It was used as a racial insult, not a compliment, therefore it is racistNow imagine a white person saying it...
She's gatekeeping again - you're not black enough if you don't agree with her. You don't "understand" the struggle according it her. It's shady as fuckWhat are the odds there will be white people in Munroe’s comments/DMs calling her a coconut?
As others have pointed out, she uses this language irresponsibly because now her supporters will latch on to it.
100% and academic referencing is a very hard skill to master. Would actually be an interesting assignment to give students her book and have them retrospectively search her sources to create the reference list.Just want to put some points across from the world of academic publishing, that I’ve been involved in.
Journal articles, academic books and pretty much every non-fiction textbook you will read as part of your education will have parts that are borrowed from other academics. This is NORMAL. Black, white, brown...skin colour is completely irrelevant as long, and this is incredibly important, as long as credit is given. This is not financial credit, but written credit in the reference section/bibliography. I think Florence is guilty only of not crediting appropriately.
You might think, that academic publishing is so far removed from these Feminist illustrated works. Not since several schools and higher education institutions have incorporated WDOYP into their reading lists. This is now a book being used to teach and should be amended to reflect that.
I think for the next print run, Florence should go through each page, and where work has been borrowed (and it HAS been borrowed - I’ve got both books and a lot of the ideas and imagery are inspired by previously existing work - she didn’t invent it, although did SF??), it should be credited in line with academic referencing. I think SF would be hard pushed to find fault with that.
I also believe that SF should do the same with her book, as she didn’t invent the ideas, imagery, text in her book either.
Incidentally, has anyone else apart from SF accused Florence of stealing work?
That’s a great idea! I hope a Women’s Studies or Social Sciences lecturer sees this!100% and academic referencing is a very hard skill to master. Would actually be an interesting assignment to give students her book and have them retrospectively search her sources to create the reference list.
I think she is thick but also taking advantageHonestly am torn between thinking SF is a bit academically thick with her reliance on 10 second Googles and ignorance of book publishing/how genres work, and then wondering if she’s actually genius, knows it’s bullshit but it’s making her money so why should she care.
Wasn’t that drawing on FG’s Instagram in 2018? Why didn’t SF complain then? If you look back SF liked all the illustrations/text on FG’s insta. Why is it only ‘stealing’ now she’s published a book. SF could argue that it’s because FG is making money from them, but it looks like SF had apparently no issue with brand sponsorship & ads FG got pre-book based on the same text and drawings...Does chidera really think that a drawing done in red pen is effective evidence of plagiarism. Wow.
Hope some taxman somewhere is enjoying Chidera’s stories. What an absolute idiot posting about how much money you’ve personally brought in during the last few months. Honestly clueless
It's now painfully embarrassing to me. She can't continue to bang on about being personally disenfranchised as a result of this and then boast about earning more than the average starting salary in the space of a month or so.It actually makes me a bit sick thinking of it. £27,060.
But thank god all those guilty WW donated via paypal so she could grab those top tier essentials.
I disagree that Florence didn’t credit Chidera appropriately, she did reference her numerous times throughout WDOYP so maybe you missed that. Or is it the fact it wasn’t done academically that you think is a problem?Journal articles, academic books and pretty much every non-fiction textbook you will read as part of your education will have parts that are borrowed from other academics. This is NORMAL. Black, white, brown...skin colour is completely irrelevant as long, and this is incredibly important, as long as credit is given. This is not financial credit, but written credit in the reference section/bibliography. I think Florence is guilty only of not crediting appropriately.
Yep, Florence lists Chidera 4 times in her book and once again in the acknowledgmentsI disagree that Florence didn’t credit Chidera appropriately, she did reference her numerous times throughout WDOYP so maybe you missed that. Or is it the fact it wasn’t done academically that you think is a problem?
I completely agree with you though that it’s normal to be inspired by others and reference them in nonfiction texts, Chidera seems clueless on this and didn’t seem to know she was supposed to credit her inspirations too instead of taking all the credit for herself for ideas which have been around a long time. It’s painful her followers don’t see what she’s doing which is deflecting from her own accusations of fraud, by pointing the finger at FG and accusing her of the very thing she seems to not be so innocent of herself.
Attached screenshot showing Fg’s first page of WDOYP where Chidera is credited. There are more examples and someone else listed one above.
Also, no, no one else has accused FG of fraud to my knowledge.
My point was that academic referencing or just a more formal and specific referencing system than that used would have left no room for misinterpretation. I know SF is credited in the book, but it’s vague and doesn’t pertain to specific information in most cases. It’s not specific enough. If possible there needs to be quote marks around borrowed phrases or terminology with a direct reference to where or with whom it originated, and not just a general ‘bits of my book are inspired by SF’ style text. In a textbook or journal article, this would never happen. And for good reason.I disagree that Florence didn’t credit Chidera appropriately, she did reference her numerous times throughout WDOYP so maybe you missed that. Or is it the fact it wasn’t done academically that you think is a problem?
I completely agree with you though that it’s normal to be inspired by others and reference them in nonfiction texts, Chidera seems clueless on this and didn’t seem to know she was supposed to credit her inspirations too instead of taking all the credit for herself for ideas which have been around a long time. It’s painful her followers don’t see what she’s doing which is deflecting from her own accusations of fraud, by pointing the finger at FG and accusing her of the very thing she seems to not be so innocent of herself.
Attached screenshot showing Fg’s first page of WDOYP where Chidera is credited. There are more examples and someone else listed one above.
Also, no, no one else has accused FG of fraud to my knowledge.
My point was that academic referencing or just a more formal and specific referencing system than that used would have left no room for misinterpretation. I know SF is credited in the book, but it’s vague and doesn’t pertain to specific information in most cases. It’s not specific enough. If possible there needs to be quote marks around borrowed phrases or terminology with a direct reference to where or with whom it originated, and not just a general ‘bits of my book are inspired by SF’ style text. In a textbook or journal article, this would never happen. And for good reason.
I completely get your point with this especially as her book has now been incorporated in to lots of syllabus’ but it is not common practice to reference in a popular book so I don’t think she should have criticised for not having done it. She was never writing for an academic audience and so just mentioning where she got her ideas from is pretty good/standard. I don’t think in WATTBA there were any mentions to where she got her ideas from though...My point was that academic referencing or just a more formal and specific referencing system than that used would have left no room for misinterpretation. I know SF is credited in the book, but it’s vague and doesn’t pertain to specific information in most cases. It’s not specific enough. If possible there needs to be quote marks around borrowed phrases or terminology with a direct reference to where or with whom it originated, and not just a general ‘bits of my book are inspired by SF’ style text. In a textbook or journal article, this would never happen. And for good reason.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?