We've received a ton of responses to our call for submissions for Yes Means Yes, and we're so psyched that everyone is so invested in the project. Some of the feedback has been encouraging and some of it has been critical, and we've been grateful for both sorts of responses. We've also taken some of the criticisms to heart and have integrated them into a new, Version 2.0 Call for Submissions which says more of what we meant and (hopefully) less of what we didn't, and fills in a few blind spots that were rightfully pointed out.
Here she is in all her glory after the jump-- hope she makes you even more excited about submitting something!
~Jaclyn and Jessica
UPDATE: Ravenmn has asked us to unlink to her roundup of the critical discussion, so we have. You can follow that conversation at the following folks' blogs: Tekanji, Magniloquence, Sylvia, Sudy, Fire fly, Veronica, Theriomorph, I'm falling up. As the conversation was wide-ranging, we know we didn't get a chance to read all of it -- we apologize if we've missed yours. Feel free to link to it in the comments.
CALL FOR SUBMISSIONS: Yes Means Yes: Visions of Female Sexual Power and a World Without Rape
Co-editors Jaclyn Friedman and Jessica Valenti are seeking submissions for their anthology on sex, rape and power, Yes Means Yes!, to be published by Seal Press in Fall 2008.
Imagine a world where women enjoy sex on their own terms and aren't shamed for it. Imagine a world where men treat their sexual partners as collaborators, not conquests. Imagine a world where rape is rare and swiftly punished.
Welcome to the world of Yes Means Yes.
Yes Means Yes! will make the world safer for women to say yes and no to sex as we please. We are looking to collect sharp and insightful essays, from voices both established and new, that explore how creating a culture which values genuine female sexual pleasure can help stop rape.
Potential essay subjects could address:
How public sex education is taught, and to whom.
Self-defense and creating the kind of safety required for meaningful consent and pleasure
The new backlash against rape survivors (e.g., media obsession with female drinking and slutty "Girls Gone Wild" being to blame for assault.)
Analyzing and eradicating sexual shame in American culture
Bringing men back into the conversation, making men co-leaders in the movement to dismantle the cultural dynamics which support and encourage rape
How queer rape is reinforced by patriarchy, heteronormative stereotypes and the commodification of sexuality, and how centering female sexual power can combat queer rape
Thoughts on “enthusiastic consent�
Taking Back the Porn: How changing the pornography industry can help stop rape
Combating the hypersexualization of women of color to make way for genuine refusal and genuine consent
The power of language (naming rape for what it is, or the new myth of “gray rape�)
A primer for men on sexual assault
How a society that values good sex (where women’s pleasure is central) can undermine rape culture and make it easier to identify and prosecute rapists.
Rethinking sexual interaction as a collaborative performance, as opposed to as an exchange of a commodity or service
Who owns our pleasure? An analysis of the economics of female sexual alienation/oppression, and an economic model for resistance
Holding the mainstream media accountable for torture porn, kidnapping crusades and faux feminism.
Overcoming commercially enforced sexual stereotypes to organize across race, class, gender, and difference
Homophobia, compulsory masculinity, and why genuine male pleasure matters, too
Creating accurate media representations of rape
Beyond consent: state-sanctioned and institutional rape that even the healthiest sexual culture won't stop
People of all all colors, cultures, genders and preferences, published and unpublished authors, are all encouraged to submit essays. Be creative, be visionary, be outraged, be passionate, be funny! Perhaps most importantly, we are seeking essays with a pro-active bent that offer new and insightful thoughts and actions on how to dismantle rape culture. “No Means No� is not enough -- let’s think “Yes Means Yes!�
SUBMISSION GUIDELINES:
Please submit your essays to yesmeansyes2008@gmail.com no later than March 1, 2008.
Essays should be from 2000 to 5000 words, double spaced and paginated. Please include your address, phone number, email address and a short bio.
We will pay $100 for each essay published in the final book.
ABOUT YOUR EDITORS:
Jaclyn Friedman
Jaclyn Friedman is a queer Jewish writer, performer and activist. In her work as the Program Director for the Center for New Words she produces 50 plus events per year, including author discussions, writing workshops, open mics, political discussions, music concerts, book groups and special events. She is Co-Founder and Co-Chair of WAM!, CNW's conference on Women, Action & the Media. Friedman's work has been published in many outlets including Bitch, AlterNet, Women's eNews, PW.org. She performs and agitates with Big Moves, a national size-diverse dance and performance troupe. She holds an MFA in Creative Writing from Emerson College and has received a 2001 Cambridge Poetry Award, a 2004 Somerville Arts Council Artist Grant, and a recent fellowship from the Vermont Studio Center.
Jessica Valenti
Jessica Valenti, 29, is the founder and Executive Editor of Feministing.com and the author of Full Frontal Feminism: A Young Woman’s Guide to Why Feminist Matters. Jessica has a Masters degree in Women's and Gender Studies from Rutgers University and has worked with national and international women’s organizations, including Planned Parenthood, NARAL Pro-Choice America and the Women’s Environment and Development Organization. She is also a co-founder of the REAL hot 100, a campaign that aims to change the perception of younger women in the media, and a contributing author to We Don’t Need Another Wave and Single State of the Union.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Yes Means Yes: A revised call for submissions.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/6600
Weekly Feministing Newsletter
Feministing RSS Feed
I'm not up for submitting anything, but I just wanted to say I'm really excited about reading this when it comes out and that I hope it includes the concept that rape/sexual assault is based on lack of enthusiastic consent and not on whether or not the victim needs therapy afterwards. I think some people think if you're not destroyed by it, it wasn't really rape, and thence comes "gray rape." But I get the feeling this focus on yes instead of no will make that clear and I'm really happy about it.
This explains your thesis much more clearly.
Thanks!
An exciting anthology idea.
Wow, my traffic just went through the roof. And for a post that I didn't even write so much as collect. In the interest of creating a community, could you please do something for me.
I would much prefer you remove the link to my page, since I didn't actually write independently, and replace it with direct links from here to the posts I highlight in my round up.
Since a post here apparently creates huge traffic, I'd much rather that traffic go to the people responsible for the well-written critiques.
Thanks so much!
Thanks!
I just read this article: http://ca.askmen.com/fashion/austin_100/120_fashion_style.html. It was about "Feminism and Its Benefits." The article is somewhat offensive with gems such as, "she's wearing one of those low-cut shirts and a pair of Juicy pants that scream, 'objectify me as a whole, but focus on the T&A, boys.'" Implying that the clothing a woman wears tells others to objectify her. But the comments are worse, as usual.
This new call certainly has a different tone and many new suggested topics - any chance you could elaborate on where those ideas came from?
I'm done. I really am.
I'm not even bothering to link to my blog because I doubt you even know who the fuck I am or who any of those "critical" people are. Maybe you'll mention us at WAM when you talk about "beating back backlash" or some other shit. Maybe. I doubt it. We'll just be a faceless mine of ideas for you.
So done with this shit.
Applaud the sentiment, but wish it didn't sound so academic. Surely we need something without the buzzword vocabulary?
KRK -- many of the new ideas came from the critiques in the post we link to, including Sylvia's.
All these points are awesome and well thought out, there is just one that keeps being amiss...
*empowering women to be sexually pro-active without being considered s--ts*
One of the main factors in rape is that men keep being told that unless they win over or seduce a woman, they're not a "real man".
So far, so bad. We all know the patriarchal source of this. And feminism has done (and keeps doing a great job) of fighting it. It's obviously a huge battle.
==== The huge part that keeps being ignored however is the part where young women themselves are supporting the "male hunting mentality"====
The fact of the matter is that 99.9% of sex on this planet is initiated by men, simply because women believe they shouldn't be the one initiate it (even when they want it).
When interviewed, most of these women will tell men that "well it's a man's job to be the aggressor" and "men love the hunt, so that's why I make men conquer" etc...
This is one of those myths that is both supported by the media, and mainstream relationship books (like the infamous rules).
The scary thing is that many a young women who would call themselves "liberated" or "feminist" also seem to think they don't have a right to initiate sex...
...for the fear of being labeled "easy", "sl=t" and other labels, unfortunately by both men and women. Thereby encouraging young men to grow up with the "hunter's mentality"
Hence, one part of the issue that is forgotten many a times is *empowering* women sexually.
Initiating sex doesn't make you a bad woman, nor does it mean you're not a "good girl". Even though not seeming entirely connected, I believe it to be an important facet of the rape problem.
I was wondering why this steady trickle of visitors were coming from Ravenmn into my blog from a post she made nearly three weeks ago on a call that initially couldn't be edited.
I guess I've gotten my answer.
Thanks.
It seems to me that, when changing something to include the ideas of others, it would make the most sense to attribute each idea to its originator from the get-go.
Following Ravenmn's request to link directly to those who wrote critiques of your initial call would have helped. But really, linking to Sylvia and her colleagues in the first place is the only proper way to give credit to your sources. They have given their time and thoughts, and if you must pull from their ideas, it is only appropriate to give them due credit. To do otherwise is to besmirch the very ideas that you're trying to pull forth in this latest call.
"The fact of the matter is that 99.9% of sex on this planet is initiated by men."
um, citation needed.
KRK- I appreciate your point, but it would be difficult (if not impossible) to attribute each specific idea to its originator at this point, because many of the ideas were discussed in multiple places by commenters as well as bloggers. It's been a complex, interlocking conversation, and we want to give credit to everyone on Raven's excellent list, as well as to their commenters.
alicepaul, there are no studies on who initiates sex on first time. Only for married and long-time couples (still 66%)
But that wasn't the point...
Do you really need a study to know that women get *judged*, *berated* and *put down* all the time for initiating sex?
The truth is that beyond all advances... society still doesn't let women be pursuers or initiators... and it labels them "unfeminine" and other such restricting roles.
As a man, I would like to express my appreciation for this recognition of sexual assault/rape in all its forms. Experiences like mine often escape attention.
AlekNovis, I don't know what world you're living in, but some women actually DO initiate sex. I can tell you that with 100% certainty because I'm one of them. In spite of all the messages society sends women about sex, plenty of us are smart enough and strong enough to overcome them. First kiss with my BF? I initiated it. First mention of sex as a possibility? Again, me. First time having sex? So much so I was practically seducing the poor boy - not that he minded. ;) My point being, don't mix up society's messages with reality.
Hey Liz, kudos to you, you are truly a liberated woman as is just about every reader of this blog. You do know what (unfortunately) you're still an exception to the rule?
I don't know why my message didn't come across :) I guess it's my darn newbie english again (i'm not a native speaker), i'll try putting it another way :)
I wasn't trying to be judgmental and say "you women don't do stuff", or "women don't do stuff" or "why don't you women start initiating"
Not at all :) I am trying to say that society that this is one area where a much larger percentage of women have been left unliberated than in other areas. It's the one place where society has a strong tight gender-role still in place almost as much as in the 19th century.
I know a lot of strong-character feminists. And you know what? They successfully escape all gender-roles that society puts on them. Every single one of them. But this (initiating dates, kiss, sex etc) is one that even the majority of feminists I know haven't yet escaped. Some have.
Aside from liberated, intelligent feminists... most women are still shackled by these gender roles when it comes to sexuality, dating, love and relationships.
There are no definite studies to be cited at this moment, but way less than 1 percent of all kisses and date requests, as well as sex (in the western world) are yet initiated by the woman.
Mainly because every single study in existence assumes that men do the initiating, so there isn't even a study on how liberated women are on this aspect (do a little research you'll be astonished). All studies on sex-initiation study all kinds of factors, except gender, it never comes into play, the male being the initiator is assumed.
I think that's kind of amazing. The entire academic field actually *assumes* that all initiations of sex, dating, relationships are done by men... They are in fact ignoring liberated women like you entirely.
That's why i'm point out that this is one field where society has been left dominating it's "gender restricting role". Liberation at this field has been a lot smaller and slower than in other areas as of yet.
Alek, perhaps the language barrier is making it difficult for me to understand what you are saying. I think I get the point that there is social pressure on women to be the sexual gatekeepers, and on men to be conquerers, which I agree with. But this 99.9% vs. 1% stuff seems weird to me, if there is not a particular study you are citing.
You can get your message across without having to make up statistics. If this is a perception based on your personal experience, then say so, don't throw out arbitrary numbers.
Jaclyn,
Acknowledging sources goes towards accountability -- something you need to have in order to have some kind of basis to the claim to speak for feminism. The kind of commentary you have reduced to a sentence here is what ought to take up many paragraphs in the editors' introduction to the final volume. Changes being made to a book proposal after online discussion has called its conceptualisation into question are not without precedent in the world of feminist book-publishing, and in all such volumes I can think of the editors acknowledged specific ideas and originators without having to go into detail about who said what. There's also such a thing as an acknowledgements list, to which one customarily adds individual names.
I still, however, believe my criticism -- that this anthology will be biased towards certain types of sexual violence at the expense of others -- remains. I'm not suggesting that the book should aim for universality, but that it should at least attempt to be conscious of its limits.
-Fire Fly
alicepaul -
Perhaps you're thinking about it too literally. In my mind (at least), saying "99.9%" is the percentage equivalent of saying there were a "million" people at the grocery store, or that you ate a "ton" of pizza.
Denying that by far the vast majority of sexual experiences (including kissing) are initiated by men even if you just so happen to fall outside of that majority is kind of silly. That would be like me saying that because I have no interest in sex, it proves all women have no interest in sex. It may be my reality, but I'm well aware that it's not reality for a vast majority of the population.
"KRK- I appreciate your point, but it would be difficult (if not impossible) to attribute each specific idea to its originator at this point, because many of the ideas were discussed in multiple places by commenters as well as bloggers."
It would not be difficult or impossible to link here all the women who were involved in this conversation or at least to list their names on this post. Instead you link to a (white) woman who compiled all of the links while once again leaving WOC unacknowledged.
"It would not be difficult or impossible to link here all the women who were involved in this conversation or at least to list their names on this post."
That's not the point I was responding to. That, we have already done (please see UPDATE above.)
What's with the knee-jerk reaction to Alek?
I interpreted "99.9%" to mean "the vast majority." And that's true. He wasn't being literal.
"It would not be difficult or impossible to link here all the women who were involved in this conversation or at least to list their names on this post."
That's not the point I was responding to. That, we have already done (please see UPDATE above.)
And yet, there is still no acknowledgment that it was a mistake not to link to the primary sources to begin with. You made the change at Raven's request, and while that I commend you for the update, it would be gracious (if nothing else) to acknowledge the original error.
Why is this so hard to understand?
Thanks for updating the attributions! Much appreciated.
Ravenmn
Xana: I really don't see what Ravenmn's race has to do with anything?
That was what was originally linked because that was a summary not because the poster was white.
I think by adding race for no real reason I can see you just undermined your own valid criticism!
I think by adding race for no real reason I can see you just undermined your own valid criticism!
And it begins.
We're debating the merits of an anthology that hasn't even been compiled yet.
So far, we know the names of the editors and the title of the book.
That's not a lot to go on.
Even the suggested topics are just that, suggestions--and these preliminary guidelines have already been revised and expanded based on further suggestions.
Let's give this project a chance.
You have a typo in the updated post. It's "Theriomorph." Don't usually point out typos, but it strikes me that in this context you'd want to make sure to fix that one.
Majikthise: you've been following the discussion, right? The criticisms that Blackamazon, BfP, Sylvia/M, Theriomorph, She Who Stumbles, etc., have been making address not just this specific project, but how it represents problems endemic to [white] feminism in general.
Yes Means Yes is just the most recent example of how mainstream feminist bloggers marginalize women of colour, poor women, women of colonized cultures, women who reject the label "feminist" (and not 'cause they think it means "man-hater"!), and many more.
Again and again, "big" feminists have misrepresented or simply ignored WOC who call out racism and privilege; many WOC and allies, in frustration, have gone on hiatus at some point, and some (like Nubian) have quit the blogosphere completely.
I do agree that change can happen. Chris Clarke and Ilyka left Pandagon; but Kactus is now part of Feministe. Even people who never leave the white-feminists-who-love-abortion-'n'-Democrats 'sphere are continually getting access to new perspectives.
Unfortunately, Yes Means Yes seems to be rather exclusive and limited from the start, and no twiddling with the essay suggestions will fix it.
Wow. When I read the first proposal, I was excited about the possibilities of this anthology, and when I read version 2.0 I was encouraged all over again. One of the reasons I love working with feminist activists and intellectuals is their/our collective willingness to incorporate critical voices. Each individual project can't be the be-all, end-all of feminist movement, but I feel like we keep striving.
I guess I'm just surprised at the level of anger and vitriol directed (as Lindsay pointed out above) at an anthology that hasn't even been written yet. If you have ideas for a topic that wasn't included in the proposal, write an essay and submit it! This is an opportunity for us all to make our voices heard.
====alicepaul===
I think I get the point that there is social pressure on women to be the sexual gatekeepers, and on men to be conquerers, which I agree with.
====alicepaul===
Yeah, that's what I was fumbling around trying to communicate. You put it elegantly.
We live in a society that teaches our sons to be conquerers... and not only that, it teaches them to draw their entire feeling of self-worth on how much they conquer.
On the other hand it teaches our daughters to be gatekeepers and draw their entire identity on how good of a gatekeeper they are.
Hence, conditioning sexual initiation to be an act of "men knocking down gates".
...instead of say looking at sex as "the physical manifestation of mutual pleasure and attraction"
An obviously overlooked source of rape, I think.
As for the 99.999% thing. Yeah where we live that's like saying "I ate a ton of pizza". I thought it was obvious. I'll be more careful next time though. Thanks. :) And thanks for the conquerer/gatekeeper metaphor. That's kinda like what I was looking for but couldn't put to words.
Ok, I have a question.
So if what I'm gathering from the comments and post here correct then the discussions about the call are pretty spread out and not all necessarily easily found via the links here. That being said, could someone point me in the right direction for a basic break down of the critiques regarding race?
Ayla,
The links above (the full list) do point you to the discussions / critiques you are seeking. I think the issue you may be referring to was that the first *revised call* linked only to one blog page featuring a round-up of those many links. It takes time to read them all, but the links above are correct, and it is worth it.
I will also add Chris Clarke's post (sorry I can't format for shit):
http://faultline.org/index.php/site/comments/on_rape_and_privilege_and_being_seen/
Charity -
thanks. apparently my cold medicine had wrapped itself firmly around the part of my brain needed for reading comprehension today.
Charity, thanks for linking that article. It's very eye-opening.
Yes, thank you, Charity. I figured the negative reactions on this thread must have a history that explained them but wasn't sure if I should ask (or how to, without making it sound like I was dismissing them completely).
You are welcome, but all I did was post one link...all of the links posted above, in the update, are central to the discussion. For a broader conversation, I will dare link to this post:
http://hugoschwyzer.net/2008/01/03/feminism-marketing-evangelism-inclusion/
and Brownfemipower's response:
http://brownfemipower.com/?p=2092
And with that, I'm out!
Lindsay Beyerstein and annajcook, the value of a book like this isn't just in the writing but its research methodology. You can't just say 'don't judge until it's done!' because the method of making the book itself is already under way and is in many ways questionable. I do appreciate the changes they've made to the idea though, and think they should be properly credited.
Another concern of mine is the fee. $100 (£50) is significantly less than I receive to write a 700-word review for a magazine. I don't know what's normal in the US, but £50 for 2-3000 words strikes me as ridiculously low for a contribution to a book. Obviously open submission means there will be a lot of newer writers being considered, but in the end the most deserving and best writers will be chosen - as with any book. I understand low pay/free labour in situations when the book is likely to be completely under the radar, or when the book is a community effort which will then be distributed for free. But this is, I hope, going to be a big shiny publishing project. Why not pay your writers properly? Sounds like cheap labour to me.
Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of this project and I think opening it up to new writers is great. It could really provide a platform for the collective contributions of the feministing community. But people MUST be paid properly and MUST receive credit for their work. (And I can't believe we have to point this out on a feminist forum of all places!)
What's "queer rape"? I've been queer for a pretty long time now, and have never heard this term, at least in the queer community.
Please delink me form this page.
I was not consulted with, talked to a or even remotely engaged as a human being , with even the basic amount of intellectual respect .
Both in threads where both authors found time to comment but overlooked the fact that I was being maligned IN their defense. OR where I was ignored in favor of large scale mea culpas but the took time to assure someone of tehir ability to contiribute but not mine to to be treated as a decent human being , or to defend against some repugnantly evil transexual baiting .
Also please make sure that unless someone contacts me further to remove my name form all further calls , and any and all phraseology in reference to this project.
The critiques offered ( had they been properly read) were not to "help" improve this book ( a for profit venture which violates my copyright and a couple others as well) but to hopefully instigate a larger more nuanced discussion on the treatment of the realities of women of color. A discussion that it is now plain , is refused to being engaged with involving the women of color who dissent.
Thank you for the support consideration and respect you have treated this young woman of color with , which is officially little to none
I want nothing to do with this.
Perdita, we soooo wish we could pay more. You are largely overestimating how shiny this project is, in terms of how much money we or the publishers stand to make on it (which is to say, hardly anything). As writers ourselves, we know how rough that is, believe me, and we wish we could do something about it, though I'll point out that $100 is also what the pay is for writing a 3,000 word feature article for Bitch Magazine. Not because they're stingy, nor are we -- there's just not a lot of money in publishing feminist perspectives these days.
B. Dagger Lee, what we mean by "queer rape" is simply rape that is perpetrated in a queer context. Rape by one lgbtqi person against another.