Thread by @jbf1755

1/ A few thoughts on the #SHEAR2020 panel of last week.

It seems to me that we're talking about 3 separate things here:
1. The tone of the paper
2. The content of the paper
3. The publicity of the paper -- & the panel.

Each deserves some thought.

2/ First: the tone

I KNOW that some historians reading this tweet have been publicly slammed inappropriately & personally during conference panels. I certainly have--more than once.

It's unnecessary, unprofessional, pointless, & says far more about the slammer than the slammee

3/ Panel-ambushing also tends to elevate loud senior voices at the expense of less loud, less senior, more marginalized voices. Zoom exposed this in all its ugliness (see more on Zoom below).

This is NOT how we should work.
We need to be better--& hold each other to account.

3/ Second: the content

In many ways, the paper was EXTREME.
Others have done a far better job than I can do pointing out what was omitted, what was glossed over, what was offensive.

At a conference during Q&A, people would have pushed back on what the paper did & didn't say.

4/ #SHEAR2020 content (cont.)

At a live conference, there would have been an active--& in this case, very pointed -- discussion of the paper -- probably heated at points.

It would have been necessary.

5/ #SHEAR2020 content (cont.)
People would argue about the paper for the rest of the conference. There would be a follow-up panel rep. different voices & scholarship, & some real reckoning w/scholarly dismissals.

In public.
In a group setting.
With a more level playing field.

6/ 3rd: the publicity

Zoom made an active energetic discussion of the paper virtually impossible--at the same time that it broadcast the paper to a widespread public audience.

It's not good for debates & arguments.
Loud people rule.
More marginalized voices don't

#SHEAR2020

7/ #SHEAR2020

The end result was a pronouncement by a loud assertive person w/extreme views broadcast to the world as representative of SHEAR.

It's not.

But it's problematic, telling, & important.

8/ The panel's visibility pointed out--powerfully, unarguably--the need for broad organizational change & real reckoning w/the bounds & openness of our scholarship to new voices & approaches.

I see that as a good thing.
And I'm eager to see--& even help with--this process.

9/ I also have to say:

SHEAR has been a nurturing place for me & my students. I gave my 1st paper there. The same is true for some of my students.

There's a sense of community there that matters.
I love the institution & want it to live up to what it can be--& often has been.

10/ And finally, last but not least, it has to be said:

Some brands of so-called "humor"-- racist or misogynistic, for example -- need to stop. Now. Period.

In and of themselves, they're offensive.

Offered deliberately in a public setting, they're even more so.

#SHEAR2020