Romance Whiters of America
December 24, 2019 12:08 PM Subscribe
Calling out racism continues to be worse than actually being racist. Courtney Milan, who is well known for calling out problems in both Romancelandia and the legal world, was the subject of complaints from people she publicly accused of racism. The Romance Writers of America has now suspended her from the organization for a year and banned her from holding executive positions for life. She was previously a member of the RWA Board. Judges for the RWA's RITA awards are resigning in protest. [Racism in Romancelandia, previously]
Thanks for the post, OP. I can’t imagine the RWA will back down but I hope they do.
posted by Bella Donna at 12:39 PM on December 24, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Bella Donna at 12:39 PM on December 24, 2019 [1 favorite]
I've been watching this unfold on Twitter and hoo boy, I don't see how RWA recovers from this. I'm sure that there are lots of silent racists who don't post on Twitter, but the Twitter response is basically unanimously siding with Milan, and a lot of it is coming from authors, including some very popular authors. My sense is that if someone founded a rival organization for non-racist and anti-racist romance writers, a lot of top authors would join it. I'm wondering if there are going to end up being two parallel structures: awards for racist white authors and separate awards for everyone else; a convention for racist white ladies and a separate one for everyone else, etc.
I don't understand why the fuck they did this. It seems so very, very stupid, not to mention evil.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 1:09 PM on December 24, 2019 [40 favorites]
I don't understand why the fuck they did this. It seems so very, very stupid, not to mention evil.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 1:09 PM on December 24, 2019 [40 favorites]
The difficulty with a parallel organization is that RWA although people mostly know the RWA from the big conferences and RITAS, the organization is actually based in dozens of local affiliate chapters that have local events and workshops for local authors and wannabe authors. Replacing that structure is more difficult than starting a single new organization.
Might still be necessary given the unrepentant fuckwittery of the RWA, but won't be easy.
posted by jacquilynne at 1:16 PM on December 24, 2019 [3 favorites]
Might still be necessary given the unrepentant fuckwittery of the RWA, but won't be easy.
posted by jacquilynne at 1:16 PM on December 24, 2019 [3 favorites]
I don't understand why the fuck they did this.
Because the only people allowed to tell white people they’re racist are other white people who couch it in terms like “Now, I know that you’re not... [whispers] racist, but what you said might, in the wrong light, at the wrong time of day, be seen by... y’know, some people, as a little... insensitive? So maybe don’t say it out loud next time?” until one or more of them dies.
posted by Etrigan at 1:25 PM on December 24, 2019 [86 favorites]
Because the only people allowed to tell white people they’re racist are other white people who couch it in terms like “Now, I know that you’re not... [whispers] racist, but what you said might, in the wrong light, at the wrong time of day, be seen by... y’know, some people, as a little... insensitive? So maybe don’t say it out loud next time?” until one or more of them dies.
posted by Etrigan at 1:25 PM on December 24, 2019 [86 favorites]
If you feel like being infuriated, check out Tisdale's 7 page formal complaint against Milan. After two full pages of tweets outlining the critique in detail, she has the nerve to write "She is accusing me of being a racist simply because I am white." Oh, the fragility!
posted by zeusianfog at 1:49 PM on December 24, 2019 [24 favorites]
posted by zeusianfog at 1:49 PM on December 24, 2019 [24 favorites]
(╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻
posted by Fizz at 2:01 PM on December 24, 2019 [9 favorites]
posted by Fizz at 2:01 PM on December 24, 2019 [9 favorites]
I really liked the detail that Milan is a Neo-Nazi, which is a group well-known for hating racist white people.
posted by jeather at 2:20 PM on December 24, 2019 [12 favorites]
posted by jeather at 2:20 PM on December 24, 2019 [12 favorites]
If you feel like being infuriated, check out Tisdale's 7 page formal complaint against Milan.
This is a good case to be made for the value of teaching rhetoric - she clearly believes she's making an argument obvious on its face when she is not. The paranoid leaps on page 5 would read better in cut-out newsprint.
posted by PMdixon at 2:26 PM on December 24, 2019 [4 favorites]
This is a good case to be made for the value of teaching rhetoric - she clearly believes she's making an argument obvious on its face when she is not. The paranoid leaps on page 5 would read better in cut-out newsprint.
posted by PMdixon at 2:26 PM on December 24, 2019 [4 favorites]
This post comes in handy to me because I wanted to use some Christmas gift certs to, in part, buy some romances, and this will let me know who could use some support, and vice versa. I've always liked Milan's work anyway.
posted by Countess Elena at 2:40 PM on December 24, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by Countess Elena at 2:40 PM on December 24, 2019 [5 favorites]
Milan's books almost single-handedly drew me back into romance after years of reading and writing in other genres. Her work raising awareness around D&I and workplace sexual harassment has been exemplary.
I look forward to joining whatever organization springs up to replace the racist RWA.
posted by rdc at 2:53 PM on December 24, 2019 [7 favorites]
I look forward to joining whatever organization springs up to replace the racist RWA.
posted by rdc at 2:53 PM on December 24, 2019 [7 favorites]
I can't find a list of who's on the ethics committee; that information may not be available to non-members. Apparently their decision was unanimous. They acknowledged that they don't have the power to control author activities on Twitter, but they want to reconsider that:
The board's decision to uphold the ethics committee's ruling was 10 yes, 5 no, 1 abstain. Here's the board. The person who recommended the specific penalties is the President-elect - the only man on the Board. Several Board members, including Damon Suede, have terms that end in August of 2020.
How hard would it be to get them replaced?
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 2:57 PM on December 24, 2019
Inasmuch as the committee felt its hands were tied in the matter of adjudicating postings on social media not operated by RWA, no matter how egregious the author’s intent, the committee recommends that the RWA Board revisit this matter in light of the circumstances of this complaint.They're looking for volunteers, or they were a couple of months ago.
The board's decision to uphold the ethics committee's ruling was 10 yes, 5 no, 1 abstain. Here's the board. The person who recommended the specific penalties is the President-elect - the only man on the Board. Several Board members, including Damon Suede, have terms that end in August of 2020.
How hard would it be to get them replaced?
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 2:57 PM on December 24, 2019
I don't understand why the fuck they did this.
One of the things that a lot of organizations are struggling with in a post-Twitter world is: what constitutes harassment, and most importantly, is truth a defense against harassment? Ie, does there exist a circumstance in which what “I’m just calling them what they actually are” works as a defense- and how do you handle it when people strongly disagree even on the meaning of words? This is before getting into the structural issues with romance publishing in the US - this is more generally applicable. The Internet works as a magnifying glass - when you call someone something on Twitter and point the way to find them, you’re essentially directing the mob. Sometimes for good, sometimes for ill, but it’s an enormous multiplier. I remember a few months ago when a lot of authors were all attacking one young woman who didn’t like a YA book. This world is messy and kind of ugly in general right now.
And in many ways, the concept of what is harassment is generational. I’m old enough that to me, sending people to talk in places you know the person will see about what a terrible person they are, or sending people to email or call someone’s boss to try to get them fired, is harassment. Even when I understand why it’s being done, it may make it righteous, but in my view that doesn’t change the definition of the term.
I can see why an organization focused on external image and protecting sales would not want this to be publicly coming from an elected officer - even, again, before even touching the special factors that make this a problem for the RWA. The rules - assuming they’re being quoted accurately - say that no RWA member should attempt to harm another RWA’s author’s career or reputation. Those rules have probably been violated. I don’t find any trouble believing that being called out as a racist right now by a prominent and beloved author would affect someone’s career in 2019.
Now the suspension? Yeah, that’s some bullshit. But I think there aren’t really good clear rules for “how do you enforce rules around harassment when someone’s doing it For Good” because that puts the ethics board folks in the job of deciding what’s righteous harassment and what isn’t.
posted by corb at 3:21 PM on December 24, 2019 [21 favorites]
One of the things that a lot of organizations are struggling with in a post-Twitter world is: what constitutes harassment, and most importantly, is truth a defense against harassment? Ie, does there exist a circumstance in which what “I’m just calling them what they actually are” works as a defense- and how do you handle it when people strongly disagree even on the meaning of words? This is before getting into the structural issues with romance publishing in the US - this is more generally applicable. The Internet works as a magnifying glass - when you call someone something on Twitter and point the way to find them, you’re essentially directing the mob. Sometimes for good, sometimes for ill, but it’s an enormous multiplier. I remember a few months ago when a lot of authors were all attacking one young woman who didn’t like a YA book. This world is messy and kind of ugly in general right now.
And in many ways, the concept of what is harassment is generational. I’m old enough that to me, sending people to talk in places you know the person will see about what a terrible person they are, or sending people to email or call someone’s boss to try to get them fired, is harassment. Even when I understand why it’s being done, it may make it righteous, but in my view that doesn’t change the definition of the term.
I can see why an organization focused on external image and protecting sales would not want this to be publicly coming from an elected officer - even, again, before even touching the special factors that make this a problem for the RWA. The rules - assuming they’re being quoted accurately - say that no RWA member should attempt to harm another RWA’s author’s career or reputation. Those rules have probably been violated. I don’t find any trouble believing that being called out as a racist right now by a prominent and beloved author would affect someone’s career in 2019.
Now the suspension? Yeah, that’s some bullshit. But I think there aren’t really good clear rules for “how do you enforce rules around harassment when someone’s doing it For Good” because that puts the ethics board folks in the job of deciding what’s righteous harassment and what isn’t.
posted by corb at 3:21 PM on December 24, 2019 [21 favorites]
I don’t find any trouble believing that being called out as a racist right now by a prominent and beloved author would affect someone’s career in 2019.
I can think of a really easy way to avoid being called out as a racist in 2019.
posted by Etrigan at 3:24 PM on December 24, 2019 [66 favorites]
I can think of a really easy way to avoid being called out as a racist in 2019.
posted by Etrigan at 3:24 PM on December 24, 2019 [66 favorites]
From the letter of judges resigning:
posted by clew at 4:17 PM on December 24, 2019 [20 favorites]
The organization’s stance is now that calling out any kind of problematic elements in a text are an attack on the author and that the feelings of authors are more important than those of readers. As librarians, reviewers, and critics, this is antithetical to our work and our purpose.The interests of professionals, their profession, their clients, and society don’t always align.
posted by clew at 4:17 PM on December 24, 2019 [20 favorites]
Well- sure, but you're also not a romance author with a thirty year old body of work, which is my other suspicion on why this is a particular mess for the RWA. I've read rather a lot of romance novels and there are some hugely problematic, hugely salable genres whose older offerings will make you cringe and handle the book with tongs. In fact, I'd be hard pressed to find a romance author who wrote in the 1990s that didn't have some immensely problematic past work on multiple levels.
If we're deconstructing the mass of mass-market paperback romances of that era, it's largely: "Here's a book for you, cishet women, in which an attractive cishet man for Reasons, doesn't do the things that you are upset that men currently do, and in which you are not subject to the problems of society that you currently feel, while still being imagination-trapped inside the patriarchy." There's books in which men rape women and then they fall in love with the women and the women fall back in love with them, which probably spoke deeply to women who often found themselves marrying the men who raped or in some way harmed them in the 1980s. There's lots of random sex enslavement, which spoke to women who had been told all their lives that they were filthy and dirty if they sought sex out, and who needed the fiction that it was something being forced on them - and those are largely racialized - my guess because it was the fiction that it being far away and with different people made it more accessible as a fantasy.
These aren't outliers - these are the giants of the genre. Nearly everyone indulged in it. If you find a romance author who wrote during that time with more than twenty books, they've got at least one horrific stinker. So for the RWA to say that it's okay to go after anyone with problematic past work, and that there's no line there as long as someone has written something problematic, is to say that nearly every older author - including the bestselling ones with sales in the tens of millions - is a possible target. And like - there are valid reasons to say that they should be! There are differing opinions on whether someone gets a pass on doing something thirty years ago that we realize was horrifically bad and people probably should have realized it was bad. But you probably can't operate a writing guild based on everyone being on the same side if you are having constant low-grade wars going on between your members.
I think probably the really best move is to have two separate organizations at this point - especially since the authors seem divided on what the purpose of an organization like that is for. And I'm sure if Courtney Milan leads the charge, there will be a lot of people signing onto it.
posted by corb at 4:27 PM on December 24, 2019 [34 favorites]
If we're deconstructing the mass of mass-market paperback romances of that era, it's largely: "Here's a book for you, cishet women, in which an attractive cishet man for Reasons, doesn't do the things that you are upset that men currently do, and in which you are not subject to the problems of society that you currently feel, while still being imagination-trapped inside the patriarchy." There's books in which men rape women and then they fall in love with the women and the women fall back in love with them, which probably spoke deeply to women who often found themselves marrying the men who raped or in some way harmed them in the 1980s. There's lots of random sex enslavement, which spoke to women who had been told all their lives that they were filthy and dirty if they sought sex out, and who needed the fiction that it was something being forced on them - and those are largely racialized - my guess because it was the fiction that it being far away and with different people made it more accessible as a fantasy.
These aren't outliers - these are the giants of the genre. Nearly everyone indulged in it. If you find a romance author who wrote during that time with more than twenty books, they've got at least one horrific stinker. So for the RWA to say that it's okay to go after anyone with problematic past work, and that there's no line there as long as someone has written something problematic, is to say that nearly every older author - including the bestselling ones with sales in the tens of millions - is a possible target. And like - there are valid reasons to say that they should be! There are differing opinions on whether someone gets a pass on doing something thirty years ago that we realize was horrifically bad and people probably should have realized it was bad. But you probably can't operate a writing guild based on everyone being on the same side if you are having constant low-grade wars going on between your members.
I think probably the really best move is to have two separate organizations at this point - especially since the authors seem divided on what the purpose of an organization like that is for. And I'm sure if Courtney Milan leads the charge, there will be a lot of people signing onto it.
posted by corb at 4:27 PM on December 24, 2019 [34 favorites]
The Board of Directors has rescinded Milan’s suspension pending legal review.
posted by Etrigan at 4:54 PM on December 24, 2019 [8 favorites]
posted by Etrigan at 4:54 PM on December 24, 2019 [8 favorites]
So for the RWA to say that it's okay to go after anyone with problematic past work, and that there's no line there as long as someone has written something problematic, is to say that nearly every older author - including the bestselling ones with sales in the tens of millions - is a possible target
Is a criticism of the work the same as "targeting the author"? Because I believe that's the question here; Milan has criticized past work, and the authors take it as a personal attack. I would argue that any author needs to be prepared for the fact that their work (of any vintage) will be criticized, sometimes sharply.
The "giants" of SF&F (my preferred genre) have not be immune from this, and I don't see why different rules should apply here or for works of any vintage; good criticism should point out problematic elements of a work.
posted by nubs at 5:21 PM on December 24, 2019 [26 favorites]
Is a criticism of the work the same as "targeting the author"? Because I believe that's the question here; Milan has criticized past work, and the authors take it as a personal attack. I would argue that any author needs to be prepared for the fact that their work (of any vintage) will be criticized, sometimes sharply.
The "giants" of SF&F (my preferred genre) have not be immune from this, and I don't see why different rules should apply here or for works of any vintage; good criticism should point out problematic elements of a work.
posted by nubs at 5:21 PM on December 24, 2019 [26 favorites]
“a gap between policy and process” from the rescinding pending review is a pretty great term of weaselwords art.
posted by Drastic at 5:22 PM on December 24, 2019 [9 favorites]
posted by Drastic at 5:22 PM on December 24, 2019 [9 favorites]
“a gap between policy and process” from the rescinding pending review is a pretty great term of weaselwords art.
Chuck Tingle could fill that gap.
posted by srboisvert at 6:00 PM on December 24, 2019 [37 favorites]
Chuck Tingle could fill that gap.
posted by srboisvert at 6:00 PM on December 24, 2019 [37 favorites]
pounded in the gap between policy and process
posted by poffin boffin at 6:44 PM on December 24, 2019 [103 favorites]
posted by poffin boffin at 6:44 PM on December 24, 2019 [103 favorites]
“a gap between policy and process”
That... is what you say when the ED/CEO makes a decision that contradicts policy set by the board, or staff makes a decision that contradicts operating policies and the CEO/ED makes this statement and fires someone.
They are the policy makers and were the decision making body, and they couldn't be more full of shit.
posted by avalonian at 6:59 PM on December 24, 2019 [6 favorites]
That... is what you say when the ED/CEO makes a decision that contradicts policy set by the board, or staff makes a decision that contradicts operating policies and the CEO/ED makes this statement and fires someone.
They are the policy makers and were the decision making body, and they couldn't be more full of shit.
posted by avalonian at 6:59 PM on December 24, 2019 [6 favorites]
"I've said this before and I'll say it again: Don't write books about how much a culture not your own sucks. Just don't. You're not going to get it right and you're going to sound like a fucking racist."
Courtney Milan tweeted this in August re: about all the Orientalist claptrap in a novel. Demure blue-eyed half Chinese woman only trained to please men escapes patriarchy for the boundless freedom of 1870s European society in which no woman was constrained by societal norms.
posted by spamandkimchi at 7:04 PM on December 24, 2019 [30 favorites]
Courtney Milan tweeted this in August re: about all the Orientalist claptrap in a novel. Demure blue-eyed half Chinese woman only trained to please men escapes patriarchy for the boundless freedom of 1870s European society in which no woman was constrained by societal norms.
posted by spamandkimchi at 7:04 PM on December 24, 2019 [30 favorites]
her bosom heaved as he thrust his questing fingers into the gap between policy and process and in one passionate sweep tore the figleaf aside
posted by flabdablet at 7:08 PM on December 24, 2019 [24 favorites]
posted by flabdablet at 7:08 PM on December 24, 2019 [24 favorites]
Corb, totally understand your position, however here's where things get shifty. Olivia Waite wrote to the ethics board over the summer about several issues wrt homophobic and racist harassment and was told that the Code of Conduct clause was "aspirational." This indicates inequitable application of the code of conduct.
posted by rednikki at 7:45 PM on December 24, 2019 [34 favorites]
posted by rednikki at 7:45 PM on December 24, 2019 [34 favorites]
This is so vile and I'm glad it's getting called out in a big way.
posted by Zed at 8:06 PM on December 24, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by Zed at 8:06 PM on December 24, 2019 [2 favorites]
I encourage everyone to follow rednikki's link there, it proves beyond all shadow of a doubt that there's no impartial process being followed, just racism all the way down.
posted by Proofs and Refutations at 8:21 PM on December 24, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by Proofs and Refutations at 8:21 PM on December 24, 2019 [7 favorites]
Olivia Waite wrote to the ethics board over the summer about several issues wrt homophobic and racist harassment and was told that the Code of Conduct clause was "aspirational."
I would like to change my vote to Burn It All Down.
posted by corb at 8:24 PM on December 24, 2019 [58 favorites]
I would like to change my vote to Burn It All Down.
posted by corb at 8:24 PM on December 24, 2019 [58 favorites]
"...aspirational in nature - they are intended to set the tone for member interactions."
Therefore, we as the Board see no need to hold ourselves to the standard that we wish the members would.
posted by nubs at 9:28 PM on December 24, 2019 [2 favorites]
Therefore, we as the Board see no need to hold ourselves to the standard that we wish the members would.
posted by nubs at 9:28 PM on December 24, 2019 [2 favorites]
About 90 percent of my copyediting and proofreading work right now is fiction, and about 90 percent of that is romance. It's a constant teeth-grinder for me, a middle-aged white cishet woman, when I read these things. This is an ongoing problem, and one the RWA has not effectively addressed either on a national level or within their chapters, especially in the Southern chapters and the middle of the country. But even here on the liberal left coast, I see this in writing groups I belong to, and it's maddening as hell.
I'm not on twitter, so this is the first I've heard of it, but in some small way, I guess I was unsurprised. When members are avidly defending the kinds of things I see them defend, and the organization never seems to make a concerted effort to educate, it's not a shock that this would blow up in their faces.
posted by kitten kaboodle at 10:23 PM on December 24, 2019 [4 favorites]
I'm not on twitter, so this is the first I've heard of it, but in some small way, I guess I was unsurprised. When members are avidly defending the kinds of things I see them defend, and the organization never seems to make a concerted effort to educate, it's not a shock that this would blow up in their faces.
posted by kitten kaboodle at 10:23 PM on December 24, 2019 [4 favorites]
Apparently it was not the ethics committee who made this decisions, it was a secret panel unknown to the actual ethics committee.
posted by jeather at 6:52 AM on December 25, 2019 [15 favorites]
posted by jeather at 6:52 AM on December 25, 2019 [15 favorites]
I think that anyone who fights effectively against institutional racism is going to be labeled a rabble-rouser. There is no way to effectively combat racism without making racists uncomfortable, and so there's no way to effectively combat racism while prioritizing the comfort of racists, which is what you have to do to appease people like the folks calling the shots at the RWA. And Courtney Milan tried really hard, for years, to reform the institution from the inside, to explain what was wrong and help them fix it. If she did it wrong, then there's no right way to do it, or at least no right way to do it that could actually change anything.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 7:02 AM on December 25, 2019 [28 favorites]
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 7:02 AM on December 25, 2019 [28 favorites]
So for the RWA to say that it's okay to go after anyone with problematic past work, and that there's no line there as long as someone has written something problematic, is to say that nearly every older author - including the bestselling ones with sales in the tens of millions - is a possible target.
It seems like there is an vast and unexplored patch of middle ground between this and the absurdly punitive (and, in view of the total insufficiency of the 'report' by the 'ethics committee', entirely opaque and objectively lacking in justification) approach they took. If there were acts of actual harassment this decision is intended to censure, then these would have been clearly laid out in the findings of the committee: there's no point in issuing an anti-harassment decision if you don't make clear what conduct you regard as wrong, unless your intention is to chill debate and silence those who share the views of the person accused.
Even on the surface facts of the case itself, without any context, this looks a lot more like an attempt at suppression than an attempt to prevent harassment. And, while the RWA clearly feels it has an interest in suppressing awareness of and discussion of racism, the only way that its board and committee members can believe that is if they're malignant racists.
posted by howfar at 8:57 AM on December 25, 2019 [6 favorites]
It seems like there is an vast and unexplored patch of middle ground between this and the absurdly punitive (and, in view of the total insufficiency of the 'report' by the 'ethics committee', entirely opaque and objectively lacking in justification) approach they took. If there were acts of actual harassment this decision is intended to censure, then these would have been clearly laid out in the findings of the committee: there's no point in issuing an anti-harassment decision if you don't make clear what conduct you regard as wrong, unless your intention is to chill debate and silence those who share the views of the person accused.
Even on the surface facts of the case itself, without any context, this looks a lot more like an attempt at suppression than an attempt to prevent harassment. And, while the RWA clearly feels it has an interest in suppressing awareness of and discussion of racism, the only way that its board and committee members can believe that is if they're malignant racists.
posted by howfar at 8:57 AM on December 25, 2019 [6 favorites]
Ok, so I have a question about this. The complaints were made by two people who are involved with (and in one case is the owner of) Glenfinnan Publishing, a new publishing company that was founded this summer. But the tweets that the complaints address grew out of a controversy about a third, unmentioned employee of that publishing company, Sue Grimshaw. I sort of followed this when it was happening, and the discussion was really about Grimshaw and only secondarily about Suzan Tisdale, who got involved because she decided to hire Grimshaw, who I think parted ways with her old employer after there was controversy about her being kinda racist. And the issues with Grimshaw were, first of all, that she had favorited a lot of gross Trump and Trump-adjacent tweets and, second of all, that people then went back and looked at her history as a buyer for Borders and realized that she had been deeply implicated in a system that segregated romance novels by black authors into a separate category, shelved in a separate section, where they were only seen by readers who sought out the African-American fiction section. People began to ask whey Glenfinnan hired her, and when Tisdale claimed that Grimshaw was no more racist than she, Tisdale, was, then people started asking some questions about Tisdale and her other employees. And those questions, not all the discussion about Grimshaw, is what the complaints are about, even though they were very much secondary to the whole Grimshaw controversy.
So basically, this all grew out of the controversy over Sue Grimshaw. And I guess I can see two ways that could affect things. One of them is that Grimshaw liked racist things on her Twitter account, but she liked racist things that were specifically related to Donald Trump and his defenders and hangers-on. So maybe this is political, and the RWA is worried that they're going to be accused of anti-conservative bias or whatever. And the second is that Grimshaw was a muckety-muck in the mainstream industry, and her racist history is the racist history of very powerful institutional actors. If it's ok to hold her to account for that history, then a lot of people and institutions with power are going to worry that they, too, are going to be held to account. And maybe that's who the RWA was thinking about when they decided to censure Courtney Milan, who is a popular and well-regarded author but whom they probably don't perceive as being as important as some of the behind-the-scenes industry actors.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 11:17 AM on December 25, 2019 [17 favorites]
So basically, this all grew out of the controversy over Sue Grimshaw. And I guess I can see two ways that could affect things. One of them is that Grimshaw liked racist things on her Twitter account, but she liked racist things that were specifically related to Donald Trump and his defenders and hangers-on. So maybe this is political, and the RWA is worried that they're going to be accused of anti-conservative bias or whatever. And the second is that Grimshaw was a muckety-muck in the mainstream industry, and her racist history is the racist history of very powerful institutional actors. If it's ok to hold her to account for that history, then a lot of people and institutions with power are going to worry that they, too, are going to be held to account. And maybe that's who the RWA was thinking about when they decided to censure Courtney Milan, who is a popular and well-regarded author but whom they probably don't perceive as being as important as some of the behind-the-scenes industry actors.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 11:17 AM on December 25, 2019 [17 favorites]
ArbitraryAndCapricious, the issue you raise has one further step: this is the Romance WRITERS of America favoring a publisher over a writer. The fact that the publisher also writes may cloud the issue for some people, but not for me. It's extraordinairly inept, misguided and has hurt so many in our industry. (I'm a book editor, heavily focused on romance.) Courtney and those in her circle represent the future of publishing, as far as I'm concerned, and RWA, which seemed to be on the verge of being dragged into the 21st century, has proved itself an irrelevant dinosaur with this ruling and their clumsy attempt to walk it back.
posted by BlahLaLa at 1:05 PM on December 25, 2019 [16 favorites]
posted by BlahLaLa at 1:05 PM on December 25, 2019 [16 favorites]
Coming after the romance author who is also a lawyer just seems like a terrible idea. (I love a lot of Milan's books, this just makes it even better.)
posted by Margalo Epps at 1:52 PM on December 25, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by Margalo Epps at 1:52 PM on December 25, 2019 [2 favorites]
I just need to get back to Jeather's comment here. When I saw that the RWA had convened a secret ethics panel and never told the ethics board about it, I actually gasped in shock. Bypassing the ethics board on an ethics complaint, and setting up a parallel ethics procedure that is not in compliance with the ethics regulations is, well, unethical.
Now, where this gets weirder is, if you look at Olivia Waite's response that I linked to up above, she got a response from the Deputy Executive Director who said that someone (name redacted) had "had an email in her draft folder" but never sent it. This leads to the question: how long has the board or leadership been running parallel ethics actions without looping in the ethics board?
posted by rednikki at 3:21 PM on December 25, 2019 [12 favorites]
Now, where this gets weirder is, if you look at Olivia Waite's response that I linked to up above, she got a response from the Deputy Executive Director who said that someone (name redacted) had "had an email in her draft folder" but never sent it. This leads to the question: how long has the board or leadership been running parallel ethics actions without looping in the ethics board?
posted by rednikki at 3:21 PM on December 25, 2019 [12 favorites]
So far at least three members of the original ethics committee have resigned because the RWA bypassed them, and because they do not agree with the decision.
posted by rednikki at 4:02 PM on December 25, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by rednikki at 4:02 PM on December 25, 2019 [2 favorites]
O.o
Somewhere in those threads someone says Milan was on the ethics committee when the complaint against her arrived, so yeah you would need some mechanism for recusal or parallel, but not a secret one.
posted by clew at 12:17 AM on December 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
Somewhere in those threads someone says Milan was on the ethics committee when the complaint against her arrived, so yeah you would need some mechanism for recusal or parallel, but not a secret one.
posted by clew at 12:17 AM on December 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
Discovered by way of Milan's ongoing thoughts in her tweets: A Piece of the RWA Puzzle -- another author's blog post about originally having their work ruled "not romance" (naturally affecting membership access, voting rights within organization, etc) and discovering through the process of (successfully, eventually) appealing that ruling that there wasn't an appeals process before they kicked up a fuss with the help of allies on the board, and for that matter wasn't much of a process for membership-submissions review either.
It made me reflect that organizational flailing itself isn't racist (and other-ist), but organizational flailing--"gaps between policy and procedure"--is very much something that cognitive poison encourages and reinforces. (It's also made me make notes to keep this thread and topic on standby for future heated metatalks about this own site's "challenging" go-rounds on policy-and-procedure issues for POC and marginalized users.)
posted by Drastic at 7:14 AM on December 26, 2019 [5 favorites]
It made me reflect that organizational flailing itself isn't racist (and other-ist), but organizational flailing--"gaps between policy and procedure"--is very much something that cognitive poison encourages and reinforces. (It's also made me make notes to keep this thread and topic on standby for future heated metatalks about this own site's "challenging" go-rounds on policy-and-procedure issues for POC and marginalized users.)
posted by Drastic at 7:14 AM on December 26, 2019 [5 favorites]
Came back to the thread to post Drastic's excellent link, which includes in its first paragraph pointers to Twitter reports of many other RWA-related problems and controversies that back up the conclusion this is a deeply troubled - and troubling - organization. A key paragraph:
It was clear to me from the beginning that this issue was larger than my own particular case. It raised a bigger issue around inclusion, as these kinds of judgments were likely shutting out other marginalized writers, potentially sending the message that only certain kinds of romance “count” as romances, and by extension, that only certain kinds of *people* get to have romances, are worthy of love, get to have happy endings.
Thanks to jacquilynne for posting this. When I first saw it unfolding on Twitter, I hoped someone would make a clear explanatory front page post about the mess, and this was exactly that.
posted by mediareport at 10:54 AM on December 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
It was clear to me from the beginning that this issue was larger than my own particular case. It raised a bigger issue around inclusion, as these kinds of judgments were likely shutting out other marginalized writers, potentially sending the message that only certain kinds of romance “count” as romances, and by extension, that only certain kinds of *people* get to have romances, are worthy of love, get to have happy endings.
Thanks to jacquilynne for posting this. When I first saw it unfolding on Twitter, I hoped someone would make a clear explanatory front page post about the mess, and this was exactly that.
posted by mediareport at 10:54 AM on December 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
I have been following this, as a romance writer who isn’t a member of RWA - it is appalling. I’d been leaning towards joining specifically because of Courtney’s work, so obviously that’s not happening now.
I do want to come in and correct one point: Corey Alexander, the author of the “piece of the RWA puzzle” blog post above, uses they/them pronouns.
posted by angeline at 11:20 AM on December 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
I do want to come in and correct one point: Corey Alexander, the author of the “piece of the RWA puzzle” blog post above, uses they/them pronouns.
posted by angeline at 11:20 AM on December 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
Flagged-with-note for preferred pronoun correction, and otherwise mentally noted and underlined; thank you and my bad!
posted by Drastic at 11:28 AM on December 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Drastic at 11:28 AM on December 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
Mod note: Amended accordingly!
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:30 AM on December 26, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:30 AM on December 26, 2019 [5 favorites]
Adriana Herrera: Myself and 27 other local RWA current and incoming chapter Presidents have submitted this letter as members in good standing requesting the resignation of the Executive Board President, President-Elect and Executive Director of RWA.
(Link to the letter itself.)
posted by rewil at 4:35 PM on December 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
(Link to the letter itself.)
posted by rewil at 4:35 PM on December 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
The RWA has released two statements to members about the situation and how they handled it. Both are the pasteurize process cheese product version of an explanation, in that they don’t really contain any explanation.
posted by sgranade at 5:08 PM on December 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by sgranade at 5:08 PM on December 26, 2019 [1 favorite]
So...the staff is throwing the board under the bus? Is that what I'm reading?
posted by BlahLaLa at 5:29 PM on December 26, 2019
posted by BlahLaLa at 5:29 PM on December 26, 2019
Now even more skeletons are falling out of the closet. (I was going to say "all" but I can't imagine what's coming.)
Chapters who pay black writers half of what they pay white writers to speak.
Writers saying overtly racist things while presenting to a chapter, and PoC and Jewish members being told they should just "get over it."
A publishing company that hasn't been paying royalties to its writers avoiding censure – a publishing company that coincidentally is about to publish the incoming President's book.
This is shocking.
posted by rednikki at 5:35 PM on December 26, 2019 [11 favorites]
Chapters who pay black writers half of what they pay white writers to speak.
Writers saying overtly racist things while presenting to a chapter, and PoC and Jewish members being told they should just "get over it."
A publishing company that hasn't been paying royalties to its writers avoiding censure – a publishing company that coincidentally is about to publish the incoming President's book.
This is shocking.
posted by rednikki at 5:35 PM on December 26, 2019 [11 favorites]
Since people are still following this thread: if you want a summary of the latest developments via curated tweets, here is a Twitter moment for you.
posted by rednikki at 5:56 PM on December 26, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by rednikki at 5:56 PM on December 26, 2019 [4 favorites]
Fascinating that the Post article is sympathetic to the RWA’s critics, given the Post’s typical politics.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:57 PM on December 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 5:57 PM on December 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
MRKowal has just tweeted encouragement to everyone who might qualify for SFWA instead of RWA. Someone argued that belief in happily ever after was innately a fantastical worldview, which is maybe a little snarky although I expect meant to be welcoming.
I would rather the RWA were squared up and made what it should already have been, but people have been trying and then this happened.
posted by clew at 10:01 PM on December 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
I would rather the RWA were squared up and made what it should already have been, but people have been trying and then this happened.
posted by clew at 10:01 PM on December 26, 2019 [3 favorites]
a publishing company that coincidentally is about to publish the incoming President's book.
Ugh. Damon Suede, the incoming president whose new book is coming out from a shady non-paying publisher that romance writers have been trying for *months* to get their organization to take a stand on, also happens to be a gay guy? What a mess. Everyone seems to be waiting to find out how involved he was in the creation of the special ethics committee that appeared out of nowhere in violation of the organization's procedures.
posted by mediareport at 7:28 PM on December 27, 2019 [3 favorites]
Ugh. Damon Suede, the incoming president whose new book is coming out from a shady non-paying publisher that romance writers have been trying for *months* to get their organization to take a stand on, also happens to be a gay guy? What a mess. Everyone seems to be waiting to find out how involved he was in the creation of the special ethics committee that appeared out of nowhere in violation of the organization's procedures.
posted by mediareport at 7:28 PM on December 27, 2019 [3 favorites]
Update from the twitterverse:
@CIMRWAposted by thedward at 7:35 PM on December 27, 2019
Update on Petition to Recall: Based on the RWA national membership rosters, we are confident that we have obtained the number of votes required to institute a recall based on section 11.4.2. of the RWA bylaws. The petition will remain open until 11:59 pm Sunday, December 29, 2019
(On further reading, Suede was deeply involved in the process and recommended the specific punishments. Double ugh.)
posted by mediareport at 7:44 PM on December 27, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by mediareport at 7:44 PM on December 27, 2019 [2 favorites]
RWA Bylaws:
Section 11.4. Recall Elections. Any member of the Board of Directors may be removed from office by a membership recall election. Any Advisor may be removed as an advisor by a constituency recall election.
11.4.1. Initiation. A recall election shall be initiated by filing a petition for recall with the Executive Director.
11.4.2. Petitions to Recall Officers and Directors-at-Large. Petitions to recall Officers and Directors-at-Large shall be signed by ten percent (10%) of the General members listed on the RWA national membership roster as of the date the petition is filed.
11.4.4. Recall Outcome. Promptly following receipt of a valid recall petition, RWA shall hold a recall election. An Officer or Director shall be removed from office and an Advisor shall be removed from an advisory role if a majority of the eligible recall election votes cast are in favor of the recall. The election results shall be effective immediately.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 10:29 PM on December 27, 2019
Section 11.4. Recall Elections. Any member of the Board of Directors may be removed from office by a membership recall election. Any Advisor may be removed as an advisor by a constituency recall election.
11.4.1. Initiation. A recall election shall be initiated by filing a petition for recall with the Executive Director.
11.4.2. Petitions to Recall Officers and Directors-at-Large. Petitions to recall Officers and Directors-at-Large shall be signed by ten percent (10%) of the General members listed on the RWA national membership roster as of the date the petition is filed.
11.4.4. Recall Outcome. Promptly following receipt of a valid recall petition, RWA shall hold a recall election. An Officer or Director shall be removed from office and an Advisor shall be removed from an advisory role if a majority of the eligible recall election votes cast are in favor of the recall. The election results shall be effective immediately.
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 10:29 PM on December 27, 2019
It's becoming a lot clearer that at least the specific form of the punishment was about Suede trying to remove a potential rival. It seemed very odd from the first, "we'll kick you out for a year and then let you in but as a second-class citizen who is never allowed to run for office". I'd guess that someone(s) on the permanent staff has been manipulating ethics complaints for a while, killing what apparently were many complaints about racism before they ever made it to the ethics committee, and of course fast tracking the Milan complaint because they saw a chance to hurt a person who had been championing PoCs in RWA. And then Suede took it over for his own purposes.
posted by tavella at 10:31 PM on December 27, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by tavella at 10:31 PM on December 27, 2019 [7 favorites]
Well, I did not see “Chuck Tingle crossover” coming.
posted by Etrigan at 4:40 AM on December 28, 2019 [15 favorites]
posted by Etrigan at 4:40 AM on December 28, 2019 [15 favorites]
The Implosion of the RWA - blogpost summary by Claire Ryan
posted by oh yeah! at 7:00 AM on December 28, 2019 [7 favorites]
posted by oh yeah! at 7:00 AM on December 28, 2019 [7 favorites]
One odd procedural discrepancy I noticed while reading that summary - which is great - is that Suede talks about his role as liaison to the ethics committee. Then Milan says there is no board liaison to the ethics committee and points out the part of the rules of procedure that make that clear. But on Twitter, while defending Milan, Helen KayDimon, a past president of RWA, mentions that she was the board liaison to the ethics committee. I imagine this is largely a sign of the RWA's general disregard for its own rules. I thought maybe there was a rule change but KayDimon was the president right before Carolyn Jewell, so any rule change would have to be super recent.
posted by jacquilynne at 7:30 AM on December 28, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by jacquilynne at 7:30 AM on December 28, 2019 [1 favorite]
The big anvil yet to drop is how and by who was this super double secret special ethics committee selected, which Suede has been assiduously avoiding saying. And who was on it.
posted by tavella at 10:26 AM on December 28, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by tavella at 10:26 AM on December 28, 2019 [4 favorites]
This is getting fractally batshit.
posted by PMdixon at 10:37 AM on December 28, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by PMdixon at 10:37 AM on December 28, 2019 [3 favorites]
Jacquilynne, further down in the twitter thread you linked, KayDimon says she was board liaison years ago, and that the code change eliminating the position happened 2 years ago.
posted by oh yeah! at 11:02 AM on December 28, 2019
posted by oh yeah! at 11:02 AM on December 28, 2019
Ah, thanks, oh yeah!
posted by jacquilynne at 11:07 AM on December 28, 2019
posted by jacquilynne at 11:07 AM on December 28, 2019
Apollycon (a YA/New Adult/Adult centered reader convention owned by author Jennifer L. Armentrout) just disinvited Damon Suede from their 2020 and 2021 conventions.
This is getting WILD.
posted by palomar at 11:31 AM on December 28, 2019 [5 favorites]
This is getting WILD.
posted by palomar at 11:31 AM on December 28, 2019 [5 favorites]
This is honestly reminding me more and more of treehouse shit, where people who are not equipped to be on a board of directors try to be on a board of directors without the experience of doing it and start doing wildly unethical shit because they have literally no clue what they're doing.
Like: I do think it makes sense that you shouldn't choose people supervised by a person to be sitting on the committee judging that person; it'll be impossible to be done impartially. However, what you do is you tell them there is a complaint against a member of the ethics committee and you'd like them to name a neutral committee, which they do, and vote on, transparently, and then there's a named committee that can do it fairly. You don't make a fucking Star Chamber.
posted by corb at 11:47 AM on December 28, 2019 [7 favorites]
Like: I do think it makes sense that you shouldn't choose people supervised by a person to be sitting on the committee judging that person; it'll be impossible to be done impartially. However, what you do is you tell them there is a complaint against a member of the ethics committee and you'd like them to name a neutral committee, which they do, and vote on, transparently, and then there's a named committee that can do it fairly. You don't make a fucking Star Chamber.
posted by corb at 11:47 AM on December 28, 2019 [7 favorites]
There's a nice, clear (completely non-subjective) summary of events to date in this Twitter thread from Cate Eland.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 2:26 PM on December 28, 2019 [12 favorites]
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 2:26 PM on December 28, 2019 [12 favorites]
Here's a 4th(?) round-up by Vox (etc.) culture reporter, Aja Romano.
Also, here's a Wayback Machine link to the letter Nora Roberts put out today--the site is unreachable at the moment, presumably from getting too much traffic.
posted by Wobbuffet at 4:38 PM on December 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
Also, here's a Wayback Machine link to the letter Nora Roberts put out today--the site is unreachable at the moment, presumably from getting too much traffic.
posted by Wobbuffet at 4:38 PM on December 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
I just got in to the Nora Roberts letter. And let's just say that this is the way to do it:
Let me add, as a personal note, that over the course of my life, the course of my career, the couple hundred books I’ve written, I may have–most likely have–said or done or written something that was offensive, racist, homophobic. Without intent–but intent doesn’t mean a damn to those hurt. So I’ll apologize without qualification.posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 4:42 PM on December 29, 2019 [11 favorites]
I hope I’ve learned along the way. I intend to continue to learn and do better.
For anyone else curious about what the "Reno nightmare" Nora Roberts mentions was, a search for 'reno rwa nora roberts' turned up this blog post from 2005 - RWA Fiasco in Reno: "So it comes to pass that the RITA ceremony was a complete and utter disaster from start to finish. Honoring past award winners is a good thing; putting pictures of disasters in the news as a backdrop behind each of the prior winners is not the way to hold a award ceremony. So badly was the presentation written, that… get this… the master of ceremonies, the best known romance author in America at the moment, Nora Roberts, publicly resigned from the Master of Ceremony duties 24 hours before they were to begin at the end of what is reported to be a fairly heated argument at the Harlequin Party!!"
posted by oh yeah! at 5:27 PM on December 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by oh yeah! at 5:27 PM on December 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
Was Reno the same convention when the RWA President had herself driven right on stage in a limousine?
posted by jacquilynne at 6:43 PM on December 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by jacquilynne at 6:43 PM on December 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
Ha, there's a mention of limos in that blog post, so, yep, must have been.
posted by oh yeah! at 6:53 PM on December 29, 2019
posted by oh yeah! at 6:53 PM on December 29, 2019
The really interesting thing in the Nora Roberts letter is the explanation of how RWA is taking the money and labor of thousands of unpublished authors who are paying dues to be counted as part of the organization. This is sounding more and more sketch by the moment.
posted by corb at 11:14 PM on December 29, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by corb at 11:14 PM on December 29, 2019 [4 favorites]
The Claire Ryan page is the most helpful summary of this debacle yet!
Though I think a lot of it can be summarized by this short tweet from Courtney Milan:
Though I think a lot of it can be summarized by this short tweet from Courtney Milan:
STOP LIGHTING YOURSELVES ON FIRE AND BLAMING ME FOR IT.posted by fifteen schnitzengruben is my limit at 8:00 PM on December 30, 2019 [10 favorites]
Jesus; following the thread from Courtney Milan’s latest tweet it looks like they’ve sent another letter that is rather...ambiguous on some of the facts. And Courtney is asking them if they’ve alerted their Directors & Officers liability insurance carrier.
posted by nubs at 8:27 PM on December 30, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by nubs at 8:27 PM on December 30, 2019 [1 favorite]
Also RWA sent an email to a RWA member stating that the board considered "other factors" besides Milan's social media posts. And Milan was not informed of those "other factors."
posted by creepygirl at 1:19 PM on December 31, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by creepygirl at 1:19 PM on December 31, 2019 [4 favorites]
Lately in the various related twitter timelines, people have been keeping an eye on the RWA website versus very recent archives, and tracking things mysteriously disappearing--sections of the policies that point up just what kind of yawning chasm was involved in the gap between policy and process, just recently the (now pretty much just appointed, not elected) board's email vanishing entirely until only reappearing after people noticed, etc.
posted by Drastic at 11:51 AM on January 2, 2020 [4 favorites]
posted by Drastic at 11:51 AM on January 2, 2020 [4 favorites]
Ayy, new Tingler! NOT POUNDED BY ROMANCE WRANGLERS OF AMERICA BECAUSE THEIR NEW LEADERSHIP IS FROM THE DEPTHS OF THE ENDLESS COSMIC VOID, available now.
posted by rewil at 10:16 AM on January 3, 2020 [11 favorites]
posted by rewil at 10:16 AM on January 3, 2020 [11 favorites]
Lots of thick and chunky updates from the Claire Ryan page cataloging the mess. Notably:
*lots of literary agents issuing statements saying that they will not attend any RWA events until current leadership is replaced and a full audit into the Courtney Milan situation has been performed
*RWA hires a law firm to perform an audit, and the problematic aspects of this decision are immediately pointed out
*the story hits national news with write-ups in the NYT (featuring comments from at least one of the women whose complaints about Milan kicked the whole thing off) and Vulture (featuring a long clarifying statement from Milan because Vulture didn't get the facts right), and a deeper analysis shows up on NBC News from author/activist Mikki Kendall
*and now, reports are coming out that current RWA president Damon Suede is telling people that if he's ousted, the organization will be forced to close immediately with no paychecks being issued for paid employees, which is of course contradicted by the org's bylaws regarding swift replacement of leadership in the event of a resignation or dismissal. Ironically, these untrue statements made by Suede constitute a violation of the org's code of ethics.
posted by palomar at 6:57 AM on January 4, 2020 [6 favorites]
*lots of literary agents issuing statements saying that they will not attend any RWA events until current leadership is replaced and a full audit into the Courtney Milan situation has been performed
*RWA hires a law firm to perform an audit, and the problematic aspects of this decision are immediately pointed out
*the story hits national news with write-ups in the NYT (featuring comments from at least one of the women whose complaints about Milan kicked the whole thing off) and Vulture (featuring a long clarifying statement from Milan because Vulture didn't get the facts right), and a deeper analysis shows up on NBC News from author/activist Mikki Kendall
*and now, reports are coming out that current RWA president Damon Suede is telling people that if he's ousted, the organization will be forced to close immediately with no paychecks being issued for paid employees, which is of course contradicted by the org's bylaws regarding swift replacement of leadership in the event of a resignation or dismissal. Ironically, these untrue statements made by Suede constitute a violation of the org's code of ethics.
posted by palomar at 6:57 AM on January 4, 2020 [6 favorites]
Oh, wow.
White romance novelist in racism row says she was 'used': Kathryn Lynn Davis says in Guardian interview trade association ‘encouraged’ her to file a complaint against Courtney Milan
White romance novelist in racism row says she was 'used': Kathryn Lynn Davis says in Guardian interview trade association ‘encouraged’ her to file a complaint against Courtney Milan
In an interview with the Guardian, Davis said she was “encouraged” by the administration of Romance Writers of America (RWA), a trade association for romance writers, to file a formal complaint against Milan, an influential former board member and diversity advocate. She now feels she had been “used” to secure a political outcome that she had never intended.posted by palomar at 8:25 AM on January 4, 2020 [3 favorites]
“They encouraged us. They wanted us very badly to file these complaints,” Davis said.
...Davis clarified that she did not have and lose a written book contract, but that a publisher had delayed further discussion of a potential contract in the wake of the controversy.
In the complaint, Davis also seemed to imply that the publisher told her they were afraid of being publicly linked with Milan, but in fact the publisher “never said anything” to that effect, Davis said.
So...Davis is admitting now that the ethics complaint was filed in bad faith and that the alleged harm never happened; i.e., that she made a false statement as part of a bad faith claim?
I mean, she seems like an asshole, but I'm hoping she at least gets herself a lawyer at this point.
posted by nubs at 9:18 AM on January 4, 2020 [8 favorites]
I mean, she seems like an asshole, but I'm hoping she at least gets herself a lawyer at this point.
posted by nubs at 9:18 AM on January 4, 2020 [8 favorites]
Oh, she's a total asshole.
To echo sentiments from waaaay upthread, I truly don't see how the RWA comes out of this intact. On top of writers pulling their own submissions for the org's flagship awards and members either quitting or announcing an intent to let their membership lapse, literary agents and publishing professionals are severing relationships with them, which makes membership in the org rather a useless thing if one's goal is to get published.
posted by palomar at 10:09 AM on January 4, 2020 [7 favorites]
Two or three days after Milan tweeted about her book, Davis said, an editor at the publishing house in question advised her that the situation would probably get worse. “I was told to apologize to Courtney [Milan] and to remove myself from the controversy, and in that way to save both my reputation and that of anyone connected to me.And then at the end of the article, this:
“I didn’t understand what I would be apologizing for unless it were for my 24-year-old book,” she said. “I did not agree with what [Milan] was saying and to apologize for something I did not agree with didn’t make sense to me.”
The editor was “not happy” with this response, Davis said, but the end of the call was not angry. In a subsequent conversation with the same editor about a week later, “it was offhandedly mentioned that discussion of the [new book] contract would have to wait until spring”, Davis said. The editor did not explicitly state there was any link between Milan’s tweets and the delay in the discussion of the contract, Davis said.
Davis said she had decided to make some changes to the novel Milan had criticized, Somewhere Lies the Moon, and that she has republished edited ebook versions.Soooo, nothing's wrong with your book, but you'll edit out the offensive bits if they're pointed out to you nicely enough. And it's totally that the publisher doesn't want an SJW mob coming after them, and that's why your contract talks are delayed. Right. Definitely not because they're questioning the wisdom of doing business with an argumentative writer with demonstrably poor behavior within the industry, and whose work absolutely reeks of white supremacy (see also: Davis's Native American "Dream Suite" series, with another exoticized biracial heroine and a shitload of white saviorism and noble savage stereotyping, whew jesus what a mess).
“Some people have contacted me and have told me calmly what it was that offended them, and it was very few things, and I have corrected those things,” she said.
To echo sentiments from waaaay upthread, I truly don't see how the RWA comes out of this intact. On top of writers pulling their own submissions for the org's flagship awards and members either quitting or announcing an intent to let their membership lapse, literary agents and publishing professionals are severing relationships with them, which makes membership in the org rather a useless thing if one's goal is to get published.
posted by palomar at 10:09 AM on January 4, 2020 [7 favorites]
It basically sounds like the paid staff are a bunch of reactionary racists who resent the anti-racist agenda that has been imposed on them, and Damon Suede is a toxic narcissist who is burning everything down for reasons that seem totally unclear to everyone. And from what I've heard, there are a lot of members who aren't following this on social media or in the press, and only know what they're hearing directly from the RWA, which is all one-sided bullshit. So who the fuck knows where this ends. It's really infuriating and sad.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 11:53 AM on January 4, 2020 [6 favorites]
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 11:53 AM on January 4, 2020 [6 favorites]
There have to be at least two cleavages tearing the RWA apart, and I think there are three, and they're all making each other worse. There's the racist/decent one, and also the staff/Board one which (among other things) breaks the `money flows towards the artist' rule, and also the publisher/published/unpublished opposition. Probably the interests of backlist/bestseller differ, too.
Plus also romance-as-operating-now is used instrumentally, to soothe the pain of people living in at least one subaltern position, usually by taking spoons from another subaltern. So it's got an enormous `don't squick my squee' problem, to borrow a cuppa from next door. I mean, romance as a ?profession? can't agree that rape isn't sexy and romantic. I'm pro-squick, but the genre kind of can't be. Maybe HEA or another phoenix organization will manage.
posted by clew at 2:36 PM on January 4, 2020 [2 favorites]
Plus also romance-as-operating-now is used instrumentally, to soothe the pain of people living in at least one subaltern position, usually by taking spoons from another subaltern. So it's got an enormous `don't squick my squee' problem, to borrow a cuppa from next door. I mean, romance as a ?profession? can't agree that rape isn't sexy and romantic. I'm pro-squick, but the genre kind of can't be. Maybe HEA or another phoenix organization will manage.
posted by clew at 2:36 PM on January 4, 2020 [2 favorites]
I was charmed by a short conversation between a traditional romance reader who had never heard of Chuck Tingle at all and people explaining Tingle's commentary work. Newbie got `buckaroos prove love' as the essential point.
posted by clew at 2:38 PM on January 4, 2020 [7 favorites]
posted by clew at 2:38 PM on January 4, 2020 [7 favorites]
They have now cancelled the RITAs for this year. I can't see how the RWA can come back.
posted by jeather at 5:08 PM on January 6, 2020 [4 favorites]
posted by jeather at 5:08 PM on January 6, 2020 [4 favorites]
I think canceling them is by now the right choice, but this has been a parade of bad decisions
posted by jeather at 5:49 PM on January 6, 2020 [4 favorites]
posted by jeather at 5:49 PM on January 6, 2020 [4 favorites]
I agree that it's probably the right choice, but at this point I'm so suspicious of their motives that I sort of wonder what nefarious plan is causing the to do it.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 6:03 PM on January 6, 2020 [4 favorites]
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 6:03 PM on January 6, 2020 [4 favorites]
Email from RWA on the RITA cancellation:
Due to recent events in RWA, many in the romance community have lost faith in RWA's ability to administer the 2020 RITA contest fairly, causing numerous judges and entrants to cancel their participation. ... Recent RWA Boards have worked hard to make changes to the current contest, striving to make it more diverse and inclusive, relieve judging burdens, and bring in outside voices, but those changes had to be voted on and implemented in a narrow window of time each year.posted by Etrigan at 6:21 PM on January 6, 2020
Not that the RWA has made any attempt lately to hide its white supremacy problem, but one big indicator is that generally speaking white people are assumed to be acting in good faith, while POC/LGBT+/marginalized folks are assumed to be acting in bad faith. (Twitter thread, unrolled here)
posted by Etrigan at 4:31 AM on January 7, 2020 [7 favorites]
posted by Etrigan at 4:31 AM on January 7, 2020 [7 favorites]
Melissa Blue tweeted:
I'm a cynical harpy. I suspect the RITAs were canceled bc:Courtney Milan QTed and replied:
1. They lost their shirt from having to refund (and it would cost more to administer the awards than they made from the contest);
2. They didn't have enough judges;
3. It would distract us from razing the place
Everyone in the comments: Yeah, we’re still on for #3, right? Right?posted by Lexica at 9:19 AM on January 7, 2020 [3 favorites]
Hot damn. Harlequin and Avon Books both just pulled out of the annual RWA conference scheduled for July. (Both imprints are owned by HarperCollins.)
posted by palomar at 7:24 AM on January 8, 2020 [6 favorites]
posted by palomar at 7:24 AM on January 8, 2020 [6 favorites]
And now apparently we have reached the point where the President of RWA is demanding loyalty oaths from the Board members.
posted by creepygirl at 10:14 AM on January 8, 2020 [4 favorites]
posted by creepygirl at 10:14 AM on January 8, 2020 [4 favorites]
I am left with such an intense curiosity about what is up with this Damon Suede person, how he got voted in, and what he had thought was and currently thinks is in his best interest in all of this ordeal.
posted by meese at 10:22 AM on January 8, 2020 [3 favorites]
posted by meese at 10:22 AM on January 8, 2020 [3 favorites]
thanks to the tweets linked above, I have just now learned that "circle the wagons" is a racist phrase (this being what Suede proposes to do)
posted by Countess Elena at 10:33 AM on January 8, 2020
posted by Countess Elena at 10:33 AM on January 8, 2020
I am left with such an intense curiosity about what is up with this Damon Suede person...
I’ve met Damon a few times at the RT Booklovers Conventions I attended. He thinks he’s a rock star, and acts accordingly. He’s very bombastic, cheery, bitchy, and charismatic. He sells schmooze like nobody’s business.
He ran unopposed for the RWA presidency on apparently falsified credentials (not enough qualifying works published, none within a specific time frame around the election), and seems to share more than a few of the rather racist inclinations with the members of the board who aren’t so interested in diversity - so he was basically a shoo-in.
I mean, those Nice White Ladies will totally eat him for lunch before this is all over, though.
posted by angeline at 3:09 PM on January 8, 2020 [2 favorites]
I’ve met Damon a few times at the RT Booklovers Conventions I attended. He thinks he’s a rock star, and acts accordingly. He’s very bombastic, cheery, bitchy, and charismatic. He sells schmooze like nobody’s business.
He ran unopposed for the RWA presidency on apparently falsified credentials (not enough qualifying works published, none within a specific time frame around the election), and seems to share more than a few of the rather racist inclinations with the members of the board who aren’t so interested in diversity - so he was basically a shoo-in.
I mean, those Nice White Ladies will totally eat him for lunch before this is all over, though.
posted by angeline at 3:09 PM on January 8, 2020 [2 favorites]
Two big developments over the last few days:
1. Avon Books, a HarperCollins imprint, has pulled out of RWA's national convention.
2. Twenty RWA former board members/past presidents joined the chorus who've been pointing out that Damon Suede never met the organization's basic requirements for eligibility to be President. The evidence includes Suede's husband's tweets that an upcoming book (which Suede promised would fulfill an eligibility requirement) did not in fact exist, an attempt to deflect criticism of Suede's links to a publisher many writers have had payment issues with.
posted by mediareport at 6:26 AM on January 9, 2020
1. Avon Books, a HarperCollins imprint, has pulled out of RWA's national convention.
2. Twenty RWA former board members/past presidents joined the chorus who've been pointing out that Damon Suede never met the organization's basic requirements for eligibility to be President. The evidence includes Suede's husband's tweets that an upcoming book (which Suede promised would fulfill an eligibility requirement) did not in fact exist, an attempt to deflect criticism of Suede's links to a publisher many writers have had payment issues with.
posted by mediareport at 6:26 AM on January 9, 2020
Damon Suede and Carol Ritter have resigned.
posted by jeather at 8:55 AM on January 9, 2020 [8 favorites]
posted by jeather at 8:55 AM on January 9, 2020 [8 favorites]
Damon Suede and Carol Ritter have resigned.
Perhaps appropriately, that link is serving me a runtime error
posted by nubs at 9:02 AM on January 9, 2020
Perhaps appropriately, that link is serving me a runtime error
posted by nubs at 9:02 AM on January 9, 2020
RomanceSparksJoy has tweet-quoted it if you still can't get to it.
posted by jacquilynne at 9:10 AM on January 9, 2020 [3 favorites]
posted by jacquilynne at 9:10 AM on January 9, 2020 [3 favorites]
I think a key point is whether the 4 (?) new board members Damon Suede appointed remain, or if their seats are re-opened for election. The latter would be a good sign.
posted by mediareport at 10:25 AM on January 9, 2020 [2 favorites]
posted by mediareport at 10:25 AM on January 9, 2020 [2 favorites]
On the plus side, people are going to be writing romans à clef about this for positively decades. "Coretta Venice" will be warring with "Aidan Velour" forever.
posted by Etrigan at 10:50 AM on January 9, 2020 [2 favorites]
posted by Etrigan at 10:50 AM on January 9, 2020 [2 favorites]
I think Chuck Tingle may be responsible for the Romance Wranglers of America website. At least, Chuck Tingle tweeted the link to it.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 6:12 PM on January 9, 2020 [11 favorites]
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 6:12 PM on January 9, 2020 [11 favorites]
Vox.com has just put out a piece covering where things sit at the moment plus a thorough history of events, with lots of links to various tweets and other articles: Romance is publishing’s most lucrative genre. Its biggest community of writers is imploding
posted by soundguy99 at 5:31 AM on January 11, 2020 [1 favorite]
posted by soundguy99 at 5:31 AM on January 11, 2020 [1 favorite]
And having read that piece . . . Holy SHIT.
It's very clear that the RWA and its chapters have a long history of racism, homophobia, and gatekeeping, and I strongly suspect there were even more backchannel machinations that haven't come out yet. (Like how the hell did this Damon Suede guy wind up president? I wouldn't be at all surprised if he was maneuvered into position so that the org and/or certain people could attempt to fend off accusations of bigotry by pointing to their queer president.)
This collapse obviously been a long time coming.
posted by soundguy99 at 5:46 AM on January 11, 2020
It's very clear that the RWA and its chapters have a long history of racism, homophobia, and gatekeeping, and I strongly suspect there were even more backchannel machinations that haven't come out yet. (Like how the hell did this Damon Suede guy wind up president? I wouldn't be at all surprised if he was maneuvered into position so that the org and/or certain people could attempt to fend off accusations of bigotry by pointing to their queer president.)
This collapse obviously been a long time coming.
posted by soundguy99 at 5:46 AM on January 11, 2020
This article by Kelly Faircloth is the most comprehensive article I've seen in terms of summarizing the whole mess, including detailed discussions of Sue Grimshaw's gatekeeping role at Borders and Damon Suede's publishing credentials and the strange history of "Stud Planet" (Suede was almost certainly not qualified to be president under the rules of RWA). If anyone asked me for a summary of the debacle that isn't a whole bunch of twitter threads, I'd send them this.
posted by creepygirl at 3:13 PM on January 15, 2020 [7 favorites]
posted by creepygirl at 3:13 PM on January 15, 2020 [7 favorites]
Thanks for that, creepygirl - one thing that article points out that seems to have been largely overlooked is that the Davis book Somewhere Lies The Moon which kind of kicked everything off (this was the book that Milan called "a fucking racist mess") may have been an older book but it was republished in 2014.
I was not aware of this beforehand, and it kind of explains a lot; Milan wasn't just taking potshots at any random 20-year-old book, she was specifically addressing a novel that got a recent boost from the publisher. And it also, of course, puts the lie to everyone trying to dismiss her complaints as some SJW picking on some poor old book written when people didn't know any better - it's a fucking current publication, she didn't have dig through the dusty piles of a used bookstore to find it.
posted by soundguy99 at 5:21 PM on January 15, 2020 [3 favorites]
I was not aware of this beforehand, and it kind of explains a lot; Milan wasn't just taking potshots at any random 20-year-old book, she was specifically addressing a novel that got a recent boost from the publisher. And it also, of course, puts the lie to everyone trying to dismiss her complaints as some SJW picking on some poor old book written when people didn't know any better - it's a fucking current publication, she didn't have dig through the dusty piles of a used bookstore to find it.
posted by soundguy99 at 5:21 PM on January 15, 2020 [3 favorites]
From Kelly Faircloth’s history of the publisher Harlequin, some while ago:
while romance is often treated as a static genre, I prefer to think of it as a sprawling, decades-long intergenerational discussion (sometimes polite, sometimes a bare-knuckle brawl) among women about what constitutes love, how one finds a partner that's worth putting up with the occasional tantrums and dirty socks.posted by clew at 7:38 PM on January 15, 2020 [3 favorites]
« Older These ones go to eleven | To the next generation Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by ErisLordFreedom at 12:36 PM on December 24, 2019 [21 favorites]