Comments

1. Celeste wrote:

   Just the tidbtis of these essays are awesome, I’m going to read more.

   Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 9:43 am ¶

2. DEAF FEMINIST PUNK!! wrote:

   right on.

   as a WOC, i’m so freakin sick of the high regard that white women are held in higher than WOC, by white men AND by men of color!!!

   Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 10:13 am ¶

3. The Cruel Secretary wrote:

   Five-second report from the carnival:

   It’s freakin’ awesome! I’m blown away with the depth and the wit of these writers. Love love love love love it…..

   Celeste, perhaps I’ll see you there?

   Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 11:06 am ¶

4. The Cruel Secretary wrote:

   Back from the WoC and Beauty Carnival. My only critique is I would have loved to have heard more from non-Black WoCs write about their ideas on race and beauty. Other than that, I dug it. A lot.

   Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 1:22 pm ¶

5. skywardprodigal wrote:

   I like the picture with this post.

   To cruel secretary: how would you define more in the context of this particular context.

   Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 3:52 pm ¶

6. Brigitte wrote:

   @ My only critique is I would have loved to have heard more from non-Black WoCs write about their ideas on race and beauty.

   I agree. I enjoyed all of the articles but I was hoping there would be more perspectives as well.

   Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 4:46 pm ¶

7. Delux wrote:

   Thanks for the writeup.

   On the topic of who was included? Well, I included everyone who responded with their own writing.

   Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 9:13 pm ¶

8. Lola wrote:

   This is the last part of YELOSON’s post :

   “Why do you like me?”

   I hate this question. I get it, I know it, I wonder it myself a lot. But damn. How do I explain why I find her beautiful? How she makes me laugh, smile and want to get lost in her eyes? No matter how many times I say it, I’m up against her lifetime of words telling her otherwise. Everytime I get this quesiton, everytime I answer honestly, I watch the same response. She pulls away like the rest, becomes more distant. She thinks I’m lying to her, she’s distrustful. Maybe only subconsciously, but I’m an anomaly. I there because I want to be there, I’m not using her, I’m not fetishizing her, I’m not telling her who to be. The basic reasons for breaking the interracial dating line aren’t there, and she can’t compute it.

   And so we fall apart. Just like the last 3 people I’ve dated. Damn.

   This is the story of so many of us BW. I feel like crying……..

   Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 9:16 pm ¶

9. skywardprodigal wrote:

   Hey Brigitte,

   I’m curious to know, in what way were your hopes for more perspectives exact?

   Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 9:27 pm ¶

10. A. wrote:

    Yeloson pwns me.

    Seriously, preference is okay, because it always favors white women. It never actually favors Black women. How dare someone say that they don’t have a preference for white women!

    Racial Preference = the beating around the bush form of racial prejudice.

    Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 9:31 pm ¶

11. Valentina wrote:

    beautiful and veerrryy interesting. Thanks for the heads up I’m running off to read those articles now.

    Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 9:34 pm ¶

12. Asian girl wrote:

    Cool. That’s why I don’t date white guys too. Even if I met a great one, I don’t know that I’m willing to deal with everything else. That never meant I hate them tho.

    - Asian girl

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 12:37 am ¶

13. gatamala wrote:

    I’d go out with Yeloson!

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 8:38 am ¶

14. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    @ Skyward/Delux -

    The readers here are accustomed to a variety of perspectives. Your carnival is awesome, and I really enjoyed reading through it. Most of the perspectives are from black women (or women who identify at least partially as black). However, as you said, the Carnival is driven by who submits a document.

    I will apologize for some of that - I saw the announcements for the carnival, and only mentioned it in passing. Please contact me if you decide to host another, and I will tap our full network to contribute. Or, since we are planning a race & beauty series, you all can feel free to use any posts past or present on Racialicious - if you wish, drop me a note before the carnival and I can send you some links.

    @Brigitte and TCS -

    Now, y’all know I love you. But I know y’all also know how the internet is. There are always far more readers than writers and a carnival (which is submission driven) is different from a blog (where I may commission pieces to get a broader viewpoint.) For the first time out, the carnival was dope. It is also *quite* difficult to get a lot of coordinated perspectives completed and submitted to run on the same day. That’s why our series run so long - I’m chasing people down, asking for rewrites, etc - which someone hosting a carnival isn’t going to be able to do since everything drops on the same day. Perhaps we can do more reach out to other communities for submissions, but at the end of the day, you’re still trying to get a writer to write.

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 9:28 am ¶

15. Chris (yeloson) wrote:

    The readers here are accustomed to a variety of perspectives.

    There is also the fact, that even amongst black identified women? There’s a variety of perspectives within that.

    As nice as it is to get recognition for my writing? I’m really tertiary to this Carnival- the focus is the voices and experiences of Women of Color, which remains non-monolithic and non-universal, although, it will remain unheard if unread.

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 11:10 am ¶

16. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    @Chris -

    Yes, that is true. Let me clarify a bit more:

    Racialicious is a multicultural space. Many of the readers here come to Racialicious so they can get information and perspectives from a variety of cultures - and information from cultures or ethnicities that are not their own. We aren’t 100% successful from any standpoint but we do it well enough to continue to attract a very broad reader base.

    Our readers often ask for more perspectives that are rarely heard from. It is similar to some of the issues with IBARW - black and asian perspectives are over represented, other perspectives are rarely heard. So, for many of our readers, they push to hear from queer perspectives, perspectives outside of the black and white binary, things like that.

    While no one is glossing over the fact that black women are not a monolith, and there are thousands of variations in how we experience the concept of beauty, there are also books and studies dedicated to deconstructing the white beauty ideal and to celebrating black beauty. (As much as it still needs to be said.)

    Wendi & I have written often about beauty from a black female perspective here and provided links to resources that discuss beauty from those viewpoints. However, we do not discuss South Asian beauty, Arab/Persian/Middle Eastern standards, biracial (or multiracial) ideas, NDN or Native American beauty, Latina beauty (and how that falls across race lines), etc etc. So, in someways, there is the quest for other knowledge that isn’t as easily accessible for most of the readers here.

    I highlighted your piece, specifically, because it comes from the perspective of an Asian male - someone we do not hear from often be it on male issues with attractiveness or on discussing dating from a male perspective.

    This does not mean that the carnival was not great and did not fulfill a need - some of the readers here are just looking for perspectives that are heard less in this circle.

    Hope that clarifies.

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 11:37 am ¶

17. skywardprodigal wrote:

    @ Latoya Peterson

    The readers here are accustomed to a variety of perspectives.

    That’s excellent. It seems to me that there are a variety of perspectives represented in the Women of Color and Beauty of Carnival even if the two pieces by men of color aren’t taken into consideration.

    Your carnival is awesome, and I really enjoyed reading through it.

    I agree that the carnival contains awesome reads and is awesome in its organization. It’s not mine, though. Delux put it together, and many people other than me, contributed.

    I look forward to your series on race and beauty. If I ever decide to organize a Carnival on Women of Beauty and Color, or come up with a series on race and beauty myself, I’ll swing through and see what wonderful pieces you have that can add to that.

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 12:02 pm ¶

18. Delux wrote:

    Given how exhausting if not plain traumatic working on this was for myself and the contributors, I have no plans whatsoever to do a Carnival on this topic again.

    On the topic of perspectives other than Black, I think there is plenty out there. I’ve just finished reading the anthology Me Sexy on Native sexuality and I know that lots continues to be written about colorism, beauty, weight, and related topics by a variety of people.

    I guess my goals were different– I have never been interested in gaining a large readership, and I spend most of my web time within closed, POC focused online communities. I did the carnival because it was a topic of personal interest to me at the time and because it had been a subject of quite a few conversations I had seen.

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 12:44 pm ¶

19. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    @Delux -

    Given how exhausting if not plain traumatic working on this was for myself and the contributors, I have no plans whatsoever to do a Carnival on this topic again.

    LOL & SMH. If you could only see my face right now…you have no idea how much I feel you on this statement.

    I’m sad to hear you won’t host another carnival on this topic, though I understand.

    (It is one of the reasons I am hesitant to do a series that I really want to do, on women of color and sexual violence. I would love to do it, but it is such an emotionally draining topic, I’d be in the fetal position after reading each post.)

    At any rate, Delux, thank you for taking the time to do it at all. I am waiting for the day I can google “Women of Color and Beauty” and receive a long list of critical analysis/personal narratives instead of more crap to buy.

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 12:50 pm ¶

20. EvilAngelfish wrote:

    Thanks, Latoya, for the links to this carnival. I really enjoyed reading the contributions - so much, apparently, that I was compelled to compose an ode to my hair in the middle of the night last night (although it may also have been a result of the caffeine I’ve been consuming to get through exams :p).
    Funnily enough, many of the issues the contributors wrote about - hair, beauty, body image, relationships - have all been sneaking to the forefront since I started med school and transitioned from pressing my hair straight to wearing it “natural”. Too many things to go into (especially when I should be studying) but I really appreciate the perspectives of the writers that were featured for giving me more to think about.

    Thanks to the organizers as well. This topic is so deep that it’s tough even to provide analysis without it getting personal so it’s bound to be draining. In spite of the trauma and exhaustion - could you be persuaded to do this carnival annually?

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 1:36 pm ¶

21. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    @EvilAngelFish -

    transitioned from pressing my hair straight to wearing it “natural”. Too many things to go into (especially when I should be studying) but I really appreciate the perspectives of the writers that were featured for giving me more to think about.

    Going through that transition now. I have some observations, but I think I will make that a separate discussion because so many things are wrapped up into it.

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 1:39 pm ¶

22. The Cruel Secretary wrote:

    @ Latoya–friend, I feel you about getting writers together. That head- and heartache is part of the business of publishing. Getting writers together, as the old saying goes, is like herding cats. And delux got a taste of it–and a bad one at that, considering that the carnival won’t happen again under delux’s leadership. I’m sorry that this won’t happen under delux’s leadership, too. You did a great job, delux.

    I think Latoya’s idea of pulling more

    @ delux and skywardprodigal–As I said, I loved (loved loved loved loved!) the carnival as well but, to be billed as a “women of color carnival,” many of the posts were about women of African descent. A complaint I’ve heard from some non-Black WoCs is the term “women of color” too often becomes equated with “Black women” (in our various experiences) to the exclusion of them. I don’t think that was your intention, delux, but again, due to the majority of posts being about Black women (again, in our multiple experiences, even with MoCs), I could see the WoC and beauty carnival being another example of that complaint. I simply gave voice to that complaint in my critique, that’s all. My critique doesn’t negate that I thought what you pulled off was incredible, friends.

    I think Latoya’s suggestion of asking our circles of bloggers to contribute is a great solution. I’m more than happy to put the word out on my blog if you decide to do it again. Brigitte, are you down with that, too?

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 3:54 pm ¶

23. Delux wrote:

    @ cruel secretary

    A complaint I’ve heard from some non-Black WoCs is the term “women of color” too often becomes equated with “Black women”

    Yes, I’ve noticed, and even mentioned it in the Carnival re: discussions of woc and weight. Like I said, I included everyone who responded with their own work. Perhaps you might want to ask non Black women of color you are familiar with what they think the barriers to having these discussions online might be?

    @evil angelfish

    Nope. No, nuh uh, no way. I’m flattered that you think I should, though! This was not my first blog carnival and most likely wont be my last but it was the most exhausting thing I’ve done online in many years. Glad you liked the result.

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 4:34 pm ¶

24. skywardprodigal wrote:

    @ The Cruel Secretary

    As I said, I loved (loved loved loved loved!) the carnival as well but, to be billed as a “women of color carnival,” many of the posts were about women of African descent.

    I understand that you loved the carnival, but I don’t understand the rest of the sentence. Perhaps you can help me. I’m having trouble understanding the ‘but’ when saskaia is EBC, hari-mirchi is desi (I believe) and yeloson and fa-ikaika are members of the east Asian diaspora. Too many black women are a part of the carnival? Not enough poc that aren’t black?

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 6:31 pm ¶

25. Chris (yeloson) wrote:

    With what Skyward said; this is why I recommend folks go read the actual posts, and maybe take some time to get to know the contributors.

    I find it very problematic that 75% of my post is quoted here, while the very basics of who the contributors are, hasn’t even been touched, but instead, swept into “overrepresented voices”.

    Maybe the issue isn’t being overrepresented, but simply being underheard.

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 6:59 pm ¶

26. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    @Chris -

    I’m happy to remove your section if this bothers you - those two selections were quoted because they dovetailed perfectly with a very heated conversation we had last week about interracial dating. But like I said, you want it removed, just say the word.

    For clarification purposes:

    1. The point of posting “link love” is to draw attention to a carnival or blog series that is going on and to direct traffic that way, not to hold the conversation here. That is why in most link loves, two or three posts at most will be linked. The point is to put forth a teaser, not a full representation of the carnival.

    This works for two reasons: (1) because half of our reading audience does not bother with the link round ups where we used to put them and (2) it makes sure the conversation happens where contributors to the series can see it, not here. I made this mistake with the first carnival I excerpted - the PoC in Sci-Fi, IBRAW 2 week were I went through and pulled 14 of 50+ posts. People where overwhelmed, not as many went to the carnival. (That is also why I included links to the carnival at the top and bottom of the post.)

    2. As I announced in my editor’s letter, we are hosting a feature on PoC and beauty. I mentioned that I was waiting until after this carnival to make sure we didn’t cover the same ground.

    But that also means:

    1. Excerpted Black Amazon’s piece.
    2. I enjoyed Karynthia’s piece but it was very similar to something Wendi Muse wrote on brown beauty.
    3. Tami is one of our regular contributors and that is an older post so no need to excerpt.
    4. Excerpted the New Approach to Race and Beauty.
    5. Hari-Mirchi’s post on hair was good, but similar to one or two conversations we have had over the past year, as well as one we already commissioned someone to write for our series.
    6. The colorism post was also good, but also conflicts with a post on skin privilege, already comissioned. (And when I say conflicts, I mean covered too much of the same ground.)
    7. The mention of the Skin-Coloured blog conflicts with a link love planned for next week.
    8. Dating and Crossing the line was excerpted, in response to the responses from “Interracial Dating: Grudgingly Heading Toward Acceptance.”
    9. Saskias’s piece was excellent. I held off on it because it is overlapping with the blow-ups in the fatosphere as of late but if I remove yeloson’s post, I will put a link to that piece in it’s place.
    10. We cover fashion extensively on Racialicious so I am limiting posts dealing with it - love of Alex Wek was passed over, and three contributors have submitted their take on Italian Vogue, which I am still debating as I am building a post around the criticism. Whichever posts I do not refer to in my piece will become part of a larger round-up, and Brigitte has provided multiple posts on the fall out.
    11. Fatness and uplift is also part of the FA piece I am working on. I have not decided whether to ask permission to crosspost both Fatshionista posts about race, roll them into a larger post about race and FA, or contributor Tara roll these issues into a larger post of her own.

    What got posted were decisions made for what the Racialicious audience wants to see, what hasn’t been covered, and what is a different take, especially when considering that the majority of the writers here are women, and we have tackled beauty (and cultural norms, and appropriation, and hair politics, and the idealized body type, and the politics of looks and dating and the positive stereotyping of looks based on race) on a fairly regular basis since 2006.

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 7:46 pm ¶

27. Chris (yeloson) wrote:

    Hi Latoya,

    My issue is not me being quoted. It’s also not the specifics of who was chosen or why.

    The issue is the larger context of applauding a secondary ally while at the same time devaluing the words of the primary contributors under the guise of asking for more diversity.

    ..whether or not that was your intent, or desire, or that of commentors on this thread.

    I’ve spoken enough.

    Posted 13 Aug 2008 at 9:01 pm ¶

28. Anonymous wrote:

    @ skywardprodigal–let me see if I can clarify my statements for you.

    –”I Ain’t Pretty” is Black Amazon’s reflection of the privilege of “pretty=white” and how she falls out of it because she’s black. Yes, she also reflects on the murder of a Latina and how that equation possibly led to her death, but it still is mostly about her Black beauty not being considered in that ideal.

    –Karnythia’s piece is her reflection as a African American author on Black beauty.

    –Tami’s piece is about her being a Black woman and her hair and the politics of Black hair.

    –Entry Level Living’s post is about Black beauty.

    –fa ikaika’s post is about why he loves Black women, specifically a particular Black woman.

    –The Alex Wek post is about an African model about what she inspires in the post writer.

    –The “Fatness and Uplift” post is about fat acceptance and how it plays out in Black communities and with Black women.

    –The Italian Vogue post is about the editorial content containing Black models.

    –Hari Mirchi piece about hair focuses on the exoticization and degraded conversations about Black hair.

    Ten posts *about* Black women.

    –Hari Mirchi’s piece on colorism is about being a light-skinned desi and the BS of being the “goal” of darker-skinned desis.

    –The “Dating and Crossing the Line” is about not having the slightest desire to date white people and the disruptiveness of that idea to the “white=best” paradigm.

    –”On Diets, Beauty Myths, and Leisure” encompasses the ideas about WoCs not being–and perhaps not wanting to–achieve the thinness “standard” because of its wounding recialized/sexualized implications.

    Three articles about non-Black WoCs.

    Ten articles to three, skywardprodigal. In other words, about three times as many articles about Black women–again, in a multiplicity of voices and subjects–than about non-Black WoCs, written by Black folks and non-Black PoCs.

    That’s why I said that I wished there were more posts about and by non-Black PoCs about their particular experiences around non-Black ideas about beauty and why I made the statement that, even though the carnival was billed as about WoCs and Beauty, it contained mostly posts about Black women, which brings up in my mind the complaint of non-Black PoCs that “women of color” seems to mean “Black” and how the *content* of this carnival can easily manifest that complaint.

    @ delux–as I said, friend, I’d love to help out by asking my non-Black PoCs bloggers, readers, and friends what the barriers are. I’ll happily direct them to you, too. And asked Brigitte if she was up to doing the same.

    It’s not my intention to devalue what what said at all, and I apologize that my critique has upset the folks who worked hard to write for and coordinate the carnival. I feel that praise for what you all pulled together and my critique of what’s posted shouldn’t negate or devalue each other and definitely devalue the work. A constructive critique–which is what I hoped I was offering–isn’t a zero-sum idea, of I loved the carnival but because I saw this flaw, the carnival, then, completely sucked and should never be attempted again by the people who put this together.

    What I’m getting at is, IMO, the billed idea of “Women of Color and Beauty” and the actual posts, which mostly covered Black women and those issues around beauty, and the issues raised in my mind of “women of color” being more than, by author and subject matter, about Black women. That’s all…

    Posted 14 Aug 2008 at 12:08 am ¶

29. The Cruel Secretary wrote:

    @ skywardprodigal–ooops! That’s what I get for working on a old laptop (like its disk drive is a 3.5-floppy disk drive). “Anonymous”=me. My apologies for that.

    Posted 14 Aug 2008 at 7:06 am ¶

30. Blackamazon wrote:

    Dear Anonymous et al.

    I must admit it’s taken me by surprise how this has went.

    First off an for ever and always the fact that this wasn’t intended does NOT change the fact that what has happened is that even in positive commentary , little of what was written was actively engaged.

    Not literally the origins of the carnival which are clearly stated within it self that it was a black woman and Hair carnival at it’s inception.

    That does not eliminate it from being able to be critiqued but I am a taken aback by one

    That it is becoming a case of numerics well the ” numbers” aren’t right

    and that the critiques about not having enough non Black POC voices are stemming mainly from people ( and if my assumption is incorrect please do correct me) members of teh African Diaspora.

    One becuase the assumption that having a carnival that has BLack women eliminates a variety of perspectives is frightening.

    And no I get that’s not what meant but that’s how it’s playing out

    and

    Two

    That they can respond for this specific incident in the place of NON black POC. Not by expressing problems with subject matter construction, or the fact that calls were isolated in any way to produce this result ( which they weren’t) but solely in a ” I have heard folks say” It’s speaking for others and doings o i n a way that infers their concerns , not to bring them in but to make something ” look better”.

    I am troubled by this mostly because this is not a quota based thing and the really hurtful and disturbing though not plainly voiced reading that ” what is said is of less concern to us than the novelty of who is saying it”

    That the response then becomes well here’s how you can make it more appealing to this critique WITHOUT ADDRESSING THE ACTUAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND WISHES OF THE CREATOR IN IT’S INCEPTION ( ie . asking a SINGLE question) is not a benign simple critique regardless of intent .

    Posted 14 Aug 2008 at 8:06 am ¶

31. Delux wrote:

    @cruel secretary

    So basically, I should have counted the number of submissions based on ethnicity of the author and the topic and called this the “Originally Women of Color But Now Mostly Black Women With a Few of Those Other People Whoever They Are and Beauty Carnival”?

    OK.

    delux–as I said, friend, I’d love to help out by asking my non-Black PoCs bloggers, readers, and friends what the barriers are. I’ll happily direct them to you, too.

    Gee thanks, buddy! There’s no need to direct anyone anywhere, as I have said repeatedly I’m not ever doing this again. Perhaps you could do a Carnival of your own about non Black women of color in the Blogosphere? I’m sure it would be a fabulous contribution to the kind of discussion you say you want to see.

    @Black Amazon

    ” what is said is of less concern to us than the novelty of who is saying it”

    Pretty much.

    Posted 14 Aug 2008 at 8:28 am ¶

32. skywardprodigal wrote:

    @ The Cruel Secretary

    Thank you very much for breaking this down for me this way. Now it’s very clear to me what you meant and mean.

    Now that you’ve given me the numbers, I see that the number of posts about black women (and not the ethnicity of writers) caught your attention in the way it did. That’s a very specific and detailed critique. I’m grateful for it because now I think I understand what you meant by that sentence.

    Again, thanks.

    Posted 14 Aug 2008 at 8:44 am ¶

33. The Cruel Secretary wrote:

    @ Blackamazon–Anonymous/The Cruel
    Secretary here. I feel what you’re saying–and delux, Chris, and skywardprodigal have presented their points on this thread as well. Again, I understand their points as well. I read delux’s reason for the carnival in the intro to it, and we’ve all have been engaging in a dialogue about the intentions, of the carnival and my critique. Skywardprodigal and I are engaging in a similar dialogue; SP asked questions about where my critique stems, which is why I stated that the carnival’s content being mostly about Black women–and giving examples of how I came to that conclusion–brought to my mind (noticed I said “my” mind, not the minds of “my WoCs pals and me”) of the argument I’ve heard a while about non-Black WoCs saying that “WoC” seems to equate to “Black women.” In other words, Blackamazon, I was
    being cognizant and sensitive to that argument in reading this carnival and, in light of what I read, could see by the content of the material presented could easily fall into that argument–whether that was the intention or not.

    And, actually, Latoya wrote a great explanation as to why the carnival shaped up the way it did. I understand that as well and actually empathize with it, having dealt with the publishing world, in print and online.

    So, am I, an African American woman, speaking *for* non-Black PoCs when I said that I feel that there should more content about WoCs who aren’t Black and PoCs who aren’t Black write about their ideas of beauty? No, I don’t believe so, and I apologize that that seems to be the statement that’s coming out.

    And I don’t believe that I’m really saying that the a Black female-centered content or voices “eliminates the variety of perspectives.” (Hell, I’m selfish–as polycultural as I’m doing my best to be, I love to hear multiple perspectives about Black women, whether it’s about hair, make-up, or dealing with our dealing with the ish around feminism. I just like that, I suppose.:-D) However, when the content is mostly about Black women (again, *in our multiple voices and experiences* brilliantly written and beautifully nuanced and all), it does, *IMO,* outweighs other non-Black WoCs/PoCs stories around, in this case, beauty. And this carnival is supposed to be about “Women of Color,” (by authors, with which you were successful) but majority of the content says “Black women.”

    My question to you, Blackamazon, delux, and skywardprodigal (I’ll respect Chris’ (Yeloson’s) right to not speak about this anymore), is how is my observation of wanting to hear more from non-Black WoCs about their ideas about beauty silencing and denigrating the pain of those who posted and organized this carnival?

    Posted 14 Aug 2008 at 10:12 am ¶

34. Blackamazon wrote:

    My Question to you is taht why does it take until I say something for you to pose that question.

    My further question to you is that why is this being leveraged at THIS carnival with until it was posited to you By ME no mention of the very really difficulties of such endeavors FOR ANY WOC to write about beauty culturally?

    Also why is it NECESSARY for a carnival where in it is EXPLICITLY stated that it had a specific beginning AND that it encountered specific issues required to a GENERAL OUTSIDE oft made critique that is disembodied and unspecific.

    It brought to your mind a critique so is it your critique ? IF it is , then how is it specific to the content not just the numbers of this carnival?

    How does it reflect KNOWING WHAT YOU KNOW ABOUT THIS CARNIVAL not a generalized view or a previously heard critique by some other WOC a problem with WOC dynamics ?

    The duynamics of communication , movement building, cross cultural communication?

    Those to me are excellent questions but tehy also involve much more than saying ” too many Black women” and I want more voices from NON POC

    And yes it is a bit grating because your question is being asked in the context of this Carnival , but manages to avoid the fact why this SPECIFIC carnival was called .

    And in you opinion it outweighs them?

    That’s exactly the frightening point. This is not a numbers game . This is not some lets make the shiniest most diverse presentation we can cause it’ll best serve those who desire to consume it.

    If you want to hear more non Black POC’s thoughts on beauty that’s one thing and frankly there are MANY places to find them,

    but to engage in counsel of how this could/should have been done better as a kind of well people have said this before renders teh SPECIFITY of the work mute for some goal

    THE ORGANIZERS NEVER EXPRESSED

    and raises a silencing to those NON BLACK POC’s who DID contribute that somehow they are not enough or erased because the mix wasn’t right enough.

    Posted 14 Aug 2008 at 11:05 am ¶

35. The Cruel Secretary wrote:

    @ delux–I offered my critique and my reasons why–nothing more and nothing less. And I certainly didn’t do it in a spirit of disrespect for what you’ve done. Having done what you’ve done in print form (I had a ‘zine by and about feminists of color), I empathize with the blood, sweat, and tears you had to go through to get it done–and the reasons why you’d never do it again. (I didn’t bother doing my ‘zine after the first issue, partly due to the headaches of getting it together, including getting together the writers.)

    Looking back at that inaugural issue, even though I stated it was for “women of color,” my content and my writers were mostly Black women. The arguments of non-Black WoCs feeling “WoC=Black Women” crystallized in my own ‘zine–and I committed that flaw. In my own ‘zine. Out of harm or hate or disrepect? No, but I did it nonetheless.

    That lesson taught me to do my best afterward to be aware of how I apply that term and made me even more aware how that term is applied. It’s that awareness–out of my own damn-I-thought-I was-more-aware-than-that reflection of my own experience–that I brought to your carnival, delux. I saw what I saw, and that awareness also help shape the critique I made about your carnival.

    With all that said, Latoya stated that we’re doing a series about PoC and beauty. Looking at what and how you did what you’ve done, it definitely gives us all something to build upon, including our definitions of what we mean by “PoC” and “beauty” and how the series will be shaped and what voices we’ll include to reflect those definition.

    I’m sure my non-Black PoC bloggers, friends, and readers would love to talk to you, delux, about the issues that you discussed in your carnival, whether you ever decide to do another carnival again. It’s unfortunate that that the avenue for that dialogue will be shut off.

    Posted 14 Aug 2008 at 11:09 am ¶

36. The Cruel Secretary wrote:

    @ skywardprodigal–I’m glad my explanation made some sense and I really appreciate your dialoguing with me about it. Again, I meant no disrespect and apologize that I’ve rubbed a raw wound.

    If you can believe it, I had to think through that while I was trying to figure out what coherent argument I could offer my best friend, an African American woman, why I found “Tropic Thunder” so deeply problematic though, according to her, the Black folks in the audience laughed through it. (Yeah, I paid $$$ and sat through it. And Robert Downey, Jr.’s performance didn’t bother me half as much as the anti-Asian stereotypes, including a toddler stabbing at Ben Stiller, who wanted to adopt the child and bring him back to the States. No lie, y’all…)

    Posted 14 Aug 2008 at 11:19 am ¶

37. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    @ All -

    I doubt that there will be any more productive conversation coming from this thread.

    Everyone has stated their piece, and it is obvious that the readers/writers & contribs/blog owner all had a different take on the carnival and what is should be/billed as/was.

    Thanks for your participation, but this thread is now closed. If you wish to have your outgoing link removed, please email me. If not, this post will stay to serve the original intent: to direct attention toward the carnival.

    *****Comments Closed.**********

    Posted 14 Aug 2008 at 12:28 pm ¶

38. Delux wrote:

    [Mod Note - This thread is now closed. If you wish to continue to speak to TCS, her blog is located here. - LDP]

    Posted 14 Aug 2008 at 12:30 pm ¶

Post a Comment