I don’t know how many of you have read this awesome post at Shapely Prose, but if you haven’t, please do. I am loving this wave of posts in which bloggers are proudly taking a stand on being good at what they do, and having high standards and authority. (Not like Technorati authority or Eric Cartman’s authori-tay. Wink wink, Rachel. Stay dry!)
Here is another great post by a blogger I have added to my out-of-control blog reader, That Post on Natural Childbirth on The Feminist Agenda.
And, this bit of awesomeness at Fugitivus. The post is pretty specific to a recent post she wrote about adoption, and how she is sick of putting up disclaimers and catering to reactionary commenters who derail these conversations. But, it is similar to what a lot of these posts are saying. She says:
I’m not catering to anybody else, and I’ve never felt any shame over that, despite how many trolls have tried to make me feel shame by screeching about free speech and limited perspective and your tone is too angry and oh my god she’s using swears.
The whole post, and all of the other ones I link to, are all worth a read. Here is my reply on harriet’s post at Fugitivus:
Wowza. Love it.
Sorry, I am about to go off.
I forwarded your recent adoption post to a friend of mine. She is someone who had a relatively successful adoption, but is so in tune with the major flaws in the whole adoption industry. I am incredibly lucky to have learned about adoption on a deeper level, and been shown the issues of adoptive parent privilege and birth mother (and adoptee) silencing prevailing media and cultural dialogue. The barriers to being able to discover one’s genetic identity and familial history as an adoptee.
I learned what I have learned by listening to the people in my life that are part of the adoption triad, and through my interaction with birth mothers (and adoptive parents, and adoptee infants) as a health care practitioner-to-be. I still feel like I need to tread lightly before I start bloviating on this subject.
One of my pet peeves is when people stumble on to a very technical conversation that involves a layered understanding of privilege just to broach the specific topic, and starts crapping all over it. This happened on Alas A Blog when talking about research on maternal mortality and racism. If you can’t even acknowledge there has been good research on racism and its real effects on health care outcomes, then don’t come crapping on the conversation with a hypothetical “Well, has anyone ever looked into how CLASS plays into this? Hmmmm?” thinking you are coming up with a brilliant new angle that us researchers have NEVER thought of doing multifactorial analysis on, and if you don’t even know what the word “confounder” means and you didn’t even read the article you are bloviating about, I am not interested in having a conversation with you, and I may sound sarcastic when I call you out.
You’re completely right that there is a learning curve to this, and this is not a 101 site. You cannot get into a deep discussion about these topics if you have to put up with derails. It has happened on my site. I am not going to stop a discussion about the intricacies of health care reform because one commenter is spouting off Glenn Beck quotes at me about how taxation is like stealing from your neighbor. I am not going to stop a discussion about pregnancy or breastfeeding because one commenter is saying their experience is more important than the real barriers and layers of privileged fucked up ness and loss of autonomy surrounding that whole experience for millions of people.
There is a conversation going on in the genfemblogosphere about taking a stand on the importance of what you are writing about, and having high standards, and not taking any shit from people who want to say you’re not authoritative on what you really are pretty authoritative on, in your own space, to boot.
There’s nothing wrong with having high standards for the conversation you are hosting.