I write to give my view of the recent dispute among JASNA members regarding a statement on Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion.
I write as a life member of JASNA who, like many of us, is an older, well-educated, cisgender, upper-middle class, white woman. Also, like many of us, despite enjoying being immersed in Regency language, manners, and even fashion, I am concerned about many 21st century issues. These include issues of racial, sexual, and gender equality.
Like others of similar age, I grew up during the civil rights movement, the second-wave feminist movement, and the early years of the LGBTQ+ movement. Much progress has been made in my lifetime, but none of these social movements' work is yet complete, as we have daily proof.
When JASNA announced the formation of the committee on Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (JEDI), it was cause for joy. To ignore social inequities is to promote them, and it is incumbent upon all organizations to proclaim their commitment to welcome members of diverse backgrounds and experience or to rightly be condemned for their failure to stand up against prejudice, sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, and ableism.
As I understand it, the committee comprised individuals of diverse backgrounds so that each unique lived experience could inform the committee's work. So far so good. As I further understand, the committee explored how other organizations, more forward-thinking than JASNA, had handled these questions to discern best practices for our own Society as they crafted an inclusivity statement.
To formulate an inclusivity statement is, quite obviously,
the very least any organization can do, but it is the starting point, and was
clearly what JEDI was charged to do--or so the membership had a right to
expect. But such a statement must be followed up by action for, as Jane tell us, "It isn't what we say or think that defines us, but what we do." We members hoped that JEDI would further help to guide us
toward meaningful action--certainly more profound than simply encouraging males to read Austen.
The committee's statement, which has been released to the public, was clearly drawn with care. It was a clear, minimal statement of openness and acceptance of all people and rejection of the toxins of hate, prejudice, racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, and ableism. It was an excellent first step.
For these reasons, I read with a mixture of anger and great sadness about the executive committee's decision to water down the JEDI inclusivity statement to the point of its being completely meaningless. To quote another life member who stated publicly:
An organization that takes this:
"In order to fulfill our mission to foster among the widest number of readers the study, appreciation, and understanding of Jane Austen’s works, her life, and her genius, JASNA has an inherent responsibility to ensure that all people feel welcomed, valued, and safe at our meetings, events, and community spaces. There is no place in JASNA for discrimination or exclusion of any kind on the basis of age, color, race, national origin, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, sex, marital status, gender identity, gender expression or disability."
And instead states this:
"To fulfill JASNA’s mission of fostering among the widest number of readers the study, appreciation, and understanding of Jane Austen’s works, her life, and her genius, JASNA strives to ensure that all people are welcome and feel valued in its meetings, events, and community spaces. JASNA is committed to supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion within the Society."
Is very obviously NOT committed to diversity, equity, and inclusion.
The altered statement acknowledges no responsibility, omits specifics
about who is entitled to our protection from discrimination, and fails to promise
a safe place for all. Without these, what is the point of issuing a statement?
We are no better off with the latter statement than we are with no statement at
all. Indeed, such a wishy-washy
statement makes us look like what we are: an organization without the courage
and commitment to diversity that we were supposedly trying to espouse. "Better to be without sense than misapply it as you do."
To add insult to injury, the ridiculous attempt to claim that a committee on diversity, equity, and inclusion was created to encourage males to read Jane Austen defies the clear meaning of the words and assumes an overly credulous membership. It confirms, rather than rejects, an attitude of discrimination. It's like naming a committee to study poverty and hunger issues, then claim its mission was only to provide ideas for snacks during conference breaks.
After due consideration, I can perceive only a few possible reasons for the board and executive committee's actions, none of which is defensible:
1) The board was cynically insincere in its initial decision to create the JEDI committee, hoping just the formation of a group with that title would be sufficient to inoculate the organization from being perceived as racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, ableist, and hateful. Did the board expect that naming a committee would be the end of this effort or just its beginning? If the former, this brings great shame on us and reveals us to be all the things the inclusivity statement would proclaim us not to be.
2) The individual board and executive committee members are uncomfortable with an open, diverse, and welcoming organization and would prefer we stay old, white, straight, and cisgender. If so, what makes them comfortable is a death sentence for JASNA. Before long, an organization that refuses to move forward will be unable to retain younger members who see the injustice of a world filled with prejudice and who are unwilling to allow old, bigoted, white women to claim the sole right to know and love all things Austen.
3) The board and executive committee are driven more by fear than conviction to do what is right. Whether the fear be of lawsuits, as claimed by the executive committee, of member backlash, or simply of taking a stand against societal evils, making decisions based on fear is never the way forward. (Speaking as a retired attorney, JASNA is no more or less likely to be the subject of a lawsuit with one of the statement options versus the other--or of having no statement at all. Groups that are objectively lacking in diversity are often rightly presumed to be hostile to diversity, and are subject to reproach both from society and the legal system. Is this what JASNA hopes to be?)
4) The board and executive committee perceive our organization's membership to be composed of bigoted, ignorant, hot-house flowers who will wilt at any acknowledgement of their own privilege, the societal realities of 21st century America, and the debt we owe to those for whom our society has been and remains unequal, endangering their well-being and their very lives. If this is the case, I cannot help but take offense on behalf of myself, our membership, and even of Jane herself.
Are we unable even to give lip service to racial, sexual, and gender equality? Jane Austen was not so squeamish in pointing out the inequities she perceived in her own society more than 200 years ago. Do we really believe her fans incapable of such awareness, empathy, and social responsibility? Just how shallow are we? Just how shallow, or prejudiced, or fearful is our leadership?
This whole episode reflects extremely poorly on our Society and on each of us as members. Since a "good opinion, once lost, is lost forever," if this debacle is allowed to remain uncorrected, it will thenceforth be an embarrassment to admit to being a JASNA member. It will imply a tolerance for discrimination.
This behavior has brought shame to our community that can only be remedied by swift and decisive action. For that reason, I earnestly request the repudiation and reversal of the executive committee’s actions in this matter by the board as a whole, adoption of the JEDI committee’s proposed statement of inclusion, and restoration of the stated mission of the committee. To fail to act now would only further damage JASNA's reputation and confirm the worst assumptions about us and our organization.
Yours, etc.
Carol L. Wright
For background information on this controversy, see: https://bookhoarding.wordpress.com/2021/02/28/receipts-and-resignation/?fbclid=IwAR2AKFCDNStAk6beZ63mKbToaCkGjGZbHcZOqIWb2zz8ensOLtowwLb7UdU#click=https://t.co/GVH5MhAhAa
Posts
