(no subject)

[nolly]

Went to the Mysterious Galaxy holiday party Saturday.

13 authors came to talk about their books.

4 were male, at least one was not white. [1]

Of the 9 women, at least 2 were not white.

Eliminating the authors of straight mystery (no obvious supernatural or fantastic element), memoir (one of Shel Silverstein's best friends) and a cookbook-for-charity, those numbers become 3 men (still at least one not-white), and 6 women (still at least 2 not-white).

Tell me again how the SF/F field is dominated by white men, aas has been claimed? No, really, show me some numbers. Not one anthology among dozens, but the field as a whole. Because I look at the new releases, and I just do not see it.


[1] Sometimes people who look Caucasian to me identify as other-than-Caucasian, and that's fine, but since the subject did not come up explicitly, I can only go by my best guess. Sexuality also did not come up, and that's not something I'm likely to guess with anything like accuracy, so I won't bother trying.

Comments

[tablesaw]

Race only

[nolly.livejournal.com]

That's a very out-of-date and/or incomplete listing -- as it says, "Subject to infrequent updates" (emphasis mine), which uses an odd definition of local (I know where some, but not all, of them live, and at least one is out of state), and it's not limited to SF/F, but includes plain mystery as well. It's still about half women, and both attributes are important to my point, which has as much to do with gender as race, if not more so.

[nolly.livejournal.com]

(To re-phrase -- "SF/F is dominated by white people" would be a much more defensible position, but is not the assertion that was made in the conversation to which I am responding.)

[tablesaw]

Thanks for the clarification.

When you say "dominate" are you thinking in terms of numbers or power/influence? I think that in terms of race, it's clearly both, but at this point men "dominate" SF/F more interms of having a distinct power advantage more than having a distinct numerical advantage (though there is a numerical advantage too). And although that is and has been changing, that doesn't mean that it's yet been changed.

Here's a list of statistics regarding gender, presented in an annoyingly haphazard manner. Most recent data is from 2007, I think, and comparison of the Locus numbers generally indicates a general shift of from 30% to 40%. (Though the "Big 4" story mags have remained steady.)

Power is more complex than presence, because it starts to get into areas about subgenres that have more influence and stuff like that. A survey would be interesting, but I don't know that one's actually been done. But if you were to reckon things differently, and to consider the individuals who you feel "dominate" the field, would white men be the majority? The vast majority? The plurality? And would you imagine your individuals would align with the list of others?

[nolly.livejournal.com]

I find that numbers and power are inextricably linked. I don't think the distinction was made previously, and the conversation elsewhere ended with no conclusion when my objection to having my experience dismissed with "You're wrong because I say so" was taken as a flounce, and we all disengaged. I will look at the links you provided later; it's time to exit the office, so I'm going to hit save and the road in that order.

[nolly.livejournal.com]

The Broad Universe stats are interesting; I'd like to see it updated a bit more -- some sections go to 2007. but others stop at 1999 or 2000. I'd really like to see how the Locus numbers change under the new leadership, but that'll take a while yet. The Strange Horizons article is perfectly sensible; editors can't publish what isn't submitted, and the publication numbers are in line with the submission numbers, according to her data.