We’re sorry, this post in is another castle.

We’re sorry, this post is in another castle.

justira and I have been working on a co-review for The Disreputable History of Frankie Landau-Banks for a few months now. We’ve discovered it was a pretty epic undertaking. We’ve decided that E. Lockhart is either a genius, crazy, or both. This book has shaken my world.

I was thrilled when Frankie got the NBA nod, ecstatic when the Printz chose it as a honor book, excited that now more people would read it and love it and cheer for YA handling a pertinent topic. After all, there are tons of female book bloggers. Guys, I do not know how to communicate how much I loved the idea of the book blogging community seeing Frankie and seeing the issue of institutionalized sexism handled so thoughtfully.

So excited that my heart is breaking by watching so many reviews miss the fucking point. I’ve seen people talk about the book and totally ignore the feminism aspect except to insult it. I’ve seen people talk about the book and deride Frankie for her choices, for being too demanding and too loud, for being nosy and silly. I’ve seen Frankie as a character dismissed for her sex, for her choices, for her age. I’ve seen people say, actually STATE: “this book is pointless. Sexism isn’t a problem anymore.”

When people who read this book brush it off like so much garbage, a bad book that’s not saying anything worth paying attention to, a bad book with unlikable characters because oh no, they act like kids just finding their way I get pissed. When people complain about the feminism in the book like being a feminist is a dirty thing? I go way beyond pissed. I’m a goddamn feminist and it’s not a bad thing or a dirty thing or something worthy of ridicule or insult and I swear the next review I see where someone equates feminism with something you would find in the gutter I will say some really nasty things. I want to shake people who make these hugely ignorant statements not just because they can’t think critically about their reading, but because in the dismissal of the subject matter of a book, I, as a woman and feminist with concerns about equality, am also dismissed. I am VIOLENT over this, violently angry and disappointed in those that continue to buy into The Patriarchy’s™ bullshit. I want to stand somewhere and scream I am so frustrated. You don’t have to work for equality to make an effort not to use sexist language or insult people who think sexism is a problem. That’s hard, though. That’s asking too much for people not to be offensive jerks.

How hilarious that in so many reviews about a girl trying to find her way in a sexist world, so many people respond to said book with sexism and sexist language. HILARIOUS. I’m laughing so hard right now. So hard.

I thought about posting about the Printz award, but so many other bloggers have summed it up so much better than me. I might natter about it later, after I finish more of the books recognized (I’ve read one, and wooo Frankie! I knew you could do it!). Instead, I have a point that’s Printz related.

I want to talk about the controversy over the casting for the Nickelodeon show, Avatar: The Last Airbender. Does anyone else watch this show? It’s so well done. I’ve loved it from the first few episodes I watched. It’s the best show on Nick since Salute Your Shorts and Are You Afraid of the Dark went away (in my biased opinion). It’s Asian, through and through, and beautifully so. This show was created by white men who were not clueless. They created a successful story with engaging characters and a intriguing plot and didn’t boil the race issues down to the least common denominator. I had high hopes for the live-action version after. M. Night Shyamalan was tapped for the director’s position. Surely he would recognized that this show is Asian and thus, the characters in it should be as well. Alas, it was not meant to be.

The movie’s main characters were cast with white actors. This article in particular makes me see red.

Due in theaters in summer 2010, “Airbender” has already begun to face a bit of controversy over the casting of white actors like Rathbone, Ringer and McCartney to play Asian characters — a concern the actor was quick to dismiss. “I think it’s one of those things where I pull my hair up, shave the sides, and I definitely need a tan,” he said of the transformation he’ll go through to look more like Sokka.

Jackson Rathbone, this was a racist, douchebaggy comment and I hope it clings to the minds of people for the next fifty years. I know I won’t forget it any time soon, just like I won’t forget Robin McKinley’s or Orson Scott Card spouting homobigot bile all over the internet while still pocketing an award for lifetime achievement in writing for teens. Please continue to vomit out racist bullshit so you look like even more of a jerk. You will never, ever be my Sokka, no matter how much Yellowface you use to fill roles from minority actors that are more appropriate and easily more deserving than your spoiled, privileged ass you’re waving all up in the air with your pants around your ankles. If this were different, if he had made this comment in the context of a white actor portraying a black character, it would be blackface and you can bet more people would be pissed. This post sums that up quite well:

If Rathbone had gotten the role of “Shaft,” and got a perm and a “tan” to play that character (and I don’t mean in a self-conscious, subversive way like Robert Downey Jr. in “Tropic Thunder”), there would be a shit storm of outrage from all sectors of America, not just the African American community. It would be a headline across every newspaper, and I highly doubt that production would make it to filming. … Why this double standard?

During this time of year as we all fawn over the Printz choices, something occurred to me and I tracked down Gene Luen Yang’s thoughts on the subject. Why him? Just a few years ago in 2007, he wrote American Born Chinese which won a Printz award for pointing out these issues. The judges decided his book was the best, I’ve seen it lauded and recommended and so well-loved. The world I live in is a world where this book written for young adults and kids can be honored but this show, a beautiful, well-animated show with such a strong message made for these same young adults and kids can be white-washed. It’s hard to deal with; it’s hard not to be angry. How do we praise books where this is addressed but ignore the more subtle forms in other types of media? It’s subtle, it’s pervasive, it’s 2009 and it’s still a problem. Racism is not dead.

This is what Gene Luen Yang had to say:

By giving white actors roles that are so obviously Asian – and by stating from the get-go their preference for Caucasians – they tell Asian-Americans that who we are and how we look make us inherently inadequate for American audiences, even in a movie that celebrates our culture. Like the schoolboy who pulls up the corners of his eyes at his “Oriental” classmate, they highlight our otherness.

I’m so tired and disappointed. I have a sinking feeling this movie is going to be released with a white main cast and people who are ignorant of these issues or (foolishly) don’t care will see it just because it’s Avatar and their kids loved it will send the profits sky-high, only encouraging Hollywood to keep up its silly, racist habits.

Further reading and letter writing campaign: Saving the World with Postage.

It is no secret I am into BOYS KISSING in huge, flashing neon letters, capslock on and some glittery stars attached for good measure. I like male/male romance and I do not apologize for this. I do not think this is weird or freakish or sick. I think it is normal. I have liked it for almost ten years and I haven’t been struck down yet. I am quite sure the romance novel industry makes enough money that Scrooge McDuck would drown in for male/female sexy times. Sarah Dessen has her own GOLD PEDESTAL for male/female teen romance. People like romance! Some people happen to like romance where the same gender gets together and makes out a little. Why do I get the stink eye? It’s not like we’re in the 90s, bookstores!

What do I want? BOYS KISSING. When do I want it? NOW. Where do I want it shelved? IN THE YA SECTION.

Not, say, over in the social science sections between BEST GAY EROTICA 2006 and GAY ASTROLOGY. Number one, I get plenty of gay erotica for the low cost of TOTALLY FREE in fandom and it’s normally a hell of a lot better, no offense to gay male authors writing erotica that is kind of terrible (I’m sure you’re talented to someone who is not me). Also, astrology is junk science and 170% useless and easy to beat up on when you’re a frustrated fangirl.

Why are these books being shelved there? All Robin Reardon’s books get stuck there. I saw David Levithan there once (yet Naomi and Ely’s No Kiss List was in the YA section). The book I just read by Martin Wilson would have been shelved “right here, if we had it but I guess we don’t”. The worker said this in a rush before scrambling to get away from the creepy woman who wants to read about BOYS KISSING. Right Here referred to a place between a book on feminism and something about karma.

YOU’RE DOING IT WRONG. Books-a-Million, I’m looking directly at you.

Also, I am tired of getting funny looks for asking about these books. I went in asking about The Dreyfus Affair by Peter Lefcourt and The Screwed Up Life of Charlie the Second by Drew Ferguson and was told, “Oh, that kind of book! We’d never order THAT KIND of book for shelving.” YOU MEAN THE KIND OF BOOK WHERE MEN KISS AND MAYBE HAVE SEX, LADY? IS THAT WHAT YOU MEANT? I wasn’t sure, just checking, no need to blush and look around, that gaggle of teen girls over there heard me talking about it. THE SECRET’S OUT. Women like reading about male/male relationships! Oh noez!

In other news, my shopping trip looking for some books I’ve been planning to read didn’t go so well.