Don’t you love it when things you thought about all the time when you were younger and assumed were silly are validated by other people who also secretly thought the same thing? Enter this article.
The problem with articles like this is that it’s preaching to the choir, which is self-gratifying, but rarely does it accomplish anything. It makes me sad.
Then there’s also what Neesha Meminger said, which can be applied to literature, movie casting, political party affiliation, and tons of other things:
But here’s the thing. For some people, being “political” is not a choice. Stating that racism, sexism, homophobia, classism, etc., exist – to some folks – is simply stating a reality, while others have the luxury (privilege) to choose not to address it, engage with it, or even acknowledge it. I’m not really sure what a polarizing political post is – maybe a call to action? But I do think it’s good for agents to state their preferences, just as I think it’s good for writers to continue stating their views. Because, really, there are no apolitical views. The political runs through our day-to-day lives, whether we choose to acknowledge it or not. Choosing not to write political posts IS a political act. Choosing not to see “colour” or race IS a political act. Choosing not to engage in discourse around power and privilege is exercizing that very privilege, and it is most definitely a political act.
I guess this little compilation is just my way of saying that I want to be a part of the people who engage in political acts that counter the dominant norm. And that’s not even going to do much, because for the most part I am in Meminger’s group–that is, the people who have no choice not to acknowledge those things, because they are a reality. So I hope people who do have the choice make the better one–to acknowledge it.