Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



mariem_1 ([info]mariem_1) wrote in [info]unfunny_fandom,
@ 2011-01-08 15:55:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
A clusterfuck of racefail and misogyny on Snapedom
Some time ago, when there were complaints about sexist treatment of Lily in Snape fandom, people on [info]snapedom insisted that there isn't an ounce of sexism in their attitude towards Lily. Several days ago the [info]snapedom mod [info]sylvanawood issued totally not a misogynistic challenge - Lily revisited:

Years ago (we've been around for a while, oh yes!)we had 'Severus and Lily' as a monthly challenge.

alicekinsno1 suggested to take a closer look at Lily's character:

Maybe something that discusses the character of Lily more deeply? I'd love to see what some of your ideas are for just how Lily went from treating Snape so harshly and talking back to James, to being the stereotypical "saintly mother" at the end of her life. There's something about her personality that doesn't add up.

That is to say, how her apparently selfless decision to die for her baby makes sense in light of the way she treated Severus or even James. With possibly a side comment about how despite being so powerful and gifted she didn't really show any of that by dying pleading for her baby's life without even trying to take on Voldemort.


Please post your entries here or in a separate post. I'm looking forward to your entries.


That couldn't go well. And it didn't. Some comments of choice:

duj

I don't see a dichotomy. In JK-world every mother is self-sacrificing, and even in the real world, many people treat their children differently than their friends/boyfriends/husbands.

That said, I must admit that I don't see Lily's death as an "apparently selfless decision to die for her baby". To me the scene reads as if she was just too panicked and/or hysterical to move.

mary_j_59

Right, Duj. I think, to some of us, the dichotomy in Lily's character that's most jarring is how she went from an outspoken, fiery young girl to a passive, terrified young woman. Or so it could seem. Terri had some interesting ideas about this.

But Lily is never, at any point, a saint. Rowling clearly modelled her on Catherine Earnshaw, just as she modelled Severus on Heathcliff. And Catherine Earnshaw is a spoiled, rather narcissistic young woman who treats both Heathcliff (whom she really loves) and her husband (whom she doesn't really love - and who's a fairly decent young man who deserves better than to be married to a woman who doesn't love him) quite badly.

I'm not saying that Lily = Catherine Earnshaw, any more than Severus = Heathcliff. But, having chosen to rewrite a part of Wuthering Heights in her opus, Rowling does have Lily replicate some of Catherine's unpleasant behavior. To then hold her up as the paragon of mother love is downright odd, IMHO.

Hwyla

I have more problems with the idea that no preset escape plans were set up. But then we don't have any indications that Lily was ever a very careful or logical person.

Yes, logic suggests they certainly OUGHT to have had an escape plan (preferably with a premade portkey included if one is going to put up barriers against apparation), But as Hermione told us - wizards and witches are rarely logical. And even tho' Lily came from a muggle background, not even all muggles are logical either.

I think the main problem was that Lily was VERY sure of her own beliefs. Once she's decided, then few can change her mind. We see this in her conversations with Sev and even when we see her in the playground with Tuney.

Just as sure (in her own way) as James was of his own cleverness. And her beliefs led her to join in on James' belief that he could outsmart anyone. The real trouble was that both Lily and James felt the fidelius secret keeper switch was perfect and therefore saw no need for back up escape plans.

I think it also important to note that Lily's 'sacrifice' is NOT what actually saved Harry, Whatever her efforts or reasons, asking Voldy to kill her instead of Harry wouldn't have made any difference if Voldy was going to AK him. The difference came from Voldy - in the genuine offer to allow her to live - which we all know comes from Sev asking Voldy to spare her.

And Lily might truthfully feel that she doesn't WANT to live on if both her husband and child are dead. So, it really isn't so much a 'mother's sacrifice' as a mother trying her best to influence Voldy into leaving her baby alive (as he had apparently done for other children).

All in all, 'Saint Lily' never exists except in the statue in Godric's Hollow. So, Lily herself never actually changed into this 'being'. It is an ideal suggested by the ministry, something they felt the wizarding public would like to believe in.

And when have we ever seen a wizarding statue to 'ideals' that was truthful. Perhaps individual statues of individual people - but certainly not in statues built by the Ministry in honor of some ideal they hold - or rather that they prefer the wizarding public to believe. This goes hand-in-hand with Fudge (and even Scrimgoer) wishing to pacify the public by promoting ideas without basis in fact.


The worst came when [info]mary_j_59, who is white and who knows that there are WOC who identify with Lily out there (such as [info]ravenstar84 and [info]randomneses, who both wrote essays in Lily's defense), posted this:

Another thought about Lily - this one is completely random. Lily, like Hermione, is a bright and talented Muggleborn, and a lot of people have attacked us here because they identify with her and consider Severus a lifelong racist.

Of course, he's not. It's canon that he changes. But-

I am starting to wonder why bright young women of color would identify with Lily. After all, her situation is not at all like theirs. They may well suffer low-level prejudice everywhere they go. Anyone can tell, by looking at another person, whether they are primarily of European, Asian, or African descent. And far too many people make judgements about others based on their ancestry. I can completely understand why these fans get outraged by young Sev's yelling "Mudblood" if they equate it with the "n" word.

But - it's really not equivalent. And Lily's situation is not in the least like theirs. She suffers no prejudice in the WW at large - yes, there is a fair-sized group whose leader wants to oppress Muggleborns, but, for most of her life, that group is not in power. No one can tell, by looking at her, whether she is Muggleborn or not. She is pretty, popular, talented, and apparently near the top of her class, at least in Potions. She would seem, as a girl, to have several friends, and not one, but at least two, bright and talented boys are after her. Her Potions professor loves her, and, since she becomes a prefect and is Head Girl, her other professors must think well of her. In short, she does not suffer from constant, low-level prejudice wherever she goes. On the contrary, she seems quite privileged, happy, and sure of her place in the Wizarding World. She's a queen bee.

So I really, really, don't see why those young women identify with her so strongly, while failing to identify with Sev or any other character with Muggle (not Muggleborn) descent.

That's my random thought. I realize it doesn't have much to do with the original question, but I'd be curious to know what others think of this dichotomy. Lily seems to be a very contradictory character, no matter how you look at her.


[info]totalreadr and Lynn ([info]lynn_waterfall on LJ) also added to the fail:

totalreadr

Oh, I dunno. The whole reason I couldn't get up much sympathy for Emmett Till over on terri's lj was because he was popular and "acting macho." In my reading on the case I even found his family quoted as expressing that his death was *especially* tragic because he *was* so popular! For me their cris de coeur Did Not Work As Intended in the same way that Gerda Weissman Klein's /All But My Life/ did not (http://raisin-gal.livejournal.com/1539.html?thread=23555#t23555). (Primo Levi's work OTOH...but I digress.)

Emmett Till was popular, macho, had a bright future, etc....up north. Down south, none of that mattered because he was still black.

Likewise Dr. Cornel West who, despite being a professor at Princeton and dressed like one, still couldn't get a cab to stop for him. His class privilege was trumped by racism.

Lily's in a similar situation: In Hogwarts, the anti-Muggle folks are out of power. "Judged on her own merits," she's a queen bee. But outside Hogwarts, Voldemort is gaining more and more power. Outside Hogwarts, her life is in danger.

Inside Hogwarts, OTOH, her privilege there blinds her to Severus' situation. Inside Hogwarts, *Severus* is the one who almost dies. She never finds out because she can't feel enough empathy for him to pick up on the situation -- he's a reject, after all.

Which is why I put "judged on her own merits," in quotes above. Just because Hogwarts isn't ruled by the anti-Muggle contingent doesn't mean its leadership doesn't have other prejudices.

I don't have much personal sympathy for people whose Privilege A gets trumped by someone else's Privilege B. They're both privileged, and neither privilege should exist.

But hey, a lot of the time what looks like a "privilege" to those who don't have it really should be a right -- rather than no one having it, everyone should.

It's just that it's sometimes hard to care that someone's being deprived of "rights" -- rights they may be automatically expecting -- that *you* routinely don't have and can't *afford* to expect. When you don't typically have it, it doesn't look like a right, just a privilege. A feminist friend once horrified me with her unholy schadenfreude at seeing male privilege get trumped by class privilege. Then I realized I experienced the exact same schadenfreude at seeing class privilege get trumped by...anything else. (Still have a chip on my shoulder.) And then there's Eldridge Cleaver....

So I think the answer to your question is: Intersectionality. And difficulty coping with it. As have we all.

Lynn

I think that an important part of it is that JKR's writing is poor, so there are a lot of blanks left for the reader to fill, and a lot of us here refuse to fill in blanks for her. The overall tone of the books makes it fairly clear how JKR would have us fill in those blanks, even if some of us aren't impressed with writing that has so many blanks.

Still, plenty of readers are happy to fill them in for her. Even without thinking about it; they settle into the books' mindset, and naturally fill things in. In which case they see Lily as someone who *does* face prejudice regularly. Probably the same with Hermione. Hermione's a better example because we see so much of her life at Hogwarts, and we never do see her face much there other than one kid who hates her and her friends anyway, and a genocidal lunatic (Diary!Riddle). I suspect, though, that people fill in blanks anyway, and assume that she faces prejudice from other people on a regular basis.

Which is possible. It isn't denied by the text. It's just that there isn't very much actually stated by the text, and we tend to make that distinction often.

(For instance, I know that some people say Severus hates Hermione because she's muggleborn. I don't think that he *likes* her, but I'm not aware of any evidence that her ancestry is the reason for his dislike. But Severus is a Slytherin, and Slytherins are anti- muggleborn, so that must be his reason, even if there's no evidence of it.)

Anyway, that's what I think it is. If it isn't that, though... it might be a kind of wish fulfillment thing. Lily (and Hermione) do face prejudice, as demonstrated by their facing racist terrorists, but they don't have to deal with it in their daily lives (on screen) in any realistic way. Draco is a jerk, but he isn't very good at it, and Hermione is confident enough to brush off his insults. Lily's best friend calls her an epithet, but she has plenty of other friends who would never do that, including the really cool boy who wants to go out with her. It's all for the best that she drop her now-former best friend, anyway, and all of her other friends will support her -- they even encourage her to drop him and to never speak to him again, to never have to deal with his prejudice again.

So, on the level that readers can relate to, Lily and Hermione have things pretty good, albeit not *perfect*. If anything worse happens to these characters at that level, the readers don't have to deal with it because it isn't on the page. The serious problems come in at a level that the readers don't deal with in their daily lives, so it doesn't interfere with the wish fulfillment. Just as Harry's story works as wish fulfillment even though we readers wouldn't want to have a Dark Lord out to kill us, or to have our childhoods revolve around a murderous lunatic.


Both [info]ravenstar84 and [info]randomneses wrote responses to this in their livejournals:

Oh...oh this is just gold....

When fandom and privilege meet!


(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

Flames. On the side of my face.
[info]kylenne
2011-01-08 03:50 pm UTC (link)
What.

THEY FUCKING BROUGHT UP EMMETT TILL IN A FUCKING HARRY POTTER ARGUMENT? AND SOME WHITE ASSHOLE HAD NO SYMPATHY FOR HIM? HE WAS A FOURTEEN YEAR OLD BOY WHO WAS BRUTALLY MURDERED FOR NO REASON BUT HIS RACE AND STILL HASN'T GOTTEN JUSTICE, NOT EVEN FIFTY YEARS LATER.

Emmett Till was stolen from his bed in the dark of night, beaten to a bloody pulp, had one of his eyes gouged out, and was shot in the head. For no fucking reason, other than some rednecks decided a black child should die in the most excruciating fashion for talking to a white woman.

Fifty years later, this precious child still hasn't seen justice. Fifty years later, this family is still suffering. And these bitches, these middle class privileged ass bitches arguing about fictional fucking characters have the nerve, the sheer audacity, to bring this up. And they have no sympathy. Of course not. What's one dead little N* mean, anyway? This is Harry fucking Potter.

This might well be the most utterly offensive bullshit I have ever read. Fuck all of these privileged ass white girls. Every last fucking one of them. With rusty anchors covered in bees.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: Flames. On the side of my face.
[info]mariem_1
2011-01-08 03:57 pm UTC (link)
[info]totalreadr, who mentioned Emmett Till, isn't even a white girl. He is a straight white guy.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Flames. On the side of my face.
[info]kylenne
2011-01-08 07:31 pm UTC (link)
Even worse! Jesus. All these people need to sit and watch the documentary on the subject. Seriously, this was one of the most heinous and notorious hate crimes in the South. You don't invoke that for a goddamn fandom argument. Especially not when you're whitesplaining racism to fans of color.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Flames. On the side of my face.
[info]mariem_1
2011-01-08 04:17 pm UTC (link)
Here is [info]totalreadr's comment about Emmett Till "over on terri's lj":

Aaaaand now I'm going to rant at you. Sorry; sensitive subject.

that child had the absolute, unmitigated gall to whistle at a white woman.

This really bothers me. No one deserves to be beaten to death. Emmett Till's murderers should have been put away forever. But wolf whistling is sexual harassment. Don't imply it's nothing.

A wolf whistle is a *threat*. It's about "I can hurt you because I'm a man and you're a woman." It's *not* about "I think you're cute." It's a sexually-charged threat.

Emmett Till's murder was horrible, but it isn't an endpoint.

You might be thinking that Emmett's behavior was "just teenage bravado" -- but that's what teen male bravado *is*: showing off the power of your newly-acquired manhood. If Emmett chose to show off his male power over a white woman, he chose to pit male privilege against white privilege. Neither privilege should exist.

Please don't minimize the harm done by either of them.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Flames. On the side of my face.
[info]duraniedrama
2011-01-08 04:28 pm UTC (link)
The Wikipedia tells me:

The facts of what transpired in the store are still disputed, but according to several versions, Till may have wolf-whistled at Bryant. A newspaper account following his disappearance stated that Till sometimes whistled to alleviate his stuttering

The fact that he spends more time talking about what Emmet Till may have done than what was done TO him says some pretty telling things about this guy.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Flames. On the side of my face.
[info]jaseroque
2011-01-08 04:36 pm UTC (link)
*blank stare* Okay, that's it. I can't brain any more today.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Flames. On the side of my face.
[info]zebeckras
2011-01-08 04:47 pm UTC (link)
This makes me totally throw up. JUST NO.

One of the "I'm not a racist!" arguments that I hate the most is the one where people say "but what about how the WHITE people feel? THAT's racism too!" Hey everyone, remember, those kids who murdered Emmett Till were *suffering* too! Let's not forget that life got really, really hard for them after they killed Till, and you know, Till was just ONE guy. We're talking about a whole *group* of white boys here, why isn't anyone mentioning how much they had to go through? You are ALL racists!! SHAME on you! White people are being marginalized, and we're the real victims!

[I should not post while angry.]

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Flames. On the side of my face.
[info]napalmnacey
2011-01-12 12:12 pm UTC (link)
I dunno, I've always found your angry posting awesome.

And yeah, what you said. (I have only the energy to agree with people this week).

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Flames. On the side of my face.
[info]randomneses
2011-01-08 05:54 pm UTC (link)
...I SWEAR TO GOD THERE ARE NO WORDS.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Icon not directed at you.
[info]pantyless_angel
2011-01-08 06:39 pm UTC (link)
Considering this: More importantly, her father was dying and I wasn't supportive. I wasn't supportive because she sent me a form e-mail. I wrote personal e-mails directly to her, but she...sent a form e-mail to me and all her other friends. After she sent me the form e-mail AND ONLY THE FORM E-MAIL, no personal message at all EVER, I just stopped e-mailing her. (And then her father died and I didn't send my condolences. Because I'd stopped e-mailing her. That makes it sound like I did it to hurt her, out of anger, but really it was just apathy.) Isn't that pathetic? If Only She Had Used The Bcc Field Instead Of The Cc Field, We Would Still Be Friends!

Seriously, if only we'd been older. I don't know what she's like now, but I'd bet if she'd been older she'd have sent the occasional, very short but still, personal message. Because you do. And I know if I were in that situation today, I'd just say, "Hey, I know you're very busy and stressed, but you need to send a *friend* more than just a form letter. Drop me the occasional personal note -- or take me off your mailing list." Even if she'd chosen the latter, it would have been a more satisfying ending, you know?"
from here: http://totalreadr.livejournal.com/3601.html

I'm not surprised at all, he's just showing how truly vile he is.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Icon not directed at you.
[info]alexa
2011-01-08 08:59 pm UTC (link)
I don't know what she's like now, but I'd bet if she'd been older she'd have sent the occasional, very short but still, personal message. Because you do.

"Because, even if her father was dying, all my needy, self-centered demands should've been catered to. And when I was not immediately placated, like a child in a temper tantrum, I removed all emotional support at the time she needed it the most. That's what friends do!"

What a nasty piece of work.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Icon not directed at you.
[info]ekaterinv
2011-01-08 10:33 pm UTC (link)
Yeah, we discussed that a while ago on the hms_stfu. He's like the Platonic ideal of a Nice Guy(tm).

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Flames. On the side of my face.
[info]finchbird
2011-01-08 07:20 pm UTC (link)
WHAT THE FUCK?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Your username reminded me
[info]skypirate
2011-01-08 09:43 pm UTC (link)
Somewhere in fiction-land Atticus Finch is crying.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Your username reminded me - [info]theorclair, 2011-01-08 09:48 pm UTC
Re: Your username reminded me - [info]phosfate, 2011-01-08 10:13 pm UTC
Re: Flames. On the side of my face.
[info]kylenne
2011-01-08 07:50 pm UTC (link)
It's like he has no fucking clue about the sad and sordid history of false accusations like that sending innocent black men (KIDS EVEN) to their deaths in defense of some bullshit pseudo-Victorian notion of white womanhood.

It's like he has no fucking clue that a fourteen year old black male in the 50's being sent south to visit family would have totally been warned to watch his behavior around whites, particularly women, specifically for this reason. It's like he doesn't know that by far the most common motive for lynchings were rape accusations that later turned out to be proven false in pretty much every circumstance. The incident that was the final straw in setting off the Tulsa Race Riots in 1921 was another high profile lynching with this same motive. Black people grew up with these stories. My mother is old enough to remember them, and to remember the admonitions she got from my grandmother as to how she should be careful on family trips down to South Carolina in the 50s.

He just has no fucking clue. At all. About anything. There is something visceral and persistent in the white American psyche about the meme of the predatory black male sullying delicate white women, who need literal white knights to rescue them (see also: the OJ Simpson trial, regardless of his guilt or innocence). That this asschab is, in 2011, playing right into this bullshit without an ounce of irony is depressing as fuck and entirely too predictable.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Flames. On the side of my face.
[info]theorclair
2011-01-08 08:37 pm UTC (link)
His biggest crime, really, was being from Chicago. Not that Chicago in the 50's was a bastion of tolerance or anything, but he just didn't understand how bad it was for blacks in the South.

I just read this book about the case, and I was crying because it seemed so senseless.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Flames. On the side of my face.
[info]emily_goddess
2011-01-08 07:53 pm UTC (link)
Oh, look someone using feminism to justify their racism. My, how original!

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Flames. On the side of my face. - [info]agent_hyatt, 2011-01-08 09:43 pm UTC
Re: Flames. On the side of my face. - [info]emily_goddess, 2011-01-08 11:39 pm UTC
Re: Flames. On the side of my face. - [info]sailorlum, 2011-01-09 11:11 am UTC
Re: Flames. On the side of my face. - [info]phosfate, 2011-01-08 10:14 pm UTC
Re: Flames. On the side of my face. - [info]emily_goddess, 2011-01-08 11:43 pm UTC
Re: Flames. On the side of my face.
[info]sandglass
2011-01-08 09:17 pm UTC (link)
If Emmett chose to show off his male power over a white woman, he chose to pit male privilege against white privilege.

Not to forgive sexism, but fuck that. He was, if it happened at all, being a teenaged boy. Teenaged boys do stupid things, including not realizing that they're whistling at the wrong woman, or not realizing that that whistle is threatening at all!

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Flames. On the side of my face. - [info]alexa, 2011-01-09 01:00 am UTC
Re: Flames. On the side of my face. - [info]fern_on_fen, 2011-01-09 10:16 pm UTC
Re: Flames. On the side of my face.
[info]ladyofviolets
2011-01-08 09:24 pm UTC (link)
... what.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Flames. On the side of my face.
[info]phosfate
2011-01-08 10:18 pm UTC (link)
Silver lining: Following Mr Till's murder, no woman was ever harassed on the streets again, ever. So, victory over sexism!

I have to go put my head in the snow blower now.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Flames. On the side of my face. - [info]napalmnacey, 2011-01-12 12:17 pm UTC
Re: Flames. On the side of my face.
[info]ekaterinv
2011-01-08 10:40 pm UTC (link)
I'm in the camp that believes Till did not wolf whistle. It was common practice for white racist men to claim they were defending the honor of white women when they lynched black men, and they made up shit after the fact in order to excuse their "macho" MURDERING OF PEOPLE. The supposed need to "protect" white women from the dire threat of black maleness is how lynching parties justified themselves. (And make sure that white male ownership of the sexuality of all women was not challenged.) Racism and sexism therefore went merrily along together, as they usually do.

And totalreadr is a whitesplaining, mansplaining, douchenozzle of a twonk.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Flames. On the side of my face. - [info]phosfate, 2011-01-08 11:34 pm UTC
Re: Flames. On the side of my face. - [info]abharding, 2011-01-09 08:34 pm UTC
Re: Flames. On the side of my face. - [info]ekaterinv, 2011-01-09 10:17 pm UTC
Re: Flames. On the side of my face.
[info]sailorlum
2011-01-09 12:00 pm UTC (link)
I hate this guy [totalreadr] =D: <--hurls

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Flames. On the side of my face.
[info]ikabod
2011-01-09 03:54 pm UTC (link)
My brain is broken. I can't even...What.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Flames. On the side of my face.
[info]tachikoma01
2011-01-09 04:34 pm UTC (link)
I find the fact that he needed to repeat 'white' woman is quite telling about his mentality.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Flames. On the side of my face.
[info]napalmnacey
2011-01-12 12:10 pm UTC (link)
Yeah, that's pretty much how I feel about it. Exactly. Just - just - what you said. *beyond anger*

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Read comments) -

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map