Okay, here is the combined draft with all comments incorporated! (I have proposed a very small revision to @Robinski's title.)
As for submitting it, I'm not fussed either way. @kais should we flip a coin?
Programme Title
Challenging the Critique Group Echo Chamber
Proposed Programme Description
Discussions of diversity are not new to the speculative fiction community, but we most often see them in a professional or industry context. However, writing communities outside of the industry itself, such as critique groups, also play an important role in fostering an inclusive community.
Online critique groups in particular can be an invaluable tool for providing writers feedback from people with different backgrounds and perspectives than themselves—but creating a truly diverse community requires more than just an Internet connection. It requires an active and ongoing effort from group members and moderators to create a space that is safe for all voices. Groups must be willing to address:
how to call out biased or problematic content (including racism, sexism, homo- and transphobia, etc.)
how to accept critiques that reveal problematic content in your own work (and learn from them to improve your writing)
how to support marginalized writers and act as an ally in a critique group
the responsibilities of group members and moderators in facilitating an inclusive environment
This panel is proposed by the members of Reading Excuses, an online critique group that has been active for nearly 9 years. A fan spin-off of the popular podcast Writing Excuses, the group has always prided itself on being open to everyone—all genres of speculative fiction and all levels of writer, from brand-new to published authors.
As the group has begun attracting more diverse voices over the years, we have had to explore what it means to truly be open to everyone, and take many of the above lessons to heart. Although we’re still learning, we hope that the insight we’ve gained from addressing our group’s challenges can help others create groups that are safe, productive, and inclusive for all.
A draft of proposed questions can be provided upon request.
Additional details about programme item
Proposed panelists: (our names & maybe very brief qualifying detail)
The proposed panelists are active members or moderators of the Reading Excuses forum and include men, women, and nonbinary authors; however, we would be thrilled to increase the breadth of representation on our panel, particularly including authors of colour. People willing to represent other axes of diversity would also be most welcome. All panelists should be active members and/or moderators of online critique groups.
Proposed questions (provided upon request)
Topic 1: The benefits of diverse voices in critique groups
Q1: What are the advantages a critique group with diverse voices, in background or in genre?
Topic 2: How to make sure your critique group enables a culture of diversity
Q1: Has ensuring diversity always been a focus of your critique group? If so, what did those in charge do make space for diverse voices when the group formed?
Q2: How do you do you attract and keep diverse voices, especially if your group is primarily made up of members of a dominant culture?
Q3: What are common pitfalls you have seen in critique groups trying to be inclusive?
Topic 3: Accepting critiques that challenge your worldview and understanding
Q1: For marginalized critiquers, what are the dangers to you in calling out bias? Do others always respond in a way you might expect?
Q2: How should writers respond to critiques that say their writing is problematic or biased? Should that response change based on whether the writer does, or does not, agree with the critique?
Q3: For those belonging to a culturally dominant group, how has participating in a critique group with diverse voices affected you and your writing?
Topic 4: Allyship in critique groups - group roles in fostering inclusive environments (without depending on the emotional labor of marginalized writers)
Q1: What are critiquers’ responsibilities when responding to stories that demonstrate problematic content or bias? (i.e. fridging, white savior narratives, etc.)
Q2: What are critiquers’ responsibilities towards other group members when someone responds badly to being called out on bias in their writing or behaviour?
Topic 6: The role of moderators in critique groups
Q1: What additional responsibilities to moderators have, over and above other members, to ensure that marginalized voices in the group are not drowned out?
Q2: How can moderators enable greater allyship in a critique group? How can mods foster an inclusive culture that empowers everyone to participate? (calling out bias, supporting marginalized writers, etc.)
Q3: How do you balance maintaining the peace with challenging bias? What if you lose members who are otherwise fantastic contributers, just because they are biased?
