It’s the new noise in poetry. And it’s completely necessary to shout about.
Basically, the numbers are in and they’re pretty shocking. Women in literary magazines? A much rarer creature than you might think.
VIDA is a fairly new organisation dedicated to women in the literary arts. Their recent ‘Count’ examining the submission and publication statistics of major literary magazines has birthed some outrageous results that demonstrates the kind of gender bias one would more associate with the mid 20th century. However, a full decade into the 21st century and some of the most prestigious publications are displaying a crippling bias and VIDA’s arresting pie char representations really push the message home.
Vida examined The New Yorker, The New Republic, The Atlantic, The Boston Review, POETRY, London Review of Books, Granta, Harpers and The Threepenny Review among others. Many were found wanting. SERIOUSLY wanting. Take a look for yourself here.
Among the worst offenders is The New Yorker, with an overall publishing ratio of 449: 163 of men to women writers in their pages. The New Republic is worse with an overall 256: 49.
Of course, an initial reaction to these stats is ‘DAMN EDITORS’. And yes, I suppose the simplest way of considering the problem is to blame the editors. They should be selecting more women for their pages, yes? Or at least reviewing the slush pile in some kind of blind review system. But what about the slush pile? Can we really solely blame a magazines current editorial staff for only publishing 30% female writers when only 30% of the slush pile is submitted by women writers? This kind of question really points to the need for fuller data. Yes, Vida’s pie charts are arresting, but in order to move forward to a more equal kind of publishing, the problems need to be understood properly. Because if the slush pile has a gender bias, too, we really are in the shit. For women to have internalized the prejudice they observe on the pages of The New Yorker, or The Atlantic (The Atlantic! I know, they are meant to be HIPPIES!), and to simply not even think of submitting to such publications means that gender bias is still culturally embedded and accepted in literary societies.
This all sounds like a lot of hesitance to get angry. And I am hesitant. Because, as a female who writes, I never want my writing to be rejected because I’m a woman, but I also never want my writing to be accepted because I’m a woman. Affirmative action, positive discrimination, diversity quotas…. call it what you will the idea makes me uncomfortable. Yet, if this kind of disparity is the norm (and it appears so) maybe that kind of radical shake up is what is needed.
This is kind of serious. In fact, it is serious, and you should read about it. The Rumpus has a really good round-up of what’s been said here.
Filed under: Poetry, Writing Tagged: gender, gender bias, holey moley this is shocking, literary magazines, publishing, VIDA, women writers
