Eschewed Obfuscation

* Via Fancy Brand, prolific tumblelog by a friend of mine: a Tibetan musical score.

* Cardboard sculptures--just amazing, the level of detail.

* Video of a wheelchair dance competition.

* A flash-style piece by shweta_narayan on Strange Horizons, "Charms."

* Also on SH--"Origin" by Ari Goelman, a superhero story that I actually like.

* The 3rd Asian Women's Blog Carnival! Especially check out laleia's post on perfect Chinese daughters (so, so true) and a riveting trailer for the film version of The Stoning of Soraya M. It's rated R, and though I'm normally not a fan of violence or horror, I really want to see this. Unfortunately, it's only showing in select theatres and none of them near me (not even in Philly).

A thought that has fluttered through my head several times, having just been captured: what kind of "space" is the Internet? If someone makes a public blog post or a public comment, is that content automatically public? Obviously you can't plagiarize, the words are still inherently copyrighted, etc. But what about linking, referencing, alluding to? On one extreme, the right of free press is vital; what if any author had the legal right to request that a negative review of his/her book be taken down? And on the other extreme, if one is compiling a blog carnival or a linkspam or whatever, is there an expectation of permission first? How does this interact with privilege?

I've always operated on the assumption that any public post is just that--public, free to briefly quote and free to link to. In fact, I find policies specifically requesting that linkers ask permission first to be kind of presumptous--like the author of a published book asking that all reviewers run their reviews by him/her first (thereby filtering out unwanted or negative reviews). Even if this never becomes ingrained in law, the very expectation in etiquette remains problematic in the context and spirit of freedom.

Thoughts? Disagreements? I don't pretend to know much of anything about this matter, except what is "logical" to me (and what I find logical is inherently shaped by my experiences, majority/minority/etc.).

Comments are screened. Civility rules, as always, but feel free to disrespect me civilly.

* Greta Christina talks about subtle homophobia in the professional dance world, specifically "So You Think You Can Dance."

* A New Jersey med student is expelled for calling himself a "white African-American." (No, he's not from South Africa; apparently he is the third generation of a Portuguese family in Mozambique, where he was born and raised.)

ETA:* 2nd Asian Women of Color Carnival!


In happier news...

* Higher education's best new staircase, aka some very good architecture porn. Apparently Caltech has the most entertaining new staircase at the Cahill Center for Astronomy and Astrophysics--heads-up yhlee, do report back if you visit!

* Another one for you, yhlee: a musical synthesizer toy, innovative and dead-simple for those of us without compositional skills.

* Transcription of a speech on new methods for humanities research. I've only skimmed, but looks really interesting.

Questions and Admissions: Reflections on 100,000 Admissions Decisions at Stanford
by Jean H. Fetter
276 pages (hardcover)
Genre: Nonfiction/Education/College

Fetter was, to my knowledge, one of the first admissions "insiders" to write publicly about college admissions practices that many would have preferred to keep private. Although this book was published in 1995 and competition has increased tenfold since then, it still provides useful insight through an unmatched depth in both analysis and case studies.

For instance, in the 1960s, minority students were judged "outside the competition" along with athletes and faculty children--meeting "basic entrance requirements" but not necessarily "more qualified than all rejected applicants" (93); while increased representation in the applicant pool obviously renders this approach impractical, I wonder to what extent it is still true today (i.e. "special consideration" groups only competing within the group for admission). Fetter once reversed an admissions decision (from denial to acceptance) when it was discovered that the applicant qualified as a faculty dependent; similarly, Stephen Carter was offered law school admission after an initial denial because he "was originally assumed to be white" (103). Daniel Golden's Price of Admission, a much more recent publication, confirms many of these preferences.

Such a comprehensive admissions survey would not be complete without a discussion of affirmative action, and Fetter does so admirably (albeit with some dodging). She cites Ira Glasser's three reasons for AA:

1. legal remedy redressing past/present discrimination
2. temporary compensation of opportunity
3. visible representation of minorities

Of the three justifications for "positive" discrimination, it is worth noting that the Supreme Court has declared #3--the striving for diversity--as the only legal rationale for affirmative action in a college admissions context.

In approx. the 1985-1995 time period, Fetter admits to determining applicant ethnicity from other information (e.g. standardized test records) for special consideration, even if the applicant declined to self-identify on the application: "If a minority student chooses not to self-identify as a member of a minority group to which we give special consideration, should he or she receive that consideration? My opinion is that if we are reasonably sure of the ethnicity, the answer is yes" (103). On pages 106-7, Fetter poses a scenario of 3 unexceptional student hypotheticals from the admissions pool, each middle-class but of three different ethnicities (black, Asian, white). Unfortunately, she never gives a concrete answer as to what decisions she would have made; in subsequent discussion, she does argue that middle-class blacks are still disadvantaged by racism. [Opinionated Note: Asian students are hardly exempt from societal racism, yet because their representation is deemed sufficient, they receive no "special consideration."]


Discussion at length on pages 111-36 using the statement-comment format:

( Cut for length )


Fetter's book is 15 years dated, an eternity in college admissions. But for those seeking an in-depth introduction and/or solid grounding in the theory behind college admissions, I highly recommend this.

If affirmative action is a band-aid over a bleeding wound, then the collateral casualties (whites and often Asians) must be the nerve cells of the healthy skin around the wound. Is it important to staunch the bleeding before healing can begin? YES.

But I refuse to believe that the bleeding requires a band-aid to be continually ripped off and replaced, when a piece of gauze and an Ace bandage would suffice.

* ZOMG CUTE GAMES. Orisinal is amazing. Especially check out Winter Bells and Panda Run. SO CUTE.

* Via VSL: click bored. No seriously.

* Also VSL, a bicycle built for two thousand. Music autoplay warning.

* fireriven shares her beautiful Postcards from a Traveling Oracle: To Nine Sisters, from Kyoto.

* Over at ivoryink, my list of memorable quotes has been updated.

* Via yhlee, free soundtrack/writing music: Planescape Torment, complete.

* buymeaclue writes a overjoyed, optimistic open letter from Massachusetts to Iowa and Vermont et. al. Also diatryma: Iowa has legalized same-sex marriage! We'll see if it survives legislative challenges, but I have hope.

* Via yeloson, a ridiculous example of anti-immigrant bias and racism in public school bureaucracy.

* The UNESCO atlas of endangered languages.

* Via meganbmoore, mindmelting cuteness. Not interactive, alas; but it's real!

* From Language Log, an interesting analysis of Zhonglish (the specific Chinese-English creole of China, I presume, as opposed to Chinglish of the West).

* Via yhlee, an article on e-publishing in China.

* Tibetans refuse to celebrate the New Year.


* On the atheist community befriending the ex-Muslim. Definitely worth reading from an intersectional perspective.

* A skeptical argument for troll-feeding. I have to agree with this: "I view troll-feeding as a useful tool in the skeptical arsenal--because I owe much of my skeptical "conversion" to reading skeptics' responses to internet trolls."

* Greta Christina on Alternet, presenting 10 Myths and Truths about Atheists. It's a great primer aimed at the totally clueless.

* On being good without God. If you want to call me immoral for possessing relative morality, of course, be my guest. Just don't expect me to pay you much attention.

* Nontheism among Friends (, Society of--aka Quakers). This made me seriously want to try out a meeting sometime, because I do value meditation and silence. But "Quaker atheist" remains somewhat of an oxymoron, especially if one is not born into the faith. And I haven't met many Asian Quakers, either.


* As a rule, I usually don't watch videos online. "Fidelity," however, was a worthwhile and worthy exception. Please click through and judge for yourself. (Warning for liberal bias.)

* And to lighten the mood, Austenbook! Pride and Prejudice as Facebook status updates.

mac_stone has started diversity2009, the much-ballyhooed "Summer of Diversity" project. I think it is a worthwhile endeavor and I am supporting it. Given the comments on mac_stone's original post, I want to share exactly why I am promoting the project.

Disclaimer: I do not know mac_stone's or the other organizers' history in the POC community. But I don't think it matters, just as I despise Orson Scott Card's political views but still keep his books on my TBR list. As I said in the comments of this post: x+1 is greater than x.

Perhaps mac_stone is flaunting white privilege by beginning this project, as many have charged. So? Perhaps mac_stone is in serious need of Anti-Racism 101. So? Perhaps mac_stone is as arrogant and misguided as pnh or that Helix editor who sparked Transcriptase. So?
(ETA: Edited to clarify the purpose of my comparison, using only the extreme example.)

Assuming that x represents the sum total of all efforts to promote diversity, I believe that diversity2009 is at least x+1. This may be a small net contribution in comparison to ibarw, for instance; but it is a positive contribution nevertheless, and it has the chance to become more than just x+1. Why does the organizer's unconscious bias matter? This is a worthwhile project (and in fact mac_stone has offered to step down from the helm, implicitly in favor of a POC), even if it was founded by white people for white people, which is debatable. The POC community talks a lot about recruiting white allies; maybe it's time to actually recruit, which means reaching out to people who don't approach you first and who might disagree with you utterly at first. It means giving the 101 spiel more times than you care to count, it means being frustrated at people's naivete and unconscious privilege but not blowing up at them because of your experiences with other white people. It means answering the same "stupid questions" over, and over, and over again, until you burn out--and if/when you burn out, please keep it to yourself because your caustic comments do not help. I find some people's attitude akin to that in affirmative action regarding Asian students; you're too much like everyone else of your race, so you don't deserve equal consideration.

Be suspicious if you like; but give everyone the benefit of the doubt. I am saddened by the attitude in some of the comments, implying that only POC or "proven" white allies have authority to disagree. If I were not a person of color with a "track record" in anti-racism, I suspect this post would be received quite differently than the anticipated intelligent discussion and disagreement. But why does my race give me more freedom to disagree? We are Other; please, do not "other" those who are not Other, for that truly is racism, too. (For the record, I do not believe that racism requires power, nor that institutionalized racism is the only valid kind.)

That's all. Comments are unmoderated because I have hope in human civility.

ETA2: Also, for those who are interested and have a lot of time to spare, rydra_wong's humungous linklist.

ETA3: And an interesting post on the privilege of politeness. I don't entirely agree--POC have a right to be angry, but they are not the ONLY people with that right. And like any civilized human being, of any race, we have the societal duty to be polite. Racism power imbalances should not change that.

If I were to say something sexist/classist/racist/ablist/etc. I would not expect my friends to say “Well I’m offended by what you said and let’s have a calm discussion of why.”

Among my friends and hopefully among strangers, I would indeed expect just that--a civil discussion that avoids emotion to what extent that is possible. And as the post says, there is a difference between anger and insults; to me, "racist asshole" is an insult regardless of how well it may be corroborated. You can be angry and polite at the same time. Really. I promise you, I have lots of experience with the apparent oxymoron.

Some of these have been sitting in my bookmarks for a while, so I'll try to mention the new stuff first.

* Wyrding Studios is having an end-of-year clearance sale! I have my eye on Skylit Revisited #6, a gorgeous choker-style necklace; but I don't really need to spend $50 on a necklace when I hardly wear the jewelry I already own, so someone else go buy it and remove the temptation.

* Two great stories from Strange Horizons: Meredith Schwartz's How to Hold Your Breath, which packs quite a lot into under 700 words; and a lovely modern fairy-tale from Elizabeth Bear, Love Among the Talus (Mongolian-inspired worldbuilding is a bonus).

* The NYT publishes an interesting college admissions Q&A with reps from Yale University, Pomona College, Lawrence University, and the University of Texas - Austin. It's a representative mix and a good portion of the responses are enlightening; the other portion is amusing in its dodge-the-intent tactics.

* I haven't read Cherryh, but apparently her novels feature an unusual common theme--the rape of men.

* If you haven't seen it already: Every Fanfic Ever Written.

* vagabond_sal summarizes, with a brief anecdote, the Avatar casting issue. shati does the same with a smiley face. And here's how you can help. --I did say some of these links were old.

* *bounce* Also also, people other than my recipient like my Yuletide story! I am so happy inside, because I do like it myself (which is rare). No link, of course, although I welcome guesses. I limit myself to offering only fandoms whose canon I own, which is a decidedly short but secretive list. (And I'm so curious about my own mystery author, because the prose and the characters are just. Perfect.)

The Mango Season
by Amulya Malladi
229 pages (hardcover)
Genre: Fiction/Literary/Romance

Like My Name Is Sei Shōnagon, Malladi's novel tells a story that I identify with personally. Priya Rao left India at age 20 to study in the U.S., and now she's returning after seven years--to announce her engagement to Nick Collins, an American man. India, her homeland, is overwhelmingly foreign, even the mangoes that she loved so much as a child. And as Priya's parents plot an arranged marriage to a "nice Indian boy" (preferably rich and Telugu Brahmin), Priya's fear of her family's reaction leads inevitably to disaster.

Malladi isn't afraid to deal with conflict--with interracial romance, racism, culture clash, duty, and tradition. Priya is shocked by her family's blatant racism and expectation that despite her rebellious attitude, she will ultimately conform. And she loves them, all of them--her inability to truly stand up to her mother drove me nuts, in fact--but she also loves Nick. The plot revolves fundamentally around Priya's reconciliation of her roles as lover and family, West and East.

In reading, I was constantly struck by the parallels that I drew between traditional Indian and Chinese cultures. Although China has much less emphasis on religion and is, in the modern day, more free regarding arranged marriages, there is definitely pressure to marry a nice Chinese boy and stay home to raise children. The extended family is very important in both cultures--at one point, Priya asks her mother to treat her with respect and receives this answer: "You are too young to gain my respect and you have done nothing so far to gain it....Children respect their parents [and] that is all there is to it" (89). And the scary part is that my parents have told me essentially the same thing. Another moment that echoed strongly:

"Most first-generation Indians in the United States only had friends who were Indians. I had never thought I would be any different. I had started out with only Indian friends but my circle grew as I grew. Now I was in a place where I didn't think in terms of Indian friends and American friends, just friends. I had somewhere down the line stopped looking at skin color. (213)

Ironically, for me it was almost the opposite experience. I grew up in a sheltered and overwhelmingly white environment, so I had no choice but to befriend white kids. And when I moved to a place that did have a critical mass of Asians, I still distinguish mentally between "Chinese friends" and "school friends" (some of the latter are fully assimilated Asian-American, which makes a difference). While Priya and I are different, she is of any novel I have ever read the character most similar to me. I empathize easily with protagonists no matter their heritage, but I was engrossed in Priya's internal conflict with almost painful understanding.

And the end of The Mango Season, which I accidentally spoiled myself for, also lobs a last surprise revelation at the reader that forces a reconsideration of everything preceding. I do so love twist endings. Mulladi has a knack for realism, too--this novel sounds and feels like a memoir, the characters' voices are so real.