"I never entirely believed in the meritocratic narratives of editors speaking at writing conferences or on panels, but I did always dare to hope that I would be smuggled into the world of professional writing, either by luck or tenacity. My pending loan payment has finally forced me to realize that that is a pricey and unlikely proposition, a desperate gamble. I can no longer afford to buy into writing as a job. My debts are too large and my wallet is too small. Writing professionally requires a wallet that can expand like a stomach wall on Thanksgiving. It requires investments in capital and time that run far beyond the margins of a reasonable ledger, even one that is strategically, desperately managed. Most of all, it seems to require a connection, not to the rhythms and patterns of the world, not to interesting experiences, not even to the everyday practice of writing, but to the gatekeepers. I once heard a talk in which an editor encouraged aspiring writers to ask him out for coffee, as if everybody who wanted to write for him lived in his neighborhood, in his city, in his region, in his income bracket, on his schedule. The power of writing, especially in the digital age, is supposed to be its ability to bridge gaps, whether temporal, geographic, spatial, or racial. But in my experience, proximity and access still reigns supreme. We use the word “pitch,” but sometimes it seems more like a handoff. And the hands are often the same shade." - Jessie

"I don’t expect editors to become human resources experts, to make and publish rigorous transparency indexes (Scratch actually does that, ha), to have daily calls for writers on Twitter (though that would be awesome), to turn away their regular contributors. I’m also not implying that editors alone have the power to change the structure that currently makes the pool of freelancers so white, male, educated, and well-off. But when editors make decisions about what they reject and what they accept, they should take responsibility for those decisions — no more lamely claiming that they “just accept the best pitches!” as if entire demographics are unable to offer good or interesting ideas. No more staring at homogenous submissions folders and “wishing for diversity,” like it’s a goddamn unattainable dream house. No more seeing new writers only as “potential risks” when all writers are potential risks. You either do the work, finding and welcoming and fostering different voices, or you don’t — acknowledging that, either way, what you choose to publish plays a role in determining how many writers move on (like me), and how many stick around, feeling welcome." - Jessie