-outs for submissions from anyone who’s a ethnic minority, LGBTQ+++, neurodivergent and so on regardless of the quality (I’m not saying the quality is any less overall, but as per the thread title, bad decisions are made on this basis).

I don’t actually think any of this is motivated by a conscious wish (except maybe in the most ultra cynical execs) to DEI-wash publishing while really keeping the internal structures and staff as ruling-class and hegemonous as possible.

I think it’s motivated by cultural cringe in well-meaning arts graduates who lack rigorous thinking skills and really think they are being kind and trying to be a good person and so letting themselves off the hook for being privileged. It’s an overall effect caused by ultimately selfish (but not consciously so) purity spiralling.

Barbadossunset · 03/12/2023 16:50

I feel bad about saying that now! Because I actually work with some really nice people who don’t all fit the description.

WoollyBat? Really? Still, I suppose it’s an enjoyable opportunity to do some social stereotyping. I wonder what they think of you.

WoollyBat · 03/12/2023 17:47

WoollyBat? Really? Still, I suppose it’s an enjoyable opportunity to do some social stereotyping. I wonder what they think of you.

Yes, it is an exaggerated stereotype, though based on a pretty real situation. And as I said I don’t work in-house and know I wouldn’t fit in - I am no good at office politics and schmoozing and I’m GC, so it would be hell.

I do feel bad about it as I said, and was saying having a rant really. Not so much because this culture is posh - that’s not a crime - but in light of the self-declared wokery and claims to DEI it pisses me off.

I know what they think of me - they think I’m odd and blunt (I am).

Barbadossunset · 03/12/2023 18:42

WoollyBat you and others who have commented on this thread have worked in publishing so you’d know more about it than me but it seems odd that an industry which is run by white, half-witted Etonians should then refuse to publish books written by similar, especially if they don’t make money.
Then a lot of things in this world are odd, I suppose.
Re the ones which identify as non-binary, is this just for work- so once they leave the office they return to being GC?

WoollyBat · 03/12/2023 18:52

Because they’re trying to feel better about being white.

TempestTost · 03/12/2023 21:31

It's odd that they can't seem to recognize a compelling story, or one that is really shit, when they read it.

Maybe that is a low level observation, but I mean - isn't that the most basic part of choosing books for a publishing house?

WoollyBat · 04/12/2023 07:41

To be fair, lots of bad books are published and always have been. They may sell for various reasons and a book can be terrible in terms of bad writing, cliche, holey plot etc and still be a bestseller. It might be the name, the genre, many people enjoy an unchallenging cliched read as it’s comforting - a successful publisher identifies what will sell not just what’s full of merit. That does involve picking up on the zeitgeist too - so this headline seems to be about assuming readers as a whole are riding the same “woke” zeitgeist trends as literary and arty circles, and it seems they’re not (or less so).

RebelliousCow · 04/12/2023 07:53

Virtue signallers don't read actual books or newspapers, they just look at twiitter or social media.

HoneyButterPopcorn · 04/12/2023 09:01

Short attention span. If its over 280 characters years it’s just too exhausting…

When I were a lass… if I was interested in a topic I would read several books from different authors/viewpoints to get a wide scope. People seem to be less inclined to try to explore these days.

Barbadossunset · 04/12/2023 11:05

WoollyBat · Yesterday 18:52

Because they’re trying to feel better about being white

So do these poshos join publishing because if they feel guilty about being white, it’s a good career to follow
Or, do they not feel guilty about being white but then go to work for publishers and realise that unless they say they feel guilty they won’t get promoted?

Swipe left for the next trending thread