Lambda’s Explanation of the New Guidelines and my comments

[erastes]

ETA:
OK - I'm closing this thread now - as there's a load of people here I don't know, have come here from God knows where, haven't even had the politesse to introduce themselves, obviously haven't bothered to check the facts before they waded in, have their facts wrong and are obviously here to 1. cause trouble and 2. troll.

I'm all for polite discussion - see my latest post, but there are limits to what even I'll take.

Continue the discussion in your own blogs, I've moved on - thanks.
I’m sure most of you have seen this by now but here is Katherine Forrest’s response to the deluge of concerns about the new lambda guidelines, which seemed to exclude non-GLBTQ writers from receiving a Lambda award.

Clarification of Lambda Literary Foundation Policy Guidelines of Nominations, 2009 Lambda Literary Awards, from Katherine V. Forrest, Interim President, Board of Trustees.

 

September 25, 2009 - The Board of Lambda Literary Foundation, under the leadership of Christopher Rice, (who has now resigned. erastes) spent much of last year discussing how our literature has evolved, and the actual mission of the Foundation given the perilous place we find ourselves in with our drastically changed market conditions. We also took into consideration the despair of our own writers when a heterosexual writer, who has written a fine book about us, wins a Lambda Award, when one or more of our own LGBT writers may have as a Finalist a book that may be the only chance in a career at a Lambda Literary Award.

We discussed two essential questions: who we are, what we are here to accomplish. We discussed every single word of this, our Mission statement: The Lambda Literary Foundation is dedicated to raising the status of openly lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans people throughout society by rewarding and promoting excellence among LGBT writers who use their work to explore LGBT lives.
Lambda Literary Foundation is a service organization for our writers. Our LGBT family of writers. We celebrate those who support our writers, those in all the allied areas of our literature: our readers, publishers, booksellers, publicists, agents, etc. We celebrate straight allies of every kind and always have throughout our history, with the Bridge Builder Award, Small Press Award, Publishers Service Award, Editor's Choice Award, among other awards and acknowledgments, and we'll continue to do so.

Today we continue to be excluded in heterosexual society as we have been historically. Our books are taken from the shelves of libraries all over the country and even from the website of Amazon.com this year. It is more difficult to be an LGBT writer now than it has been in many decades, more difficult to make any income from our written words, much less a living. Publishers have closed, stores have closed, the markets seem to be shrinking with each passing day. It seems more urgent than ever that LLF be as active and supportive a service organization as we possibly can be for our own writers, and that's what we're working on, with a Board that could not be more passionate in our commitment. We will soon have a new, far more comprehensive website connecting all segments of our publishing world, and we're determined to restore our Writers Retreat for emerging writers, the single most important initiative we've undertaken next to the Lambda Literary Awards.

As to what defines LGBT? That is not up to anyone at Lambda Literary Foundation to decide. The writers and publishers are the ones who will be doing the self-identifying. Sexuality today is fluid and we welcome and cherish this freedom. We take the nomination of any book at face value: if the book is nominated as LGBT, then the author is self-identifying as part of our LGBT family of writers, and that is all that is required. There are many permutations of LGBT and they're all welcome as that LGBT term we've all adopted makes clear.
We hope this will clarify our policy and answer some of your questions and concerns. We welcome your comments.

Right then, here are my comments.

We also took into consideration the despair of our own writers when a heterosexual writer, who has written a fine book about us, wins a Lambda Award, when one or more of our own LGBT writers may have as a Finalist a book that may be the only chance in a career at a Lambda Literary Award.

So what you are saying is that you are excluding the heterosexual writers because they often write better?  No, of course you are not, but it sounds this way.  I hardly think that anyone “despairs” when they don’t win an award. Not one that is set up in a fair way, anyway.  I know that I wouldn’t want the rules to be changed just so I have a greater chance of winning.  I’m not entirely sure what you mean by “the only chance of a career at a LLA” as that doesn’t make sense.

Today we continue to be excluded in heterosexual society as we have been historically. Our books are taken from the shelves of libraries all over the country and even from the website of Amazon.com this year. It is more difficult to be an LGBT writer now than it has been in many decades, more difficult to make any income from our written words, much less a living. Publishers have closed, stores have closed, the markets seem to be shrinking with each passing day. It seems more urgent than ever that LLF be as active and supportive a service organization as we possibly can be for our own writers, and that's what we're working on, with a Board that could not be more passionate in our commitment. We will soon have a new, far more comprehensive website connecting all segments of our publishing world, and we're determined to restore our Writers Retreat for emerging writers, the single most important initiative we've undertaken next to the Lambda Literary Awards.

This is no different whether you are heterosexual or GLBTQ. Straight writers of GLBTQ fiction found their books removed from Amazon in the same way as everyone else because of the subject material, not because of the gender of the author.  There was no gender discrimination as to the author, only because of the content of the books.  The Running Press books – Alex being openly straight, me being Bi – were removed from the shelves of the Romance section of bookshelves and libraries (where Running Press intended them to be) because some customers complained about the nasty gay books polluting their romance. Smaller presses find their books denied from bookstores because of the CONTENT, not because of the AUTHOR.

Instead of whining about how the world is shrinking for gay books, what we should be doing is submitting our books – en masse – to the mainstream, to Mills and Boon, to every book publisher out there.  Instead of hiding behind a lavender veil and agreeing with the hype that “there’s no market for it” “no-one wants to buy it” “No-one will publish it” we should be pushing—no, stabbing furiously at the heart of mainstream and forcing them to pay attention.There is already a level of acceptance of gay characters in other genres than romance.  I would never have imagined, five years ago, that a gay romance line would be put into the romance aisle, but because kept being a pest, and I submitted to that publisher, it happened.

As to what defines LGBT? That is not up to anyone at Lambda Literary Foundation to decide. The writers and publishers are the ones who will be doing the self-identifying. Sexuality today is fluid and we welcome and cherish this freedom. We take the nomination of any book at face value: if the book is nominated as LGBT, then the author is self-identifying as part of our LGBT family of writers, and that is all that is required. There are many permutations of LGBT and they're all welcome as that LGBT term we've all adopted makes clear.

I would agree.  It’s not up to the LLF to decide on this.  I wouldn’t say that it’s up to ANYONE to decide on this.  The last thing the GLBTQ society needs is someone saying “this is…”

What I can see happening here, in their “we will take your sexual persuasion on trust” is that people are going to get nasty about it.  If a married man or woman submits a book, and more particularly if they win – there’s going to be wank.  You know it, I know it.  People are going to say “He/she’s married, she isn’t GLBTQ”  What about someone like me, single but bi?  Am I really bi or am I lying?  What about a single celibate? Who can tell?  No-one. 

And what about the categories? Can only a gay man write gay fiction? A Bi write bi? and so on?  When does a trans man become a woman, and if she is then a straight woman is he then ineligible for the Lambdas?  Someone needs to further clarify here, I think.

My opinion is that the LLF are opening a can of worms that is going to explode in their faces when the awards are announced.  I assume, from the change in policy, that they’ve had writers bitching about the winners of the awards in the past.  Well, I can see that that will be nothing compared to the bitching they are going to get.

What this seems like, and what I wasn’t afraid of asking them about in my letter, is crony-ism.  If they don’t KNOW if a writer is GLBTQ, then they will assume that they are not.  In that case they will give the award to the “out” finalist even if his or her book is not as good as the person they are not sure about.

What concerns me most is that being forced to declare your sexual orientation is a crime—at least in the UK.  My boss cannot ask me what my gender or sexual persuasion is, not even for positive discrimination.  He can ask me on an application form, in the same way he can ask me for my ethnicity or religion—but I have no legal obligation to answer truthfully (I’ve often put Chinese, or Jedi) or even answer at all. 

But by simply entering into the Lambda’s I have to do this.

This doesn’t bother me one whit, but what about if someone were in the armed forces?  Or lived in a dangerous place for gay people, somewhere like Jamaica?  it’s something to think about.  I don’t know what the laws about disclosing sexual preference is in the USA, but I’m pretty sure it has to be the same, Yes?  How desperate are we to win awards, anyway?

It’s given me a lot to think about. 

If you have blogged about this subject, I would be very grateful if you would supply me with a link. I intend to write again to the LLF about this matter and show the depth of concern in the writing community, GLBTQ and otherwise.

Crossposted to EAA, Meta Writers.

Comments

(frozen)

[penguinfaery.livejournal.com]

This doesn’t bother me one whit, but what about if someone were in the armed forces? Or lived in a dangerous place for gay people, somewhere like Jamaica? it’s something to think about. I don’t know what the laws about disclosing sexual preference is in the USA, but I’m pretty sure it has to be the same, Yes? How desperate are we to win awards, anyway?

I have to say, as sad as it is, that even if they WERE straight, writing and promoting their gay literature probably would be JUST as frowned on as BEING gay in those situations. I think in those situation winning an award would be the least of their concerns.

(frozen)

[erastes.livejournal.com]

I agree, but it doesn't stop some people from writing in those situations.

What about a person who is married and her husband finds out that she entered and he doesn't know she's bi? Forcing people to come out of the closet does not advance equality.

(frozen)

[lee-rowan.livejournal.com]

But that decision is for the writer to make, isn't it? Not an organization that was originally, supposedly, trying to promote good writing ABOUT glbt people?

(frozen)

[vashtan.livejournal.com]

Retweeted.

(frozen)

[erastes.livejournal.com]

Thank you!

(frozen)

[lazylfarm.livejournal.com]

Personally, I think the notion that someone has to "be" something in order to "do" something is absurd. Does anyone expect that an oncologist has to have had cancer in order to care for his/her patients? No.

I think the only thing a writer needs to "be" is talented, no matter what the subject/genre, otherwise I am not interested in reading the book.

Leslie

(frozen)

[erastes.livejournal.com]

I agree with you - and I also agree it's their awards and they can have whatever rules they want, but changing the rules just because straight people are winning (because their books are BETTER!!!) is childish at best.

(frozen)

[heidicullinan.livejournal.com]

Did you see the Dear Author post on this issue? It's more a conversation than an essay, but nevertheless: http://dearauthor.com/wordpress/2009/09/22/the-question-of-mm-fiction/

(frozen)

[erastes.livejournal.com]

I read part of it, but as usual with so much on Dear Author it turned into a bitch fest - this is why I don't follow the community, but I'll look out for the next instalment though - thanks!

(frozen)

[joannesopercook.livejournal.com]

Your comments are spot on - I don't think it will make any difference to the people running the awards, but the fact that you said it definitely counts.

It's utter absurdity carried to a new height, is what it is. So apparently - if we follow their model of thinking - one has to have been a car in order to be an automotive mechanic? o_O

(frozen)

[erastes.livejournal.com]

I know - it will do nothing in the scheme of things, but one has to say something.

(frozen)

[vashtan.livejournal.com]

Posted on my LJ, tweeted, and emailed.

(frozen)

[suryaofvulcan.livejournal.com]

You seem pretty exercised about this. I wonder, do you have the same attitude about the Orange Prize for Fiction? Do you think it's unfair that it's only open to women? Do you think male authors should be eligible if they write about female characters and 'women's issues'?

Because I don't really see the difference between what Orange is doing for women and what Lambda is (reverting to) doing for GLBTQ authors.

And the same arguments about 'proving it' also apply - because I'm fairly sure the Orange finalists don't undergo a gynocological exam as part of the judging process.

(frozen)

[erastes.livejournal.com]

Yes - I do feel the same. I don't think any awards should be one-ist. I'd like to see what people would say if I started a white's only music award, or a straights only literary award.

But that's neither here nor there. I'm "exercised" about this (whatever that means) because I'm the director of a large association of authors, and I feel that I should talk about things like this - plus of course, it is my LJ, and my opinion is just that.

yes. of course men can write about women's issues.

But the main things that annoys me about this particular issue (if I hadn't already made myself clear) are:

1. this will impinge on all authors writing about gay issues,as detailed above

2. If it was an award set up TO START WITH for gay WRITERS, then I'd not make any issue with it. But it wasn't - it was set up to celebrate gay FICTION.

However. If the Orange Prize had been set up - and then they found that men were writing better novels and THEN stopped men applying, yes of course that would be wrong.

They have actually said this - that heterosexual (although how they can tell this, I don't know) writers are writing better books.

(frozen)

[semioticwarrior.livejournal.com]

I can understand the argument of both sides. I think your argument was particularly well stated, and I have to congratulate you on your dispassion. I'm not sure I could have remained so cool-headed.

As a bi woman married to a man, I could see how my living in "heterosexual privilege" would piss off a lot of people (not that it's anyone's damn business). I can also understand how some people might feel that their territory is being encroached upon. I can understand the anger some people might feel, when, after having lived with discrimination, representatives of the majority discriminatory group began winning contests founded by and meant to celebrate the minority group.

At the same time, as a writer and a human being, I don't enjoy being dismissed because of the gender of the person with whom I've chosen to spend my life.

When I suggested earlier founding a contest for GLBTQ literature that doesn't discriminate against the gender or lifestyle of the author, I wasn't being facetious. I think there are a lot of writers and publishers who would be interested in helping to organize and promote a contest like this, including me. I know you have a lot on your plate, between writing projects, EAA, and promoting the genre in general, but if you would like to go in on this with me, I think adding your name to it would go far.

Anyway, just something to think about. Email me if the idea strikes your fancy.

Jessica

(frozen)

[lee-rowan.livejournal.com]

If my wife had been her mother's second son instead of only daughter, I'd still have married that person. Probably years earlier! And having moved to a country that accords us equal legal recognition as a married couple, I cannot say that "the world" is a worse place to be GLBT or any variation thereof. Responding to discrimination with discrimination is buying into the mindset that it is acceptable.

You can add my name to the list of people interested in organizing a merit-based award. Awards are fine, discrimination is not.

(frozen)

[lee-rowan.livejournal.com]

What irritates me almost beyond words is their changing the rules to benefit their in-group. Look at the original purpose, here on teddypig's blog:

http://www.teddypig.com/2009/09/shame-on-me-shame-on-you/comment-page-1/#comment-2733

It was originally "to recognize excellence in the field of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender literature.”

Heaven forfend some of that excellence should come from people whose sexual orientation is to the opposite sex! Who might have glbt family members.

IMO, Lambda should clean up its own act. To have ten categories of award for Gay and Lesbian, and one EACH for Bi and Trans -- fiction, nonfiction, and anything else, all lumped into one bucket -- is absurd.

I see NO point in nailing the ghetto door shut from the inside.

(frozen) Lambda rules

[(Anonymous)]

I write paranormal erotic romance for readers who want a sexy romantic story, period. I never thought of them as appealing to any particular audience beyond that of readers with open minds, but I was invited to enter the LAMBDA a couple of years ago in the bi category because of the various relationships among characters in my ongoing series. I was thrilled to think that my stories, written to appease my own desire to see all relationships treated with the same sense of honor and integrity no matter the gender of those involved, were appreciated by some members, at least, of the bi community.

Most likely I won't be entering again, not so much because of the new rules but because of comments I've gotten off list regarding the sexual content of my stories--it appears I can offend just about anyone. :-) However, as a heterosexual author I had never considered entering the contest until I was invited, so it's sort of interesting to suddenly feel uninvited. I would hate to see such an exclusionary practice enter this much respected competition, especially from a community that has suffered so horribly from the same sense of exclusion.

Kate Douglas/Wolf Tales
www.katedouglas.com

(frozen)

[aigooism.livejournal.com]

This doesn’t bother me one whit, but what about if someone were in the armed forces? Or lived in a dangerous place for gay people, somewhere like Jamaica? it’s something to think about. I don’t know what the laws about disclosing sexual preference is in the USA, but I’m pretty sure it has to be the same, Yes? How desperate are we to win awards, anyway?

As someone who grew up in a US military community, I can say with certainty that service members are not allowed to come out as GLBT or whatever because of the lovely Don't Ask Don't Tell policy. The military will not ask service members if they GLBT, but if it's told or if it's found out, service members will be forced to resign/discharge/whatever.

Luckily, that doesn't apply to me (I think) as a civilian, but considering how conservative the military environment is, I would not want to come out to if I were GLBT myself. I don't even tell people on base I support GLBT or that I read GLBT literature unless I know for sure they will not judge me.

But yeah, just thought I'd elaborate on the US armed forces environment for you.

(frozen)

[chris-smith-atr.livejournal.com]

Construction Industry weighing in here. Female. You don't say you're bi or gay or anything other than a normal 2.4 person because OMG you loose all respect on site if you do. Can't do you job.

(frozen)

[taylor-lochland.livejournal.com]

Jessica's thoughts echo my own. I can see both sides to the issue. I'm not used to being in the middle on something (I usually feel passionately one way or the other), so it's a weird feeling.

I'm also a bisexual woman married to a man. Even though I might still quality, as I self-identify as bisexual, the fact that I'm living a heterosexual life would make me extremely uncomfortable submitting anything because of the new rules.

I'm glad you brought up the issue of closeted LGBT folks. It was the first time I'd seen anyone mention them in this whole debate...and it's definitely something to think about!

(frozen)

[softestbullet (from livejournal.com)]

You absolutely still qualify!

(frozen)

[lee-rowan.livejournal.com]

this isn't showing in metawriters...

(frozen)

[erastes.livejournal.com]

Haven't posted it yet - wanted to space them out rather than have them all appear at once.

(frozen)

[abrahamus.livejournal.com]

We have a link round-up here: http://community.livejournal.com/mm_fiction_news/1135.html

Author duskpeterson also wrote them a letter here: http://duskpeterson.livejournal.com/65406.html

(frozen)

[erastes.livejournal.com]

Thank you!

(frozen)

[starla-kid.livejournal.com]

I've just finished writing a book about a fourteen year old boy who can time travel, and who fancies his brother. I don't think I really need to tell you or any potential publisher/award body that I am neither fourteen or a boy and I can't time travel, and I don't fancy my brother.

Do you think I wouldn't win an award on that basis?

Starla
x

(frozen)

[erastes.livejournal.com]

Exactly - and I'm not opposed to them having those goals - it's their award. But to change the rules JUST BECAUSE HET WRITERS ARE WRITING BETTER BOOKS, and gay writers are butt hurt about it? Not classy. At all.

(frozen)

[emmyjag.livejournal.com]

this really just....chaps my hide. or something. am aggravated to no end.

(frozen)

[chris-smith-atr.livejournal.com]

http://c-smith-author.livejournal.com/47553.html

There you go.

Also am back now. Going to TWE.

(frozen)

[leni-jess.livejournal.com]

Given

As to what defines LGBT? That is not up to anyone at Lambda Literary Foundation to decide. The writers and publishers are the ones who will be doing the self-identifying. Sexuality today is fluid and we welcome and cherish this freedom. We take the nomination of any book at face value: if the book is nominated as LGBT, then the author is self-identifying as part of our LGBT family of writers, and that is all that is required. There are many permutations of LGBT and they're all welcome as that LGBT term we've all adopted makes clear

, surely that straight writer was self-identifying as gay, and hence would still be eligible. Which was not what she said.

(frozen)

[gehayi.livejournal.com]

Which is patently SILLY. I'm straight. I do not believe that writing about gay men means that I self-identify as gay. But if a publisher submits my work to the Lambdas, I have to either lie by omission and let them assume that I am gay in order to qualify, or I have to say, "No, I'm not gay," and disqualify my work.

Honestly, I don't see why it makes any difference which sex a writer prefers to sleep with. It's none of my business, and it's none of Lambda's business! The only things I want to know are these:

1) Is the story well-written?
2) Is the story entertaining?

It's a literary award. Let the Lambda judges focus on the literary aspects of the short-listed stories and books, and not on issues that have nothing to do with writing and should be private in any case.

(frozen)

[elf]

This post has been included in a Linkspam roundup.

(frozen)

[alasandalack.livejournal.com]

er

i'm assuming you just confused yourself here:

When does a trans man become a woman, and if she is then a straight woman is he then ineligible for the Lambdas?

because of course, a transman is female-to-male, and properly referred to as "he".

(frozen)

[softestbullet (from livejournal.com)]

Whoa, I missed that quote. Whaaaaaat?

I think it's supposed to be, "When does a trans woman become a woman, and if she is then a straight woman is she then ineligible for the Lambdas?"

And the answers are: She doesn't "become" a woman. She is a woman. Lambda specified that they aren't policing anyone's identity, so there is no need to worry about who "counts" or whatever. Self-identification!

If she is straight, yes, she is eligible. Straight trans people obviously are a part of the LGBTTQQI+ community. So actually, plenty of straight people can enter! (Thanks to kynn for pointing this out.)

(frozen)

[nojojojo.livejournal.com]

So what you are saying is that you are excluding the heterosexual writers because they often write better? No, of course you are not, but it sounds this way.

No. It doesn't. This is a straw man argument. Giving women equal pay doesn't mean men must take pay cuts because they're more qualified; giving blacks scholarships doesn't mean white people should be kicked out of school because they're smarter; giving the poor jobs doesn't mean wealthy people must be stripped of their assets as part of a socialist conspiracy, because they're harder-working. "Promoting A", where A has been historically mistreated, does not equal "attacking B". This is the kind of fallacy that gets used all the time by people in positions of privilege, who feel threatened and attempt to defend their privilege/the status quo. But their sense of threat doesn't make the argument any more logical.

The Lambda statement, in my opinion, acknowledges that the playing field is not level for straight and LGBTQ writers. Openly gay writers face discrimination because of their sexual orientation/identity; straight writers do not. But more than that, straight writers benefit from straight privilege, while LGBTQ writers do not. For example, straight writers earn disproportionate adulation whenever they successfully attempt to depict the GLBTQ perspective -- e.g. Annie Proulx of "Brokeback Mountain" fame. (Note: I'm saying this as a straight writer who's been lauded for writing gay characters; I'm owning my privilege.) Straight writers aren't discouraged from "writing what they know," i.e. the straight perspective, and they aren't told again and again and again that there's no market for stuff featuring people like them. Meanwhile LGBTQ writers get bombarded with those kinds of messages -- and as any writer knows, it's hard enough to be persistent in this business as it is, but doing it against a tide of constant negativity is almost impossible. Also, straight writers have the option of being considered for a vast array of literary awards, for which they don't have to fear being penalized because of their sexual orientation. (Other things, maybe, but not that.) While there's really no way to know how many gay writers have been voted down for awards because of homophobic judges.

Which might be why the Lambda committee notes that their award might be an LGBTQ author's only chance -- their chances of surviving in this industry are less, their professional networks are not as far-reaching, their resources are fewer. The Lambdas (and similar awards, like the Gaylactic Spectrum) may be the only place where they aren't penalized for their sexual orientation. (Actually, even then they are penalized; the Booker at least gives its winners money. Not sure if the Lambda does. And I wonder if having a Lambda award hurts sales to libraries, etc., in conservative communities?)

So straight writers get all this, and you're saying they should have inclusion in the Lambdas too? Seriously, how does that help things?

Your point about entry the Lambdas forcing entrants out of the closet is well-taken, and I agree that's dangerous. But how else is an organization dedicated to raising the profile of an oppressed group going to achieve that goal, if they allow straight people and LGBTQs in hiding to compete? Only by encouraging "outness" can they change the status quo.

(frozen)

[oneangrykate.livejournal.com]

I usually hate saying "this", but: THIS. Thank you for putting this out there.

(frozen)

[kaigou.livejournal.com]

'Tis a tangled web, certainly. (Deleted my other comment b/c, on second and third thoughts, figured it was possibly out of line, given that this is a personal journal. I think the link that led me here gave me the mistaken impression this was a comm, and I didn't think to check. Whoops.)

(frozen)

[kokibi.livejournal.com]

Odd that I have to explain this every time...

No, of course you are not, but it sounds this way.

No, it doesn't. Please use logic.

Fact: There are more non-GLBT people than there are GLBT/queer people. Or do you seriously doubt this?

Fact: They are most likely as good as writers as GLBT/queer people.

Fact: Higher numbers + equal ability = automatically far higher chances that one of this group wins an award which was created to promote glbt writers in the first place. Thus, the whole purpose of the award would erode away.

This is elementary math.


Why, exactly, do straight writers need this award, too? Why not go for, like, every other award that isn't set to specifically promote GLBT writers.

(frozen)

[kerri]

In a perfect world, all competitions would be fair to everyone and there would be no risk of exclusion. The judging would be purely based on literary merit, and the people applying for them would not face discrimination as minorities.

The world isn't perfect, though. Considering the censorship that books about GLBT issues, by GLBT people will face, I don't think that it's a bad thing that this award will narrow to only acknowledge the accomplishments of writers who identify as GLBT.