If you look at the history of activism in the U.S., a clear pattern emerges of Black Americans, especially Black women, blazing a path, and then being plagiarized, spoken over, and rejected from movements they created. This rather disgusting trend has perpetuated itself in the information age, via social media.
I know for a fact that many academic blogs run by people of color are regularly plagiarized by white academics for their own benefit. It is a racist double standard that white academics are expected to make a living off anti-racist activism, and yet Black activists are expected to do these things for free, despite the double burden of experiencing racism while trying to teach or write about it.
The disgrace isn’t that social media is at the very cutting edge of academia today, it’s that the same people are benefiting at the expense of others, i.e. white supremacy in action. A white, male anti-racist educator commands a higher fee to speak than a Black, female anti-racist educator, and that is unacceptable.
I say all of this because, unwittingly, your question is extremely loaded. Bloggers of color are very familiar with the experience of creating activist theory and providing priceless content, then having it stolen and sold back to us by the white supremacy you mention. And yet, we keep going because the alternative is to be silenced completely.
The basic and most essential crux of this problem is that whiteness itself is framed by our culture as “objective”, no matter the topic. As if the less something effects you, the more of an authority you are on it? And yet, this only works one way: A white male is an “authority” on racism, but a Black woman’s writing on white patriarchy can be dismissed, ignored, or stolen without credit?
A “free learning product that addresses standards without bowing to white supremacy” would require that the above issues be addressed and corrected before that could be possible. You can’t achieve equality by adding three pounds to each side of a weighted scale. To address standards, we must change what we think of as “objective”, because objectivity doesn’t exist.
If you think that I am objective, dispassionate, calm, polite, or neutral, you are wrong.
And if you think any of the sources I use to either supportwhat I say OR that I use to demonstrate bias in education are objective, dispassionate, calm, polite, or neutral, you are wrong.
I’m doing my best to analyze what we consider “facts” by stuffing them back in the mouth they came out of, and taking a good look at the source. The recent development of an avalanche of accessible info redirects the responsibility onto the learner to think critically about what they choose to accept as facts. In many ways, we need to consider how what we give our voices in support of says about us, which narratives we accept and which we reject, and how that functions within society.
good post is good
I’ve also been really frustrated when I try to incorporate social justice-related concepts I’ve picked up through educating myself online into a paper and am then stymied because so many profs will only allow peer-reviewed sources on a paper. I don’t want to plagiarize and I don’t want to appear to be pulling things out of my ass. I’ve seen plenty of blog posts that basically gather links to a ton of sociological studies or whatever and synthesize/interpret them just as any other peer-reviewed paper might but for whatever reason (lack of access, institutional bias, straight up rightful disinterest in being a part of the white supremacist circlejerk that is academia, or even the fact that a lot of journals will subsequently not allow you to publish your work for free once it’s inside their EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE publication) this work only exists on a blog out on the internet.To rehash this work in my paper (by citing the peer-reviewed studies they used but “drawing my own conclusions” more like “agreeing with what someone else already concluded”) is exactly the kind of appropriation I don’t want to partake in.
& for me this is intrinsically connected to the ways that certain sources are (wrongfully) considered objective - white, supposedly anti-racist intellectuals are neutral on the topic of racism while poc are not, men are neutral on issues of sexism while women likely have a bias, etc. It’s not an accident that the institution that validates academic work is hostile to all of these groups, who are then squeezed to the margins, seek to publish their work online on their own instead, and are then further discredited for lack of peer review they could never access in the first place. Academia, you are garbage.
I want to thank you for putting into plain language exactly how this happens.
the shockingly low number of students who actually finish the classes, which is fewer than 10%. Not all of those people received a passing grade, either, meaning that for every 100 pupils who enrolled in a free course, something like five actually learned the topic. If this was an education revolution, it was a disturbingly uneven one.
so if mostly affluent white men are taking these classes and, even then, most aren’t finishing them….
what the fuck is the point?
as medievalpoc points out, the problem isn’t lack of access or some other technological issue
i will say that i am thankful for the photoshop halftone filter (also i’ve been hearing good things about manga studio) because actual screen tone aka zipatone is the devil. shit is mad expensive AND A HUGE PAIN IN THE ASS. i will be doing my screentone effects in the computer from now on, thank you very much ;-p
Well, some people don't have space or money to buy art supplies, or prefer working with digital art. It's not about faking real art, it's about a visual style I guess? It's just a tool, but you are right, having a real thing you made with your hands feels good.
I assume no one actually pays for photoshop, but I sort of feel if one has the money for a laptop/computer that can handle the program + a waicom tablet or whatever, you can afford a few pencils and crayons?? Not every art supply has to be top of the line oil-based products. I use crayolas, sharpies, and scrap paper for my like, half my sketches, for example.
I can see why people who are commercial illustrators may primarily use the computer for their work because computer = fast/easy and that’s the kind of work where the final product is all that matters and the process is considered moot (which makes me sad in it’s own accord; also “commercial” anything).
I also get if one is GOING for a digital-look. I mean, there are certain things that digital practice offers over non-digital (like, I think 3d imaging is really interesting, like the way Jordan Speer does his work, and also where would us video-editors be without a computer these days?!?!), but it’s when you have this whole photoshop “brush set” meant to look like a real watercolor wash or whatever that you’re perfectly layering in photoshop to look like “the real thing” when it would literally be half as easy and faster and more satisfying to do it in person, that is when i just stand there going, “BUT WHY????”
Regardless, if someone wants to continue doing their work in the faux-realistic-digital way then that’s their deal and I’m not gonna further piss on them for it, it just personally confuses me.
real talk: photoshop brushes that effectively imitate watercolor/oil paint/ink washes/other “real life materials” deeply depresses me.
yes i understand that “real life” art-making doesn’t have an “undo” button BUT AIN’T THAT THE FUN OF IT???? DON’T YOU LIKE GETTING YOUR HANDS A LITTLE MESSY?? DOESN’T DOING MOST ARTWORK ON YOUR LAPTOP TAKE AWAY YOUR SOUL AND NEGATE THE THERAPEUTIC ASPECT OF ART-MAKING AND ITS PROCESS? DON’T YOU LIKE HAVING ORIGINALS TO EXHIBIT OR POTENTIALLY GIVE TO A LOVED ONE OR EVEN SELL?? AGHHHH ME NO UNDERSTAND
dear anon who sent me the bug-killing message: i wanted to respond that i think that person would be “really into that” and you should send them a copy of the bug-splattered comic! (really, no joke, they’d get a kick out of it probably).
sometimes i feel like if you’re a woman in alt-comix land, you gotta be the fucking best of the best to get recognized, meanwhile if you’re a dude, you just have to be “kind of okay” to get the same amount of recognition. oh well, i mean, it’s like that in all artistic platforms of course, not just alt-comix, what with, the history of male-dominated everything and all. and anyway the ladies i know making comics ARE THE FREAKING BEST so let’s give them a HELL FUCKING YEA ;)