Once upon a time, there was a reviewer confident that his reading habits were egalitarian, at least as far as books by men or women went[1]. After all, he knew the relevant stats for one of the three companies he freelanced for: 45% books by women, close enough to 50% for folk music.
To his surprise, the story was different at another company he freelanced for. Very different.
| Year | Books by Women/Books Total |
| 2010 | 0.33 |
| 2011 | 0.0 |
| 2012 | 0.2 |
| Average | 0.19 |
That reviewer was me.
How did this happen? I was overconfident and didn’t notice that not only were the lists of works I was offered were dominated by men, my choices amplified those biases.
As I saw it, I had three basic options, in terms of moving forward:
1: Deny that there’s a problem
I could draw on Brust’s “Everybody generalizes from one example. At least, I do,” and argue that all reviewers have some degree of gender bias. After all, the other reviewers freelancing for the same outlet, all women, had grabbed most of the books written by women before I ever saw the list of books to review. For all I know. It’s not like I checked if the lists started off with a lot more books by women.
“I sure hope my biases are general” seemed methodologically suspect, however. I already knew my gut instincts were flawed. Also, just because biases are common doesn’t mean they are acceptable.
2: Deny that there are women writers!
This is a surprisingly common gambit, along with its sibling, “women do not write anything of significance.” The first led John Lauritsen to arguing that Mary Shelley didn’t write Frankenstein, because it’s significant and she was but a callow 19-year-old girl, and the second led Germaine Greer to argue Mary Shelley did write Frankenstein but dismiss the book as crap. It leads to articles in The Guardian astounded at the idea of women fantasy authors, as though women have not been writing speculative fiction all along.
I know from personal experience there are lots of top-notch books by women. I also don’t actually want to use Joanna Russ’ How To Suppress Women’s Writing as a personal how-to, so that was out as well.
3: Actually pay attention to what I read.
Which, as a reviewer, is what I am actually paid to do. I keep a running count for each months’ reviews, as well as an annual one and I make a point of posting them so if I screw up, it’s public[2].
This might seem a very artificial approach to what is after all the perfectly natural process of experiencing guided hallucinations by staring at a series of arbitrary symbols on thin sheets of pulped wood. As I sit here typing on oil and dirt transformed by will and cunning into an electronic brain, I find I am surprisingly comfortable with artifice. I live in a house, not a natural cave. I wear clothes. My eyesight is rendered less laughable by eye glasses. I use a slide rule. Humans and their kin have been modifying their environment and themselves for millions of years. Being particular about what I read is just another tool.
As well, prioritizing deliberation over whim serves several goals that I find worthwhile. The more parameters I track, the easier it is to pick specific books to read from the ocean of noteworthy books published each year. It gives me a broader grasp of the field than I would have if I focused on a tiny specific subset of the people working in it. Most importantly, it staves off the day when I turn into one of those old people who are utterly convinced nothing good has been published since they were 14. Being consumed piece by piece by the Brain Eater I myself named will no doubt be hilarious for everyone else to watch, but I won’t give in to it willingly.
Perhaps one day the publishing industry will reach a point where women and people of color will have an equal shot at having their work published and reviewed, but until that parity is achieved, reviewers who put in the effort need not accept the outdated status quo.
1: Some years later, I had a related epiphany: I don’t make a particular effort to read books by POC but I may still have read more such books than the venues Strange Horizons looked at not because I read a lot of them but because the competition generally read so few… This time my gut instincts didn’t fail me: it turned out just 7% of the books I reviewed were by POC. It also turned out that that was a higher fraction than the overwhelming majority of the sites covered by the 2014 Strange Horizons annual count.
2: To balance the potential humiliation with the occasional burst of endorphins, I use the Strange Horizons count as a comparative. It’s not that I am in any sense competitive. You could line up a hundred people and I would be less competitive than ninety-five of them. Maybe ninety-eight. It’s just that not outdoing the competition by at least an order of magnitude is the same as failing.
In the words of Wikipedia editor TexasAndroid, prolific book reviewer and perennial Darwin Award nominee James Davis Nicoll is of “questionable notability.” His work has appeared in Publishers Weekly and Romantic Times as well as on his own websites, James Nicoll Reviews and Young People Read Old SFF (where he is assisted by editor Karen Lofstrom and web person Adrienne L. Travis). He is surprisingly flammable.
Or you could try small publishers and self-published authors.
I only buy ebooks these days, mostly from amazon. Which means I only see the title, author, and blurb. (And, side note, most of the books I buy I find out about from Tor.com’s Fiction Affliction, so please keep that up, ‘k?) I don’t know much about the authors unless I liked a book enough to see what else the author has written (or I want to send a note to the author saying that I liked it).
I rely on people like James — okay, mostly James — to point out authors or books of note. He’s been pretty good in that respect, since that’s how I found out about Rosemary Kirstein (going back a lot of years) and N. K. Jemisin (going back fewer years). So I’m glad someone is making the effort. And I’m glad to see it here.
MBeyerly: And I could try small publishers and self-published authors.
I’d be interested to see stats on submissions vs publications. What percent submitted for publication are by women?
Oh dear. Someone’s warming up to become an object lesson about reading the links, I fear.
It takes so little effort to do better than ‘zero’.
Thank you for this.
Not to make light of this situation but … how do you KNOW?
Women writing with male pen names, men writing with female pen names, author names of indeterminate gender, and so on.
Yes, I understand that, mostly, the name on the book is the real name or at least the same gender, but not always. It is something worth considering when choosing to read diversely. But then we have that story from 2 years ago about a white poet who used a Chinese name to get published. Or J.K. Rowling (indeterminate at first, before she became famous) who also published as Robert Galbraith. Sandy Schofield (which is indeterminate) and Kathryn Wesley (female name) are actually pen names for the husband and wife team of Kristine Kathryn Rusch and Dean Wesley Smith writing collaboratively. But if you didn’t know any of that and picked up a Robert Galbraith novel, you’d think you were reading a book by a man.
So, my point is that unless you know for a fact who wrote each book, rather than looking only at the name, don’t be so sure you are reading as diversely OR as narrowly as you think you are.
But do keep trying to read diversely. It’s amazing, the new experiences you will have by doing so.
I don’t actually know 100%—see, for example, KJ Parker, who kept the secret of who they are for years—but doing better than no women at all (or no POC at all) turns out to be surprisingly doable.
I understand a lot of people don’t do this but I got in the habit as a teen of taking an interest in the companies and people behind books, so I’d used to doing a bit of research when I read. In olden times I’d have to flip through the Encyclopedia of Science Fiction to see if the author had an entry. This days, it’s much easier, although I do run into cases where the author has no online presence.
I say read whatever you’re naturally drawn to read. Worrying about what gender wrote a book in a day and age where people are trying to ignore gender as much as possible seems like a waste of effort. Like or dislike a book how you want. It doesn’t matter if a male, female, male who identifies as female, female who identifies as male or some other gender wrote it.
Easy is boring. Plus, it’s the oddest thing but people who claim to use no filters save natural inclination often seem to end up reading a very narrow, very specific set of authors. It’s almost as though they do actual sift every potential book with particular criteria in mind but either are not aware they are doing this or don’t want to admit it.
I’m dammed if I’m going to read authors according to some quota. On the other hand this article seems to be about professional reviewers selecting their material which is a rather different issue. In that case concerns about representation may be valid.
Even if I was only reading for myself, I want to defer for as long as possible that time when I become one of those querulous readers only willing to engage with a very narrow range of material.
I don’t set quotas for myself. I read what interests me. What I do though is make sure I’m looking at a pool that contains writers I might not have been exposed to in the past. And I typically find books that interest me throughout. Sure, I’m still not going to read, say, urban fantasy by anyone for the most part, but the fantasy and sf I do read is increasingly diverse because my pool of possibles is increasingly diverse.
That reminds me of another sieve I have to be aware of, which is publishers have a history of restricting certain genres to specific demographics [1, 2], so if I’m reading a lot of interplanetary hard(ish) adventures, the odds are pretty good I am also reading a lot of books by men (and if I’m not reading translations, mostly white men). As much as I like certain genres to the point of knowingly reading Baxter novels, I try to be mindful of how narrow they can be.
1: I need to learn how to do links.
https://pattyjansen.wordpress.com/2013/05/01/there-are-girl-cooties-on-my-space-ship-on-women-writing-hard-sf/
2: In the cases where they do not, the authors in question get hate mail from readers alarmed at finding POC in their hard SF.
http://www.tobiasbuckell.com/a-glimpse-at-the-racism-lurking-around-science-fiction/
#16, the problem with that is that many folks who just read what makes them happy is that if they don’t encounter books by women and POC, then they don’t realize that its a thing. This is the point of this article, that so few books by POC and women are reviewed, which means that what gets reviewed and brought before the eyeballs of the general public is bereft of books by POC and women. so they’re missing out. and they don’t think to seek it out until someone pokes them out of their comfort zone. until people actively choose to bring women and POC authors to the forefront, then it’ll be the default of White Male Author FOREVER
Frankly it’s kind of hard to miss books by women these days, at least in SF and fantasy.
I just had a quick look at my shelves. The visible fantasy books, I double shelf, show twice as many female writers as male. The SF books on the other hand seem to have more male authors than female.
And of course, having posted this I did my numbers for November to discover I read 21 books, only 10 of which were by women. But since I did the stats on the 30th, I had time to review one more book to make the numbers even. Good thing I didn’t procrastinate running the numbers until Dec 1….