What Would You Want from a Bigger Other Feminisms?
Prudent ideas and long-shot requests welcome
Thanks to everyone who’s filled out the Other Feminisms one-year census. About 150 of you have answered the brief survey so far, and I’ve really appreciated reading through the responses. You can take the survey here.
It’s been one year of Other Feminisms, and after Monday’s reflection on the year we’ve spent together, I wanted to take Thursday to think about what the next year could look like. I’m grateful for the 1250+ of you who belong to this community, and I’m excited to see who will join us and what we can do together.
Paid subscribers make it easier for me to make time for Other Feminisms by saying no to other paid freelance work, and I really appreciate the 60+ of you who have been able to offer your support.
Over the next year, I think paid subscribers will help sustain this community (especially as I have to manage my time carefully with a newborn!) but I also want to look for possible support to expand what Other Feminisms can be.
I’ve received a small grant from the Abigail Adams Institute to support this project. (And the grant comes with no editorial oversight or constraints.) I’d like to see if there are other possible funders who can help.
If you have introductions to make, I’m all ears, but what I’m really looking for is your wish list. If I had a bit more time to invest in Other Feminisms, what would you hope to see me do?
You can think about this kind of expansion on a few scales:
What topics would you like to see covered in the next year?
What more could I do to support connections among readers and commenters?
What other voices would you like to see incorporated into Other Feminisms, whether through interviews or guest posts?
What would you hope could be possible if I had five additional hours a week for the community and the project?
What if I had ten hours a week?
I’d love for your comments to span the gamut of “plausibly doable” to “exciting but very unlikely.”
From my point of view, the biggest resource Other Feminisms has is a thoughtful, engaged commentariat. It’s a pleasure to write here, because what I write doesn’t vanish into a void—you mull it over, make recommendations for supplemental readings, tell your own stories, and push back with sharp, good-faith questions.
That’s a big resource to work with, and one that’s rare online. It’s why I’d like to find ways to gain a little more time I can spend to build on that foundation.
Tomorrow, I’ll have one bonus post that explores an alternate format that Other Feminisms could take on, with a little more support. I’ll post a video interview with O. Carter Snead, author of What it Means to be Human. Snead’s book is without a doubt among the best books I’ve read this year, and I keep returning to it as a way to start conversations.
I look forward to hearing your ideas for next year, and your feedback on tomorrow’s interview.
One suggestion I have is to experiment with social or hobby type threads once a month or so. Interacting with other commenters here usually feels like a deep and high stakes conversation, which is great, but it might be nice to interact like we're friends getting coffee every once in a while.
I'd also like to ponder over the idea of having some sort of live conversation on a topic, or at least to try it out. It could be in the form of picking one time and using Zoom breakout rooms to ensure that we discussed in smaller groups. I think it's one of those things that might be a big success or might be a flop and we might as well give it one or two tries to see how well it works.
I think you should write an Other Feminisms book!
I also like the idea of compiling a quarterly series of essays based off of the comment exchanges in the threads.
Or, alternatively - spin up an online publication (relatively easy and cheap) and you could commission writing from other authors (or, better, make it a writer owned publication!). Digital advertising could provide revenue, substack & social could feed you readers.
I also think you could be an incredible convener of thoughtful conversations between opposing activists and leaders. Perhaps each conversation would have a goal of finding 3-5 points of commonality or agreement as well > that could be the unique value of those conversations.