I have posted it twice to HN, and it was essentially ignored, but it provides good evidence that women writers have a much harder time getting published simply because they are female.
I don't disagree that this is a problem that should be solved, but it doesn't answer my question. Why should I, as a reader, just try to find quality interesting content care about the identity of the author. Authors are just individuals to me. Unless their experience by virtue of their identity is relevant to the subject matter at hand, why should use identity in deciding what to read instead of just relying on subject matter and positive reviews and recommendations?
Why should I, as a reader, just try to find quality interesting content care about the identity of the author.
Sorry, it seems really obvious to me and I have heard it said before, so didn't feel I needed to spell it out: Female authors must be better than most to have any shot at getting published. So, women authors who do get published tend to be better authors than most male authors.
You aren't required to care. Whether or not you care is on you, but if you want quality writing, there is evidence that due to the fact that women are discriminated against, IF they manage to get published, their writing will be of unusually high quality.
FWIW, the essay I linked to was written by a woman. By your logic, you're morally obligated to read it.
I didn't make a moral argument anywhere. You asked "Why should I, as a reader, just try to find quality interesting content care about the identity of the author." And I suggested there is evidence that women authors need to be better to have any hope of getting published at all.
As I noted above, you have no obligation whatsoever to care about the author's identity. I was merely answering your question very literally and in good faith. But, your many remarks here strongly suggest it wasn't actually a good faith question and you trying to do this "gotcha" just makes it clear that your real intent is to completely piss on the idea that anyone should do anything for "moral" reasons (a la supporting diversity).
The full original statement involves plenty of qualifiers:
Sorry, it seems really obvious to me and I have heard it said before, so didn't feel I needed to spell it out: Female authors must be better than most to have any shot at getting published.
"it seems obvious to me" and "I have heard it said before" etc. You very much look like you are trolling me at this point. So, I think I am done because, wow, I feel like I need a shower for having made the mistake of trying to engage you in good faith.
Hey, I'm not taking sides, but just want to say don't be discouraged! Discussing over the internet lacks certain dimensions that face-to-face discussions have. It's hard to sense the tone and full intention of the other party, and thus harder for each side to re-calibrate what they are about to say. Therefore I always have high threshold for miscommunication over the internet.
Because when you become aware that an injustice exists you should consciously try to do something about it? One of the easiest ways to do something about it is by buying and supporting work by female authors.
And of course a writer's identity will play a role in the work that they produce. No one is writing Toni Morrison besides Toni Morrison, and a Fanon essay is a Fanon essay because he experienced being black in France and Algeria.
I'm sorry, I don't buy books to solve injustice. I buy them to be informed or entertained.
Why stop at choosing books by gender? If it's irrelevant to the subject matter being written on, should I buy books based on someone's nationality? Their religion? Their race? Their sexual orientation?
Citing examples of authors where the subject matter is relevant to their identity is not a counter-argument to the point I'm making. I'm in agreement that only Toni Morrison can write about Toni Morrison's identity-related experiences and only Fanon can write about Fanon's identity-related experiences. However, if Fanon and Toni were to both write a book on something like the 2008 banking crisis, I would expect the their lived identity-related experiences to be largely irrelevant to the final product each produces.
This reduction of individuals to their identity is dehumanizing.
You don't think a person of color writing about the subprime mortgage crisis would write a different book than a white banker that worked at Bear Stearns? A crisis in which black and Latino applicants were almost 2.5 times more likely to be given a subprime rate in comparison to white applicants? [1]
No one is reducing individuals to their race or gender identity, but unless we're talking about pure science and mathematics books it is a show of ignorance to argue that lived experience has no bearing on the work of the author.
The inherent racism in your example notwithstanding, the two examples you chose aren't even comparable. You didn't say "a person of color" and "a white person". You said "a person of color" and a "white banker that worked at Bear Sterns". That's pure apples and oranges.
The relevant lived experience is being a banker at Bear Stearns, not the race of that banker. Also, how do I know the person of color isn't also a banker at Bear Sterns. I worked in Wall Street years ago, and yes, I had co-workers that were people of color.
I have posted it twice to HN, and it was essentially ignored, but it provides good evidence that women writers have a much harder time getting published simply because they are female.