Why do it?

Over the past three weeks I’ve received many hundreds of communications — from authors, readers, fans, editors, artists, and even professionals and interested parties beyond the publishing world. The vast bulk of these items have been supportive. A few have been critical. Almost all of them have been constructive in one way or another. I’ve even been engaged in an over-the-transom debate with minor Star Trek writer alumnus David Gerrold, who has been doing his best Andrew Jorgensen to my Lawrence Garfield. Because this isn’t just about some award, it’s about how the field (of Science Fiction & Fantasy literature) regards itself; and how it proceeds into the future. Years of uncertainty — papered over by shouts of surety — have bred an undercurrent that is roiled, confusing, and difficult to parse plainly. Feelings are very close to the surface. Enough so that a democratic system exercised democratically (and returning the “wrong” answer) has resulted in an internal explosion that’s blown out all the windows and doors, and which now involves the wider world.

Good. I think it’s overdue. This whole thing. Even the tabloid slander and the fashioning of false narratives — something the opponents of Sad Puppies 3 have excelled at. All of this has forced people to sit up and pay attention again. It’s made the otherwise sleepy and predictable Hugo selection process mean something. Nobody’s nodding off at the wheel anymore. People are giving a damn.

But one neutral party asked me a good question today: Why do it, and risk your professional standing?

That’s a great question. I’ve asked myself similar questions every year I’ve been publishing in the field. Why? Why speak up, or try to make a point? Especially if it means getting backlash?

I think one of the big reasons why Sad Puppies 3 has brought out the sharp knives, is because everyone is feeling their belts tightening. The SF/F reading audience is going away. It’s been going away for over two decades. Year by year, the numbers tell the story. That’s not rhetoric. That’s the business bottom-line. And whether people want to admit it or not, the field of SF/F literature is a business. Lovingly tended by devout fans (back at the tail end of the pulp era, and up through the 1970s) some of whom went on to become publishers and editors who helped grow the enterprise into a bona fide money-maker (Judy-Lynn del Rey) which peaked at roughly the same time movies, television, and video games were elevating SF/F on a world-wide scale.

Since the turn of the century, though, SF/F has slowly been splitting from the audience it attracted — people who picked SF/F up from the late 1970s through the mid-1990s. As with the Futurians — who all mostly agreed that SF/F ought to be a tool with political and social application — the 21st century mindset of two out of every three SF/F professionals has been to apply the literature to the question of real-world social and political concerns. Which in and of itself is not new. The field’s various authors and editors have always been doing this, to one degree or another. But they were doing it with respect for the readership’s expectations. Not in spite of those expectations.

In the words of Larry the Liquidator, the surest way to go broke, is to keep getting an increasing share of a shrinking market. Down the tubes. Slow, but sure.

Well, that’s the state of the SF/F literature field in 2015, whether you want to admit it or not.

And since I am an entrepreneur — all commercial writers are, when you get right down to it — I am not thrilled by what’s happening right now. Especially since so many of my colleagues are not only not concerned by what’s going on, they are happily cheering it. The further diminishing of the reader pool. The “refining out” of the “impurities” in the audience, so that we have a smallish, monocultural, properly progressive and thoroughly dead thing to work with. A closed circle. Conversing only amongst ourselves.

Dave Freer wrote a very apt piece about battlers — the little guys who are too stubborn, too obstinate, even too stupid to let their betters have the last word. When I look at my own history, I certainly identify with the battler mentality. Even my many characters in my books and stories tend to be battlers. I don’t write about the elite. I write about the Mike Rowe Dirty Jobs folks, men and women alike, of all persuasions, colors, and creeds, who manage to dredge victory from the jaws of defeat. Even if it’s merely personal victory — the kind of thing you can go to your grave with, knowing you were your own man. Because those are the heroes of actual history. At least the kinds of heroes I esteem: individuals who managed to do remarkable things, with pluck, courage, a willingness to cut against the grain of expectation, and who never asked anybody for permission — before going off half-cocked and doing something crazy, which ultimately made a positive difference to the lives of decent folk.

Again, I was never one to have much sympathy for the elite. The power brokers. The taste-makers. The ruling class. The people who think they know better than you or I do, about how we ought to live our lives. Or what we ought to think or feel. My general response to that kind of attitude has always been best expressed with a defiant middle finger, aimed proudly. Which maybe makes me a coarse chap? A ruffian? A n’er-do-well?

Certainly David Gerrold has classified me as a man of the street — uncouth, unmannerly, and unwanted.

Despite my best attempts to be the genteel ambassador of Sad Puppies 3 — the grass roots movement which gave voice to thousands of individuals who all more or less felt marginalized by the status quo. Not always for precisely the same reasons, mind you. But people generally floating down the same, wide river. Like a flotilla of scabby-kneed inner-tube riders.

Has my career been threatened? Oh yes, dozens of times. “You’ll never work in this town again!” has been brandished at me by people who seem to believe they have the power to back up the threat. Either because they claim to be able to control the awards (wait, I thought nobody gamed the system until Sad Puppies?) or they claim to be able to control some aspect of publishing, or because they are buddies with “powerful” people who will punish me sight-unseen; simply for being branded a troublemaker.

And if this were still 1995 and my whole livelihood — the matter of putting food on my family’s table — depended on me “playing nice” in the face of such threats, I’d probably be a little more hesitant to overturn the apple cart.

Until very recently, traditional SF/F publishing did hold a kind of trump card. He who controls the Spice, controls the universe! If you wanted to get into print, you played nice with the ruling class.

But this is 2015. My editors aren’t glowering at me over drinks in the con bar. They’re saying, “Go, you.” And even if those editors did not exist, the advent of reliable independent publishing has made it so that a good storyteller can achieve a five, six, or in some rare cases, seven-figure income; all without ever bending a knee to the Spacing Guild.

In a world without monopolies, threats to run a guy out on a rail don’t register like they used to.

Because even if Worldcon bans me for life and I get a drink dumped in my lap by every stalwart member of Fandom (caps f) I can still go to my local Comic Con and enjoy a packed room filled with fans (small f) and compatriots, none of whom ever gave a damn if I brought the “wrong” people to participate in a democratic process (Hugo voting) in the “wrong” way. Hell, I can go to the local professional symposium (LTUE) and get smiles and handshakes — all from people who never cared if the taste-makers or door-watchers gave any of us their blessing.

I’ve said it before: there is the massive, astoundingly huge “circle” that is the totality of fandom (small f) and there is the much, much smaller, more insular, and in many cases, out of touch world of Fandom (big f) which proves its love for the field by having a spectacular meltdown when the “wrong” people speak up and speak out. “Turf it!” the self-selected guardians of Absolutely-Real-Forever-Correct-And-Pure-Fandom yell. “Turf it all! The whole thing! We are being overrun!”

CHORFs are, as they do.

I remember back when I was the 2012 triple-nominee for the three major awards in SF/F: the Hugo, the Nebula, and the Campbell. I received a few communications from people who said, this is your big chance to have a seat at the elite table, and become part of the club! Rather than be excited by the prospect, I was disheartened. Because I never wanted to be one of the “behind the curtain” betters who slowly made his way among all the inner circles and schmoozed all the right people and took his proper place; never speaking out of turn, with my pinky aimed in the precise manner. I didn’t seek entrance to Skull and Bones of Sci-Fi. I didn’t care if I was always on the Hugo ballot every year, like clockwork, because I’d played the game the way you’re supposed to play it. Said the right things. Professed the right beliefs. Made the right people think I was one of them.

I’m way too much of a flyover-country hayseed for that kind of atmosphere.

So I fell in with all the other blue-collar people who simply wanted to write and read stories without being accused of doing it wrong. When Sad Puppies was invented — on a lark — I approved of the sentiment. And happily came aboard in the second year, only to become the front man in the third year. It was a chance for the field’s betters to hear from the peasants. For the proles to shout at the bosses. For the taste-makers and the dwellers-behind-curtains to have their cages rattled.

That the field’s betters went full-force destruct-o-matic on me — because I invited the proles to the democracy — was not a surprise. They (the betters) had a media apparatus tailor-made for their bogeyman narrative, and they used this apparatus according to the playbook. Sad Puppies 3 got unceremoniously shoved into the role of Black Hat, and myself along with it.

But it’s worth all the drama, because the betters don’t “own” this field. If they ever did? When David Gerrold holds forth from his Fandom pulpit about “no forgiveness” and all that dire talk, he’s speaking to — at best — a collection of maybe one thousand people. Perhaps the pool of total Keep-Us-Pure-And-Holy-Fans is not even that large anymore? It’s difficult to say. A lot of them are passing on. They’re being replaced by new kids who seem obsessed with identitarian politics — which, not ironically, makes them a perfect fit for the Holy Church of the Peoples Republic of Science Fiction — but the replacement rate may not be enough to make up the difference.

Ultimately, the consumer market votes with its collective wallet. You can’t herd those cats, no matter how earnest and pure your motives. Nobody likes a preachy scold. And right now, that’s pretty much the only face being presented by Gerrold and the sundry opponents of SP3: preachy scolds. Dolores Umbridge!

Are you muggle-born? Is your Wizardry blood pure enough? Do you obey the 191 rules posted plainly for all to see on the walls of Hogwarts?

I was always a proud mudblood. And so are almost all of my friends in the field. Sad Puppies 3 is the defiant rebellion of the mudbloods. It’s gotten the functionaries and apparatchiks of the Peoples Republic of Science Fiction all hot and bothered. So much so that I’m being threatened with a life sentence to Azkaban. And so is Larry Correia. And the many other faces and names explicitly associated with Sad Puppies 3. We’ve been digitally spat on, our names and our families and our associates have been targeted for ritual pillory, and worse.

Again, all because we invited the proles to the democracy.

Maybe the apparatchiks lock us out? At this point, that’s the logical course of action. Make the door iron-clad, with little slots for inquiring eyes to peak through — to see if anyone coming from the outside is worthy or deserving of entrance. This would be the Umbridge Way. To keep the tribe pure.

A more reasonable solution would be to simply keep re-invigorating the democracy. Bring in still more participants. No litmus tests. No screens. No bars to entrance. But that wouldn’t make the Dolores Umbridges of the world very happy. When you invite too many of the “wrong” people — no vetting — you wind up with an unpredictable and unreliable social structure. Oh my God, they’re going off the script!

Maybe I am just a contrarian? Maybe it’s the fact I have three careers, and I’ve never seen the kind of childishness and petulance (being displayed now, in SF/F) in any other serious endeavor I’ve ever been involved with? Or maybe I simply take the words of Theodore Roosevelt to heart — when he talks about the man in the arena?

As writers, we often tend to tell stories about the maverick — the person who breaks the “rules” for a greater purpose. We have so thoroughly glorified this archetype that it’s almost impossible to find any books or stories which don’t employ a maverick, to one degree or another. I find it strangely bizarre that when this field is faced with real honest-to-goodness mavericks — Sad Puppies 3 — the reaction is apoplectic. The rending of garments, and gnashing of teeth! Do we write all these wonderful stories about mavericks, and miss the whole point? Are we simply wish-fulfilling because we don’t have the stones to actually walk our talk?

In the not too distant future, I’ll be serving my country in a foreign land. I won’t be at Sasquan to see what transpires. I hope saner, cooler heads prevail, and that people comport themselves like adults — that the drama we’re seeing on-line stays on-line.

Between now and then, I am going to conclude my use of this space; pertaining to discussion of the drama. It may or may not go on without my input. It has anyway. My moment (as Sad Puppies front man) is already passing. The Hugo selections for 2015 have been finalized. They are what they are. Love them, or hate them. Vote with your taste, your pleasure, your desire. Or don’t vote at all — though I think that’s a bit of a waste. Democracies of all kinds thrive (or fail) according to the participation of the electorate. Sad Puppies 3 was an exercise in energizing said electorate. I think we’ve succeeded. I look forward to many good artists, authors, editors, and fans, being recognized. I will be in the desert when it happens. I will probably read about it long after the fact.

And I will be content with the fact that I stood up, at a moment in the history of this field when it was worth standing up.

Advertisements

291 thoughts on “Why do it?

  1. I look forward to reading you for years to to come.

    Stay safe on your deployment, Chief.

  2. “I need not excuse myself to your Lordship, nor, I think, to any honest man, for the zeal I have shown in this cause; for it is an honest zeal, and in a good cause.”

    Thank you for standing up. Keep your head down out on the sand. The world would be less without you in it.

  3. A few things of note. One, I suspect it’s going to be milder (if almost as venomous) at Sasquan. It’s an observable fact that people are not as rude face to face as they are on the web, because at bottom line, I can’t punch you in the nose over the web. Push me hard enough in real life and I may just forget how bad I look in orange.
    Two and most telling: if you look at the Blogs of “Gerrold and the sundry opponents of SP3”, you’ll note that not a discouraging word may be found in the comments. Well there’s a reason for that. Those that have kicked up a fuss, that have disagreed, that have dared to say “excuse me your Maj, but ain’t it a bit drafty walking around with your tallywacker swingin in the breeze?” Have had their posts removed, and been summarily BANNED for the sin of challenging the “right think”. Now my Blog post (https://otherwheregazette.wordpress.com/2015/02/16/destroy-the-myth-destroy-the-culture/) was one of the early posts about the problem that we the fans have with the way SF/F has gone. Gerrold, and his Greek chorus, and Skuzzy and his have come on board and said some fairly unkind things. The sort of thing that would make your average CHORF head for the Green room, to get treated for the vapors by a quick fluffing from the Chorus. Those things are still up there, still ready to be seen by all hands. NO one has been banned to date (except for a guy that’s been court ordered to stay away from the internet because he’s a certified 10-28) and Unless you get to the point of personal threats with the appearance of the ability to back them up, no one will. You want to look like an ass, be my guest, I’m not afraid of your words, or your thoughts. I spent 20 years staring at the best antisubmarine warfare the Soviet union had to offer, and another 8 in a squad car wearing a “please shoot me” suit. I’m still around, the Soviet Union, and a lot of people I put the habius Grabus on, ain’t. Words don’t scare me much, and differences in thought, sincerely expressed are the basis of our (the USA for those non US citizens reading this) government… So bring it on, Hell I may learn something, and no day that I learn something is wasted. There in lies the biggest difference between our groups.

  4. “And I will be content with the fact that I stood up, at a moment in the history of this field when it was worth standing up.”

    Instead of just letting the Hugos die… which is precisely what happens when you vote only in an insular, circular firing squad of a clique that all select each other for the award, or when you no award everything.

  5. Thank you for doing what you’ve done with Sad Puppies and through that all your posts on humanity and the various ways in which debate is being stifled by those who claim to be accepting of all. Also, thank you for serving this country. Open debate, personal honor, loyalty, and patriotism all seem to anathema of late. Again I thank you for presenting a reasoned discourse in response to the hate and idiocy that has been flung at you. Sometimes all you need to do to expose the lies and misrepresentations is continue to not be what you are accused of. Eventually even the most gullible has to accept what is in front of them, or they die of old age, and the lies stop coming. Then all that will be left is the obvious truth that you acted in good faith with your expressed intentions. Thank you

  6. As I said earlier, this has now devolved into a fight for stupid people IMHO. Leave it to Vox and his cellar dwelling fanboys and Scalzi and his hairy chested femcnuts and he-women.

    As a consumer I would like to see an element of science return to SF. Today’s authors use the genre to push an agenda. The classical Greats used to generate great yarns by asking “What if….” I like fiction that makes me think – and much of today’s dreck being published is aimed at preventing thought. These cretins want to tell you exactly what to think…and elementary critical thought is beyond most authors in the industry.

    For me – I like the Hugo’s as they are: red flags to mark crappy authors and crappy books. Just my two cents, your mileage may vary.

  7. Brad, thanks for all you’ve done. I’ve seen what you and Larry and others are saying and doing and I have seen what Gerrold and ilk are saying and doing and the conclusion is easy. I know some of them are smart…I don’t know why they can’t see that they are proving your point.
    I wish you a safe deployment. I’m seriously considering journeying out to Spokane since I have family out there and seeing what Worldcon is all about. Maybe view the butthurt in person.

  8. And even if those editors did not exist, the advent of reliable independent publishing has made it so that a good storyteller can achieve a five, six, or in some rare cases, seven-figure income; all without ever bending a knee to the Spacing Guild.

    In a world without monopolies, threats to run a guy out on a rail, don’t register like they used to.

    I hope those tags work. Anyway …

    This. This is why I went into independent publishing rather than going with an ordinary publisher. Because I could publish what I wanted and my fans wanted to pay for, not what an editor told me would sell. Or was correct. I still remember the first rejection letter I ever got, wherein the editor said that he’d liked what he’d read, but he had no idea whether there was a market for it, so no. But, if I wrote anything in some of the more popular current markets, send that in instead.

    Did he have a point? From their POV sure. Because markets are markets. But on my own, I can write something that’s not been done before, and if it sells … then it sells! And I did. I’m my own boss. I don’t have to sit and listen to someone say “You can’t write this, no one wants it.” I can write it, sell it, and write more. And they can argue that until the end of time. Some have.

    But it doesn’t matter, because I can write what I want, and what the fans want.

    Are you muggle-born? Is your Wizardry blood pure enough? Do you obey the 191 rules posted plainly for all to see on the walls of Hogwarts?

    I’ve got a great one for you on this topic. During a … well, I hesitate to call it a debate, shall we say exchange of viewpoints with a supporter of the insular, anti-SP group, I ended up with this gem:
    Me: Do you accept that the fans of the authors who comprise sad puppies qualify as Science-fiction or fantasy fans? Yes or no? (At this point, so many goalposts were being moved with their responses, I had to establish something solid)
    This guy: If they self-identify as SFF fans, yes.
    A good chunk of his argument following this was that if you had been told you were a SFF fan, or if you didn’t claim it right away, you weren’t a “real” SFF fan. And even there the goalposts kept moving.

    Why share it? Well, hopefully you get some amusement out of it. I certainly did, because it was reaching ridiculous levels of mental gymnastics. Sort of like a reddit commentator I saw earlier who declared ‘I know that’s what’s been said, but that’s not what I choose to believe they’re saying.’

    All things summed up? Keep fighting it. This isn’t really the scrappy underdog, to be honest. This is A Bug’s Life, and the insular’s are the Grasshoppers. Most of us know how that ends (although I doubt the Hugo awards will even end with someone being eaten alive by birds. Maybe if hosted by Hitchcock).

    Either way, this battle isn’t over, but there’s already a pretty foregone conclusion, IMO.

  9. “Next year watch nominations/voting to be restricted to attending members.”

    Can’t be done until at least the year after next, and that’s if the rule change is approved by both this year’s Business Meeting and next year’s Business Meeting, at which any attending con member can vote.

    I don’t think it’s going to happen.

    If anything, SP has shown that they’re not nearly as dominant as they think they are. The volume of screeching doesn’t always translate to actual numbers. I imagine the Business Meeting is going to be…lively…this year.

  10. You keep making assertions without any evidence. In fact you NEVER back up any assertions with evidence. That tells me you’re a liar.

    – “I received a few communications from people who said, this is your big chance to have a seat at the elite table, and become part of the club!”

    Really?? Please share these emails with the group.

    – The Sad Puppies slate was arrived at “democratically.”

    Really?? “Democratic”? Please share with us a list of all the “nominees” you received for the Sad Puppies, and the # of nominations each of them received. Please also include the tally of all those nominated works that ended-up not making the cut.

    – All you do is lie. It’s gotten to the point I almost wonder if you believe youre own lies. You are seriously delusional. Deranged.

  11. Gerrold and his posse are deleting comments? Gee, what a surprise. As I recollect, a few years of that is what started Sad Puppies.

    They don’t talk out these things because SJWs have the certainty all fanatics do. They also know almost nothing they say makes any sense to a normal person. There’s a woman-hating Jim Crow in SFF in 2015? Who’s stupid enough to believe this shared hysteria? When it comes to trends in Golden Age SFF, every single thing I’ve ever heard SJWs and their nutty feminists utter has been a straight up lie.

    Let’s be honest about who these nuthatches are: they are extremely weird people – even for SFF – who’ve decided to drag insane paranoia about creepy subjects into a genre that’s about science fiction and fantasy. SJWs have no sense of boundaries. Why not drag SFF into the NAACP – it makes about as much sense.

    I don’t know if anyone’s noticed this but the new crowd of SJWs that’s coming in? They’re not doing too well selling books. Even the self-pub market is slaying them and you never see them at the Amazon Top 100 in SFF – Never. And gee – where’s the young straight white males? Can it be they can read the “Not Welcome” sign core SFF has been hanging out for 5 years now? So their new blood is a bunch of hysterical babies coming in with elbows flying about how everyone’s homophobic racist women-haters and that’s just great for sales. I can imagine the careers even of Heinlein and Asimov would’ve tanked selling that stuff about how their own readers are “racist as fuck.”

    The truth is what I’ve been saying for months now: new blood is ignoring core SFF. They’re going to Harry, Bella and Katniss – places they are not hated for waking up. SJWs are not selling the excitement that created SFF – they’re selling hate. The excitement these truly creepy people have appropriated from their elders and their betters is wearing off.

    There is no version of Tolkien or Star Wars where white people get their comeuppance in the Jim Crow south for the 100th time, or as white supremacist colonialists. You can’t sell hate. I say good riddance to these fools. They’ve made their bed and sealed their own fate. The Nebulas have drifted irrevocably into WisCon and the Hugos are right behind. Let Gerrold and Due co-host their white privilege conference. The flak catchers can cheer on their marginalized and maybe burn a privilege cross or two.

  12. Philbert:

    You think you’re in a position to “demand” things? From anyone?

    You’re not.

    You’re a yappy little neutered Chihuahua, all mouth and no cojones. Yap! Yap! Yap! I am so a Rottweiler! Yap! Yap! Yap! YAP! I AM YAPPING! I DEMAND THIS! I DEMAND THAT! YAP! YAP! YAP!

    It’s kinda sad to watch, really. I honestly feel sorry for you.

  13. We know that it’s now devolved into a fight for stupid people because Glenfilthie and Philbert showed up.

    EVIDENCE!

    Other than that… have a safe deployment Brad. And strength to your family, too. It’s always hard to go, but it’s almost harder to stay. I’ve been on both sides of that even if I don’t have *evidence*.

    🙂

  14. Brad, you said it all. With style. May the Lord of Battles keep you and all our service members safe under his sheltering arm.

  15. “I imagine the Business Meeting is going to be…lively…this year.”

    Not as lively as MidAmericaCon’s Business Meeting if the CHORFs do try and restrict Hugo voting this year.

  16. I won’t say “stay safe, Chief” because it’s not your job nor mine to “stay safe” when the uniform’s on. But don’t take unnecessary chances and always check your six, and return to hoist a few at the mess. Canuck squid sends.

  17. If really silly rule changes get passed in this year’s business meeting, they may be surprised at the attendance of next year’s meeting.

    Also, isn’t there a rule change expected to be finalized this year that will make rule changes take 3 years?

    In any case, if they change the rules on supporting members being able to vote, they are going to owe refunds to people who paid for supporting memberships on that basis.

  18. I wish you lock and a safe return from your service, Mr. Torgersen. As the mother of an Air Force serviceman, I know how scary it is for those left at home.

    I have been following the Hugo situation sinhe nominations were announced. I have been disappointed by some of the reactions of the “establishment”, since I do not think you were motivated by malice. But I do think that suggesting a slate was not the proper way to achieve your stated goals, given the fact that there are a lot of people who LIKE the books that the Sad Puppies seem to decry. I know you’ve likened the field to breakfast cereal that’s had a different recipe subbed in for the tried and true Nutty Nuggets, but my analogy is different… See, to me, sf is like a buffet that started out with meat and potatoes and two veg as the standard offering, with maybe, a few experimental international nights (your Nutty Nuggets ). But times change. Tastes change. And now the buffet has vegetarian offerings, sushi, dim sum, heck, Ethiopian food and every other dish imaginable. It still has the meat and potatoes, just over there, but it isn’t devoted to only that anymore. And so readers can load their metaphorical plates with some of that sushi, an egg tart or two, roast beef, and oh look! Haggis! (For the record, haggis is mighty tasty.)

    I think you are doing your stated cause a disservice by casting it as blue collar vs elites, because God knows I am not an elite anything except that I am a reader and a bookstore junkie. I buy (and read) at least three to five books a week (sometimes more). I will read anything that interests me and has what I consider good characters and world-building. I don’t normally go out of my way to vet my reading for political correctness, and yet…. I happen to enjoy Elizabeth Bear ‘ s newest book (Karen Memory) as well as your book. I don’t find that odd at all. And I submit that a heck of a lot of fans are more like me than either “side”.

  19. I’m another old fan who has been reading SF since the early 1970s and watching the Nebula and Hugo awards increasingly going to what I consider dreck. (with a few exceptions). I had not been paying much attention to the Sad Puppies, until the most recent Hugo nominations came out, and certain people came out screaming bloody murder over their gored ox, called down nukes on a position already more than half overrun, grabbed a couple of fig leaves to cover their naked snobbery, and called a mob out on a witch hunt. Given the surprise outcome in the nominations (which suggests that to me that a lot of non-puppies already liked Puppy suggestions) and the numbers of people now turning out to express their support for good story, I hope and expect that Noah Ward will be thoroughly trounced. Thanks for taking point on this one.

  20. “One should weigh the votes rather than count them, because the state must collapse, sooner or later, where majority wins and lack of reason decides.” — Johann Christoph Friedrich von Schiller (1759 – 1805), “Demetrius, Fragment”, 1804/1805

  21. @twilaprice You analogy leaves much to be desired. First of all, it’s not a car analogy, and everybody knows car analogies are the best analogies. More importantly, the buffet as regards the Hugos is no longer stocking meat and potatoes at all and has instead decided to stock nutraloaf with the occasional side of granola and fresh veg. The granola and fresh veg we can deal with. The nutraloaf is right out.

  22. A question for Brad:

    What’s the endgame? What would you like the Hugo Awards to look like by, say, 2018? Do you still want there to be room for feminist SF on the Hugo ballot alongside the sort SF you and your fans prefer?

  23. @Tim Hall:
    >Do you still want there to be room for feminist SF on the Hugo ballot

    Sure, if they are good stories. Ideally, we would like fandom to vote in very large numbers, and what fandom likes, rather than what a few closed cliques wants, should be in the ballot. I suggest you look closely at what happens in the business meeting with the proposals about lowering the cost of voting rights. Look what kind of opposition those motions generate, and you’ll have an idea of who is against that goal.

  24. You’re understating Gerrold’s accomplishments just a _wee_ bit there, and I cannot disagree more with your message…but all of that is second to what you’re heading out to do. Have a safe deployment.

  25. Thanks for your service Brad, and thank you for SP3.

    You are doing the right thing with SP3 – I’d be proud to call myself a Mudblood alongside you.

    Don’t let the unscrupulous people who call you liar or racist etc dissuade you – it just goes to show they have no legitimate arguments against you.

  26. Why? Because of Orwell’s brainless black hole of a rat cage, that’s why.

    “Amanda Marcotte @AmandaMarcotte · Apr 20 Always amused/baffled by misogynists getting huffy when you insist on labeling them accurately. If it shames you, then stop hating women.”

  27. @fajenthygia “””You’re understating Gerrold’s accomplishments just a _wee_ bit there, and I cannot disagree more with your message…but all of that is second to what you’re heading out to do. Have a safe deployment.”””

    Thanks for saying that. Disagreement should not be an excuse to abandon common human decency and in your case, and to your credit, it isn’t.

  28. In my own marketing work as a self-published author I have found that brand identity of “Science Fiction” is at an all time low in the general public. (In fact I no longer have my books in that category on Amazon.)

    A number of reviews of my books begin with “I don’t read science fiction, but this book is different.” In conversations with fans of my work I’ve found that what they see as making my books different is usually “characters you can care about.”

    The perception that I have found in my (admittedly non-statistically significant) researches is that science fiction characters are dull, cardboard cutouts with no personality. Readers looking for stories about people they can relate to are reading mysteries, some fantasy, and romance, but avoiding works labeled science fiction.

  29. > I can still go to my local Comic Con and enjoy a packed room filled with fans (small f) and compatriots, none of whom ever gave a damn if I brought the “wrong” people to participate in a democratic process (Hugo voting) in the “wrong” way.

    You can. Alison Tieman can’t any longer.

    This is an important issue in all of this, I think. You’re relatively safe. George R.R. Martin is ridiculously safe, even though he’s on the other side – if some SJWs took issue with his work, he could just ignore them (and they know that, so most of them don’t – one of the things about SJWs is that they focus on attacking the people they have power over).

    But there’s a barrier to entry, and the nature of a barrier to entry is often that you don’t see the ones that never pass over it. Right now the SJWs have a lot of power to decide who even gets to have a shot.

  30. >but haven’t yet read any of your books. With which one should I begin?

    I’m not Brad, but the natural place would be “The Chaplain’s War”.

  31. Alas, I won’t be at Sasquan, but hopefully someone could show up at the business meeting and submit my proposal for a rules change…. (Click my name). more democratic, better at retaining the electorate, and totally clique-killing, without the insane math they’re proposing at Making Light.

  32. I have to wonder if there’s a conflict of interest with Gerrold being the master of ceremonies at the Hugos and his almost daily anti-SP ranting on Facebook. I mean, if, let’s say Jim Butcher wins, what’s Gerrold going to do? Throw a tantrum on stage? I would hope he’s more professional than that, but I really don’t know right now.

  33. Although Gerrold’s behavior is completely unseemly and may create a shameful public image of the awards if he does the same at the ceremony, he actually has no role in the management of the awards. Kevin Standlee’s behavior seems worse to me, because although he is not vicious like Gerrold, a member of the organization should not be publicly taking sides.

  34. Brad- I’m neither a Sad Puppy nor a Rabid one, but I joined Sasquan a couple of weeks ago when I became aware of the controversy and the low cost of a supporting membership. I think you’ve done a good thing. Kudos.

    Be safe on your deployment.

  35. The most wonderful thing about your group is that you’re encouraging all of fandom to vote because the field belongs to the fans as much as it does those in the industry. I am a librarian. I have a master’s degree. The idea that I might be “idiot rabble” really burns me. I don’t feel that I’ve read enough recent fiction this year to vote, but you can be sure I’m doing as much prep work as I can to be ready for next year.

  36. I love how they demand copies of emails, all while pretending they haven’t already tried to eviscerate anyone who disagrees with them. They call Brad a liar when he says it was done democratically, despite the nomination process being out in the open for all to see.

    It’s funny, they keep using words that look like English, but clearly is some other language because so few of the words they use to describe events bare any similarity to reality.

  37. SJWs wanted war, and they got it.

    Unfortunately they went to war for selfish reasons, against people who were better prepared to fight. The assorted Puppies are just following the orders of the SJWs’ own idol, Barack Obama: “Punch back twice as hard”.

    This furious ad hominem hurricane of SJW rage is just the outward symptom of self-hatred as they realized just how badly they upset their own applecart and exposed their own lies. So they flail around, moving goalposts, performing semantic parlor magic, and trying to erode what they perceive as the solidarity of those who oppose them.

    But they know they are headed towards defeat and failure.

    The smarter SJWs (an odd concept, much like to being the tallest midget) realize that the Puppies will actually be more generous in winning than the SJWs ever were, and are trying to triangulate to avoid burning bridges. But every lie and personal attack on unambiguously decent people like Larry and Brad makes that generosity less likely.

  38. twilaprice: “See, to me, sf is like a buffet that started out with meat and potatoes and two veg as the standard offering, with maybe, a few experimental international nights (your Nutty Nuggets). But times change. Tastes change. And now the buffet has vegetarian offerings, sushi, dim sum, heck, Ethiopian food and every other dish imaginable. It still has the meat and potatoes, just over there, but it isn’t devoted to only that anymore. And so readers can load their metaphorical plates with some of that sushi, an egg tart or two, roast beef, and oh look! Haggis!”

    I don’t think of any of that as a bad thing in itself, most certainly. Heck, I only became a convert to the wonders of sushi after marrying my wife, so I like think I am still capable of trying and enjoying new stuff. But to pick up your analogy and run with it, some questions:

    What would you think of a restaurant whose waiters, when you ordered your meat and potatoes, asked instead if you were sure you didn’t want to try the sushi, raised a supercilious eyebrow at your vigorous refusal and treated you like dirt afterwards?

    What would you think of a restaurant where the chefs, upon getting your request for meat and potatoes, kept trying to serve you sushi dressed to look like meat and potatoes and dismissed your complaints on the grounds you needed to eat healthier and didn’t know what was good for you?

    What would you think of an Award for Best Dish if it became clear that over the last few years, sushi, even mediocre sushi, had tended to beat out meat and potatoes, even amazingly well-done meat and potatoes, and when the meat-and-potatoes chefs and customers complained about this were told that this just proved (a) sushi was not just obviously better than meat and potatoes but it was a morally superior quality to think so, and (b) if they really objected to go and start their own award for meat and potatoes?

    And do you think the people who liked sushi to begin with would notice any of this as quickly as the meat-and-potatoes fans, or think it was a problem if they did?

  39. local Comic Con and enjoy a packed room filled with fans (small f) and compatriots, Well, say hi to Hugo-winner John Scalzi (he’s been to Comic Cons in San Diego and New York). Say hi to Hugo-winner Mary Robinette Kowal (she’s been to Comic Cons in New York and Chicago). Scalzi just got back from and Mary’s going on a multi-city book tour, paid for by their publisher.

    Yet somehow we’re to believe that small-f fans don’t like them, or don’t buy their books. Maybe Tor really is a not-for-profit charity, paying would-be authors so as to keep them out of the street. This would be the same Tor founded and ran by Tom Doherty, a partner in Baen Books.

  40. The SJW’s may be full of self-hate, I’ll leave that to their psychiatrists (who are no doubt very busy). However, its obvious they are full of hate and bitterness for anyone who disagrees with them and stands up to them. In fact, they revel in their hatred. They’re a sick bunch.

  41. Consider at the same time that Stephen J.’s metaphor is happening, that the waiter is trying to insist that a California roll is the only true and proper way to eat fish, ignoring proper sushi, crudo, and carpaccio, and that even those who might like fish must have a California roll. Because the copy (the California roll) is somehow more authentic than the traditional (sushi).

  42. “Consider at the same time… that the waiter is trying to insist that a California roll is the only true and proper way to eat fish, ignoring proper sushi, crudo, and carpaccio, and that even those who might like fish must have a California roll. Because the copy (the California roll) is somehow more authentic than the traditional (sushi).”

    I think I must be too dumb for my own metaphor; you lost me here. What’s the California roll?

  43. “I think I must be too dumb for my own metaphor; you lost me here. What’s the California roll?”

    And you call yourself a Foodie? A Foodie would know what a California Roll is. Go away foodie, and come back when you’ve learned yourself what the right cuisine is.

    Now, replace Foodie with Science Fiction Fan, and tell us how that sounds to your ears…

  44. A California roll is cucumber, crab, and avocado in an “inside out” sushi roll, (rice on the outside instead of the seaweed) that was created in Los Angeles. Basically fusion cuisine as opposed to authentic. Given the rather stunning lack of knowledge about the genre exhibited by most of the agitators, especially in the regards to the traditions of SF, I was adding an element of “our copy of SF is the only true SF, and there was no SF before us” to it. Kinda like those folks who think Tex-Mex is the only true Mexican cuisine. (May God have mercy on them.)

    And, yes, I do write food porn. Why does everyone ask?^^;

  45. Oh, I know what a California roll is — I actually quite like them — I just didn’t know what it was meant to represent here in the metaphor. (And I call myself a writer, I couldn’t even make that clear.)

  46. But I had no idea that the California roll was not a Japanese-original dish, which may explain why I didn’t grasp the followup.

  47. No worries. It’s the peril of the food porn writer, ever doomed to prattle on about dishes most people would rather eat instead of listen to descriptions of. Too clever by half, some days…

  48. Restricting Hugo voting to attending members will work against the SJWs. Most of the ones I know can’t afford the $40 to become supporting members; more than a few still live their parents (past 40 years of age) or live in a friend’s garage. How many could spend the appx. $1500 (hotel, travel, meals, attending membership surcharge) it’s going to cost me to attend Sasquan? – and this WorldCon is in the continental United States!

    I would wager there are far more Sad Puppies with that kind of discretionary income. So go ahead, SJWs, make my day, restrict the voting to attendees.

    We’ll be there.

  49. Are they really trying to limit it to attending members? It’s bad enough that so much of fandom was unaware they had the power to vote with their $40. I seriously just found out this year, and I’m miffed that it wasn’t more widely encouraged.

  50. The issue I have with the California Roll is that it’s fake crab – it’s whitefish paste dyed and flavored to simulate leg meat.

    I don’t mind fish paste – it’s good in a bowl of ramen – but then, it’s honest, fish-paste-as-fish-paste, not fish-paste-as-‘krab’.

  51. I would find it tremendously reassuring if there was some acknowledgment that people have legitimate concerns about the methods used by the Sad Puppies. Yes. people are conflating you lot with the Rabids but I think it’s better to ignore people who clearly haven’t done their homework.

    Look, slates are bad. They’re an order of magnitude worse than the campaign and boosterism that has marked the Hugos since forever. It’s obvious that some authors are more popular with Worldcon than others, which has also been true since forever. Bujold has her noms because she’s a genius *and* Worldcon loves her. Other authors are frozen out because their audience simply doesn’t go to Worldcon. Or because bias or whatever.

    What the SP have done is more than just jostling Worldcon’s elbow to point out they’ve got a bit of tunnel vision about what they consider for the Hugos. Everybody and their dog agrees (okay, everybody reasonable [quick, name that fallacy]) that wider participation of fandom in the Hugos is a good thing. What you’ve done, whether intentionally or not (though this result should have been anticipated), is an attempt to dictate to Worldcon what they can consider for the Hugos. Can you not see why the community might be a bit irate about that?

    Hopefully there won’t be any major rule changes about voting. If for no other reason than any system can be broken and trying to find one that can’t is a fool’s game at the best of time.

  52. Most US Ethiopian food I’ve encountered _is_ meat and potatoes. Or potatoes and veg, or veg and meat, or veg and lentils, or some other kind of stew. Injera is the local equivalent of a dinner roll or a medieval piece of trencher bread. Other than the spices and potentially eating with your hands, it’s not anything that adventurous, really. And (pace the blogowner) they serve darned good coffee. Ethiopian food is like eating at your mom’s house. And honestly, that’s one of the things that is good about it. Ethiopian cooks understand that you should go home with a nice full belly.

    Honestly, most cuisines around the world are also in the business of giving you meat and potatoes, and filling your belly. Sushi isn’t supposed to be pretentious, either; it’s cute little food packages. Most of the best chefs in the world are deeply concerned that you should go home satisfied — full and happy, with good memories that you will share for years.

    I’m a voracious reader. A lot of contemporary sf/f has been taking my money and sending me away empty. That makes this puppy sad.

  53. Noblehunter,

    Considering that the reaction to this year is so very similar to the no award campaigns and ballot stuffing (by Arthur Chu) that took place last year when SP2 only suggested two recommendations per category, it’s hard to determine the voices that might be irate by erroneous and mathematically unsupported allegations of slates from those who, last year, were upset by the successful boosterism from conservatives seen last year.

  54. Was it SP1 or 2 that nominated VD with the explicit intent of pissing people off? That might have coloured the reaction a little bit. Might still be affecting the reaction.

    I don’t see why you need math to determine a slate. Just read the title of posts.

  55. Brad, I’ve never been to your blog before, but I’ve followed this whole saga for the last couple years. I just want to say, as a lifelong science fiction fan (of such different authors as Dick, LeGuin and John C. Wright), thank you for what you’re doing. Thank you for being a gentleman and kindly explaining your side. It gives me a lot of hope that we’ll see more great science fiction in the future, on the presses and at awards shows, because men like you and Larry stuck it out through the temper tantrums and guilt trips of those in power. Again, another voice of support, I hope it helps to keep your resolve strong, but it appears to be hard as diamond!

  56. Assume, from the Hugos results, 200-300 Sad Puppies voters. Observe that there’s a variance between low to high nominations of 70-190 per category, even in categories where the Puppies. Sad and otherwise, swept. The math does not support the allegations of slate voting.

    That the recommendations of Sad Puppies often don’t feature the full five suggestions possible also argues against a slate. That the critics aren’t condemning the others who offered a full five recommendations per category suggests that people are more upset by the success of or the source of Sad Puppies nominations than a recommendations list. That the reaction is the same as observed last year, when conservatives recommended only two per category, with marginal success at times, suggests that people are more upset by the success of or the source of Sad Puppies nominations than a recommendations list. That Larry predicted that people would be upset with Sad Puppies because of the people involved, in a wholesale embrace of the fallacy of origin, is a matter of record.

  57. And because I pride myself on being as ruthlessly fair-minded as I can be, I’ll run with the restaurant/food metaphor as best I can for the other side in this dispute:

    Imagine that as a dedicated food connoisseur you’ve spent all your life trying and tasting various dishes, and have at last decided that sushi is not only the best food you’ve ever had but the best food there is. Naturally, you’re going to sing its praises and laud it wherever you can. For a lot of your life you’ve felt like you were in the minority, because it’s hard to find other sushi fans, and there’s a lot of meat-and-potatoes joints out there. But in the last decade or so, many of the really big restaurant owners have discovered they like sushi, and now make a concerted effort to get more sushi dishes out there, even putting them at the top of the menus; and because the foodie community is never averse to trying new things, sushi enters the marketplace and does quite well for itself.

    You see more than a few meat-and-potatoes fans agog with delight and discovery, that “I never knew food could taste like this!” thrill that you remember so well yourself, and you feel, at last, that you’ve found – that you’ve helped build — a community perfectly suited for yourself and those who love what you love. And eventually, you and your fellow sushi fans have grown into such a close and wonderful relationship with the sushi chefs and restaurant owners that when you vote on which dishes should win Best Dish of the Year award, well, it’s only natural, and completely satisfying, that the majority of the victors should be sushi dishes, or made with sushi techniques. The things that you love – the things that you think are the objective best — have gained the recognition they deserve.

    What would your reaction be when, one year, the awards ceremony is suddenly invaded by an irruption of meat-and-potatoes fans angrily characterizing what to you is a perfectly natural division in the market (and certainly something nobody you know ever deliberately connived at, beyond simply promoting what they liked and ignoring what they didn’t) as having been “shut out”?

    When you try to explain why sushi takes so much more skill and craft, and is so much better and healthier in general, than simply slapping a slab of greasy beef on a grill (something so self-evidently obvious to you, and so agreed-upon in your community for the last little while, that you may be out of practice at arguing for it), you are met with disbelief and scorn at your ideas of what is healthy or what represents culinary skill, and resentment that you actually think food should be judged as much or more on its nutrition as on its mere taste.

    When you try to tell them how much the experience of seeing what you love gaining its deserved approbation at long last means to you and your community, you are bluntly told, “We don’t care,” by the ruder members of the group, and told more politely but perhaps more devastatingly by others, “But the approbation you’ve been giving yourself wasn’t real; it only looked that way because the majority of the community simply wasn’t paying attention to who could vote and wasn’t telling you where you really stood. And you may or may not realize this… but a lot of people in your community have been more than a little rude to the people in mine; in fact, they’ve been telling us we’re monsters that do real damage to society, simply because we don’t agree on your nutritional standards and think meat and potatoes are just as good as sushi in their own right. So we just want to see some more variety on the award-nom menus for a while, and see what happens.” And as they talk, you realize that the sushi chef whose work you love, who you want to see get an award and was finally getting a shot this year, is about to be turfed off the ballot by people who for all their praise about the merits of good steak can’t seem to tell grade-C ground chuck from Wagyu beef, based on what (as far as you can tell) they actually eat.

    In that position, I have to admit that I personally would be inclined to take at face value even the remotest evidence I could find that the people trying to ruin what I loved (however they described what they were trying to do) were doing it for bad or dishonest reasons. I would like to think that I had enough fair-mindedness to at least consider opposing arguments (and some people like George R.R. Martin or Mary Robinette Kowal have at least made efforts in that direction), but I am not certain enough of my own character to be sure that fairness would overcome hurt feelings.

  58. Noblehunter, SP2 had a story by Vox that Larry READ and thought was a GOOD STORY. PERIOD. He said so on his own blog. That it would piss off SJWs was just icing on the cake.

  59. Gerrib,

    It’s not that Comic Con fans won’t buy a Scalzi book, it’s that the majority of Comic Con fans don’t know who Scalzi is. That’s the beauty of attending Worldcon, and then a Comic Con, and being able to contrast the experiences. Comic Con is the big fan world. Maybe 1 out of 100 Comic Con attendees even know what the Hugo is, much less what Worldcon is. At Comic Con, even the bigger SF/F literary egos (like Scalzi) get leveled. So, all the sturm and drang — over how Sad Puppies 3 is the worst thing to ever happen to SF/F — seems preposterous when you consider the fact that the Comic Con crowd could care less. They’re not really paying attention to the tempest in the Worldcon teacup. And no matter how much someone like Gerrold hates on me or Larry Correia or anyone else, it’s a tiny drama confined to a tiny little sector of the SF/F universe that has been mostly ignored by the big SF/F world for decades.

  60. Over the weekend I went to a convention with 100,000 attendees. Less than 3000 vote to determine the Hugos. A few years back, less than 900 voted. I’ll bet if I mentioned the Hugo Wars to most of the people at the con, most of them wouldn’t have known what I was talking about.

  61. They’re an order of magnitude worse than the campaign and boosterism that has marked the Hugos since forever.

    That’s very easy to say when the books you liked were the ones winning due to back-room dealmaking and boosterism.

    What’s becoming increasingly visible is that a lot of the SJWs objecting to SP really haven’t thought through the implications of what they’ve called for in the past. Saying “other authors are frozen out because their audience simply doesn’t go to Worldcon” wasn’t acceptable to the SJW side when it was perceived (correctly or incorrectly) that women and minority authors were being kept away from the Hugos.

    What you’ve done, whether intentionally or not (though this result should have been anticipated), is an attempt to dictate to Worldcon what they can consider for the Hugos.

    Why should a SJW that thinks it’s acceptable to dictate “no white males” (or “no binary gender”) consider it be a problem for someone to dictate what can be considered? Can you see why someone who’s sick of the dictation from the SJW side might be a bit irate, irate enough to fight back within the rules the SJWs established? Can you see why they might be irate at being slandered for playing the game by the rules?

    Brad, thanks, and good luck on your deployment.

  62. Indeed. All the best while you are deployed. We’ll be keeping the home fires burning for you.

  63. Where do you get the impression that SF is shrinking?

    I think I’ve seen you refer to a 7% decline in 2014, and I think that data comes from here – http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/bookselling/article/65387-the-hot-and-cold-categories-of-2014.html

    If that is the case, there are a number of problems.

    First, the 7% decline in adult SF is actually better than the overall decline in all adult fiction (8% decline) and much better than most of the other genres.
    Second, if you look at juvenile (ie. YA) fiction, there is actually evidence of strong growth. The YA data lumps SF/Fantasy and “Magic”, whatever that is, but it shows a 38% increase (and on a larger base starting number as well!) If you combine the adult and juvenile, overall fiction grows ~2% and the combination of SF/Fantasy grows 18%.

    Do you have different numbers that show the decline you speak of, and if so, can you share the sources?

    _IG_

  64. The reason that these SJWs are so detestible to so many people is that they shun debate and honest discussion. Blogs, articles, posts and the on that side are far more tightly policed to screen out opposing viewpoints than what you will find here on the free side.

    Anyone who cogently disagrees quickly on sites controlled by SJWs finds their efforts vaporized by moderators who delete their comments rather than rebut them. The result is an echo-chamber and small-mindedness from a side that fancies itself to be openminded. Ad hominem replaces all substance.

    Here on the free side, opposing viewpoints are generally allowed no matter how disagreeable they may be as long (as they are not profane, presumably). Only here on the free side do you get reasonable discussion.

    It is not because non-SJWs are smarter that they are more likely to have a more correct view of so many things, but because they do not run from debate the way these SJWs do.

  65. “is an attempt to dictate to Worldcon what they can consider for the Hugos.”

    Voting in accordance with the rules is now “dictating”? Okay.

  66. The issue is simply this. Vote for what you like. Once I discovered that I could 1. Nominate a work I enjoyed for a Hugo 2. Do so for a decent cost ($40 is not horrible). 3. Get a chance to VOTE on the Hugo’s, it was an easy decision.

    Now I am told that since some the things I like are “horrible bad think”, I have to be kicked out. Of because I voted some works (which I had read or watched) that were part of a SP/RP slate I HAVE to be a Nazi.

    Lets just say that last bit is fighting words where I grew up.

    I am also supposed to feel guilty that I paid the money, made the nominations, and hurt someone’s feelings. Yet they don’t give a rat’s behind that they are slandering, libeling and defaming all sorts of people. They complain that the mudbloods followed the rules and walked in the door, so therefor is OK to destroy their livelihood and reputation. They are screaming that someone like Vox is playing, yet they actively assisted a known and admitted pedophile for decades.

    Yet I, and the other mudblood/puppy fans, are the bad guys.

  67. It’s not that Comic Con fans won’t buy a Scalzi book, it’s that the majority of Comic Con fans don’t know who Scalzi is. Then why in the hell is his publisher paying to send him to it, and why are the cons inviting him?

    Maybe 1 out of 100 Comic Con attendees even know what the Hugo is one of my co-workers, a professional, manager, graduate degree, is a big Star Wars fan. I mean, “3-foot high Darth Vader statue in his office” and “I flew to San Diego for the day to attend Comic Con” fan. I’m more than cool with that.

    But he doesn’t read anything but Star Wars. He will never vote in the Hugos, because he doesn’t care to. Arguing that “but Comic Con fans who don’t read any of the broader fiction categories support me” is like arguing that “100% of the people who are allergic to beer think my microbrew should be Beer of the Year.”

  68. I don’t get it. It’s called it a slate. The RP (whom you guys are getting blamed for but are also providing useful justifications. There’s a discussion to be had about how anarchic movements should react to bad actors or avoid the problem of useful idiots) was explicitly “vote for these because politics.” But now it wasn’t a slate? Just a bunch of people co-incidentally voting on a very specific set of recommendations?

    The result is an echo-chamber and small-mindedness from a side that fancies itself to be openminded. Ad hominem replaces all substance. *Chokes on the irony.* *Dies.* Have you read the threads here? The atmosphere is no different than it is over on Whatever, Just a different flavour of smug.

  69. Just when you think the SJW cult has hit the rock bottom of hypocrisy and bad manners, they break out the jackhammer and start redefining “bottom”.

    David Gerrold’s diaper-filling hissyfit should reassure you that you did the right thing, Brad. Stay the course.

    And to “fajenthygia” above: Gerrold’s accomplishments aren’t much to brag about. Harlan Ellison wrote better scripts for the original series, and worked on a much better series in recent times.

  70. @Noblehunter:

    “The RP…was explicitly “vote for these because politics.”

    Link please.

  71. I see David Gerrod deleted Brad’s response to his attack on him. So much for “open debate”. Typical SJW behavior.

  72. Back in, about 2003- or 4 (before the latest Noreascon, anyhoo) I used to be a regular at the NESFA clubhouse. In addition to going to Baskone, Arisia and Readercon, I also went to a relatively new con called Anime Boston.

    Since we had the Worldcon coming to Beantown, I made the bright suggestion that we get a table there and distribute fliers to the hordes of cosplaying teenyboppers. I even volunteered to man the table. I got repeated rejections from the greybeards. I was not inner circle enough to man a table and other such comments. The best that I could do was grab some fliers and leave it around the hotel AB was using that year. (Boston cons are still at hotels, but AB is at a convention center and it is filled to nigh bursting.)

    I still go to Arisia, but skip Boskone for the movie marathon. I have been largely avoiding Readercon since the PC crowd gutted it. (Bring back Kirk Polland!) And I only miss AB when it conflicts with the Passover seders.

    Oh, and whenever I see ‘greying of fandom’ panels in a program, I get very stabby.

  73. Here’s Gerrold justification “And once again, Brad Togersen misses the point. I’ve deleted his msgs. I’m done with you, Brad. At long last, have you no decency? Have you no shame? ”

    Can anyone take the man seriously after this?

  74. Brad,
    You point to the backlash to the nominations as proof that there is an inner clique in Fandom seeking to exclude all the other fans. The implication is that those who nominated this year to put the SP3 works on the slate were actual fans of SF/F who voted based on their perception of quality. Is there any basis for that belief?

    You say SP3 was “the grass roots movement which gave voice to thousands of individuals who all more or less felt marginalized by the status quo…” but where is the evidence? (I’m genuinely asking–as someone who only just started following this debate). The Hugo website seems to suggest that there were only 2,122 ballots filed. Some of those nominations must have come from the traditional voters–the liberal bloc whose have been controlling the Hugos. And some goodly portion of those nominations must have come from the Rapid Puppy slate, which you have disclaimed affiliation with. This seems evident in the fact that where RP and SP slates went up against each other, RP prevailed, right?

    So, how many “fans” did SP3 bring to the table? And do we know that SP3 would have succeeded in outvoting the Fans if not for RP, its slate tactics, and Vox Day’s hate articles? Unless you are vouching for the RP tactics, is there any reason to think SP3 was more successful this year than in previous years?

    Your recurring thesis is that democracy won–fans outvoted Fans, proving that the Fans were just a clique and that their outrage at the nominations validates your belief that they intentionally exclude outsiders from the awards. But what is there to suggest that the fans who voted for the SP3 and RP slates weren’t exactly what you purport the clique to be–ideologues sticking it their enemies?

  75. Noblehunter –
    ” The atmosphere is no different than it is over on Whatever, Just a different flavour of smug.”
    Often true. Everybody has a POV, and nobody has all the right of anything. However, you haven’t been banned, on the other side banning is SOP. I bet you could comment on Vox and you wouldn’t be banned either.
    That’s a huge difference. I’ve been popping around the blogs of all sides for weeks, this all being great fun, and the difference in the general attitude is telling.

  76. “Noblehunter: Have you read the threads here? The atmosphere is no different than it is over on Whatever, Just a different flavour of smug”

    Has Brad, or Larry (or Vox) edited or deleted comments that were counter to what their post was about as is common practice on Whatever, Making Light and any of the other SJW sites that critique them? No? Maybe you should know what you’re talking about before defending your tribe.

  77. I have not seen anyone arguing as I am arguing banned on Whatever. I have seen people edited for vulgarity, off topic, or noxious bullshit. I’ve also people reprimanded for failing to recognize when they are being assholes. An awful lot of the latter come back around to protest they are being censored for disagreement. They may believe it, but that doesn’t mean they weren’t being assholes. I can’t comment about the other sites, I don’t hang out there.

  78. Noblehunter, I’ve seen it. Part of the reason I stopped visiting Scalzi’s site. He’s a hypocrite of the highest order that doesn’t deal with logic and reason. He can only appeal to emotional arguments. I don’t read Making Light, but have seen screen captures of the disemvoweling (such a mature way to deal with those you disagree with). And of course, you have the words out of the horse’s mouth at Gerrold’s site.

  79. Stephen J, there’s a difference between saying “try this” and saying “you never try this because you’re a privileged racist stuck in a monoculture.” One is opening a door, the other an insult. SJWs are insulting.

    I don’t need anyone force-feeding their superior morality at me, especially since – as far as I can tell – the font of that so-called morality lies in the fact they are either lucky enough not to be white, straight and a man, or have seen the light. It’s like some goofy upside-down KKK but with pigtails and sign language options.

    This culture in core SFF is not only disgusting, but its dumb reasoning is obviously being used to engage in incitement and defamation. The fact it’s supposedly all done in the name of ending such things is just too stupid for me to put up with. Reading Gerrold is like reading some weird demagogue in Orwell’s 1984. Apparently his co-host is completely invisible to him. Were I to take her Twitter feed and change a few words and blast it back at Gerrold using SF’s perceptual shift, he’d likely see the thing he supposedly hates Vox Day for. I can’t wrap my mind around that level of perceptual failure – not only from an adult – but an SF writer.

    I found Misha’s comment interesting. Is it possible all the bad SF TV shows and movies are returning SF literature to the ghetto? If her remarks are actually a correct reflection of a thing out there, it’s possible all this selkie “gender-bending” is causing a kind of bait-and-switch where the idea and genre of SF itself has been transformed in branding ways we aren’t yet aware of.

    If so, to me that’s a good thing for the literature. Once it gets out of the eye of the mainstream it may have a chance to go back to its old eccentric self and enjoy what it is without being falsely sold in sections that used to be the gay, feminist, ethnic, social justice section of the bookstore. That’s not the same as saying without diversity; I’m saying without identity-based ideologies, a far different thing.

    I think one of the reasons SF used to be so popular is precisely because it was under so little scrutiny by the mainstream and because there was so little at stake.

    SFF writer Lester del Rey once said “to develop science fiction had to remove itself from the usual critics who viewed it from the perspective of [the] mainstream, and who judged its worth largely on its mainstream values. As part of that mainstream, it would never have had the freedom to make the choices it did – many of them quite possibly wrong, but necessary for its development.”

    I think Misha has encountered people who just don’t like SF and who never did, because SF certainly has had people you care about, sometimes even in the dumbest old SF TV shows. But there’s a difference in having that trump the actual genre itself, a thing we’ve seen in recent award nominees like Hild where there literally is no fantastic element.

  80. @BTW

    The implication is that those who nominated this year to put the SP3 works on the slate were actual fans of SF/F who voted based on their perception of quality.

    How about “because many of us said so”

    Given the various – often VERY old-school – references to literary SF works in these parts (and MGC, MHI and ATH) I’d say that counts as corroborating evidence.

    Since you’re demonstrating that you think those of us who claim we’ve been fans of the lit for years are liars (otherwise you would not with a straight face call for more evidence) and can’t be bothered to look around to see what we discuss re: benchmarks of quality/etc., then why should we spoon feed you an answer you’re already primed to ignore as just more play-acting and dishonest spin?

    Dishonest entrapment and dishonest questions.

    Piss off.

  81. Scalzi really needs to take a long look in the mirror before he declares someone to be an asshole. I’ve been following him on and off for a decade now, and the slide from new young talent to middle age talent to petulant hack is almost complete. David Gerrold needs to watch himself, or Scalzi is going to steal that mantle of curmudgeonly disdain and boorishness and start waving it around like is his.

  82. Noblehunter,
    I’ve seen it in spades. The definition of “noxious bullshit” on the other side seems to be extraordinarily broad.
    Banning opposition is SOP.
    Making Light is important, it is probably the core blog, the blog of record for the anti’s in this controversy, and they are particularly silly on this. I have been looking at their postings for weeks now.

  83. Quoting Gerrold: “And once again, Brad Togersen misses the point. I’ve deleted his msgs. I’m done with you, Brad. At long last, have you no decency? Have you no shame? ”

    Please, please, pretty pretty pretty please let this stick. May he live up to his foot stomping and never ever return here, or MHI, or MGC anywhere but his blog (and hey, hey can have Hines, ML and Whatever too).

    With a cherry on top, please.

    PS – Learn to spell surnames, Gerrild.

  84. Dgarsys, nice how you’ve jumped to characterizations and accusations when I didn’t question anyone’s integrity. Even if every single SP3 voter was genuine, it does not alter the fact that there is still little evidence that SP3 was a success this year.

    I questioned the premise that the nominations prove there are more fans than Fans and the premise that the backlash that the slates have received is entirely unjustified. Sad Puppies claim victory by democracy and rationalize that victory as justified on the grounds that the voters are fans. But the Sad Puppies won no nominations that were not also supported by the Rapid Puppies, and I was to understand (correct me if I’m wrong), but there are legitimate differences between the SP and RP motivations and methods, right? So, is the ballot an legitimate democratic endorsement of “quality” SF over lit fiction or something else carried along by the RP? Perhaps that cannot be answered, I don’t know.

  85. Scalzi bans and deletes that disagree with him or expresses support for anything he dislikes. He does this on regular basis

  86. Frankly, after seeing Gerrold’s insulting and bigotted “open letter”, I think every paying member of WorldCon who has any sympathy with either Sad Puppies, Rabid Puppies, integrity, decency, or anti-bullying, should be writing to Sasquan NOW and demanding that he be removed as the MC for the Hugo ceremony.

  87. BTW, whether you conflate Sad Puppies with Rabid Puppies, both had the stated goal of nominating works on their merit as good stories (entertaining first, any message secondary to the story), not based on a checklist of the authors beliefs attitudes. There was variance because one was put together by Brad (with input on his and other sites) and one was the recommendations of VD.

    They equated this with more fans than Fans because of the jump in voting members and the higher number of votes it took to become a finalist compared to previous years. It is anecdotal, but pretty obvious that SP3 had a large impact.

  88. Mr. T.
    If your fiction is as much fun as your blog posts, I have been missing out. Gonna rectify that oversight, I promise.

  89. Brad,

    I found it interesting that you mention all the many works of SF and Fantasy, and other genres, and the lionising of the common archetype of the lone radical voice of dissent. And why, with all these many examples, the anti-puppies would choose to play the madding crowd instead.

    But what you missed (perhaps) is that, just as the trope of the lone seeker reflects a real-world phenomenon, so too does the great majority who wilfully ignore truth in favour of dogma, status, and inclusion.

    You chose the lone wanderer’s path, and I think you chose wisely and well. But it is not for everyone. Indeed, as we are seeing, it is for hardly anyone.

    Your choice is all the more commendable in that it is deeply unpopular, largely unrewarded, and yes, persecuted.

    Well done, sir. Well done.

  90. “David Gerrold needs to watch himself, or Scalzi is going to steal that mantle of curmudgeonly disdain and boorishness and start waving it around like is his.”

    Maybe Scalzi can do a reboot of The Trouble with Tribbles (which, of course, Gerrold swiped from Heinlein to begin with). [nature show narrator voice]And the Great Cycle of Derivative Hackery is Complete… [.nature show narrator voice]

  91. Of course, he’d have to file off the serial numbers a little more thoroughly than he did with the out-of-copyright Fuzzy book. Think Redshirts. The Tribulations of Trabbles, maybe.

  92. “What you’ve done, whether intentionally or not (though this result should have been anticipated), is an attempt to dictate to Worldcon what they can consider for the Hugos”

    The fatal flaw in your reasoning is trying to say that “they” are not in fact Worldcon. I paid my $40 and now I *am* Worldcon now, not a “they”. All the whiners can just DEAL with that. I’ve been a lifelong reader of SF/F, had I known that $40 would get my voice heard I would have done that decades ago. In my mind that revelation was the greatest good of SP/RP…and no doubt the reason the opponents hate it so.

    I will wear a #WRONGFAN shirt with a smile and a Go-Pro to the Con if I feel like it. I agree with the previous poster that all of these people spewing bile onto their keyboards over, lets face it, something on the surface as trivial as a book award are very, very unlikely to repeat those same words to my face.

    MISTER Torgersen, Good luck on your TDY. Come back Safe.

  93. I agree with demanding Gerrold step down as MC. He’s shown that he hates and despises not only many of the Hugo nominees but a large portion of the attendees.

  94. I’ve only been in this game for 10 years, professionally. Before that I had my own sf/fantasy/mystery bookshop. I spent some good years there, talking to every kind of ‘fan’ you could think of. The newbie, the casual reader, the dedicated reader, the media fan, the die-hard convention goer. It was all about the books (and the videos). It was me acting like a kid at Christmas when the new release deliveries came in. Putting the new books up on the display wall, then grabbing customers as they came in and shoving a copy of a new book into their hands and saying: You can’t leave until you buy this one! You’ll love it! Every day I spoke to people about the stories they loved, and why they loved them, and which books they’d never read might float their boats just as high, so why not give one a try? We all had a great time.

    Not once, not *once*, did a customer say to me: Yeah, but I need to know the author holds the politically correct viewpoint. Not once, when I was placing my orders for upcoming new releases, did I say: Yeah, but does this author expound upon the politically approved message of the day? It never occurred to us. We said: We want a damn great story to read. Show me that.

    I’m not sure what happened between then and now, to cause such a seismic shift in the landscape. What I am sure of is that if I’d stocked the shelves of my shop according to the dictates of some people in this business, I’d have been out of business in a month. This idea of policing what people can and can’t find acceptable in the stories they love is insane. It is truly self-defeating. Nobody likes to be told what to love. And nobody likes being told they are stupid or ignorant or bigoted or whatever for loving what they love. As a bookseller it never crossed my mind to tell a customer they were wrong for wanting to buy the books they wanted to read. And as a writer, I am equally stymied by the notion that this should be my function.

    Back in university, my life was threatened because I stood up at a student meeting and said I didn’t think committing acts of vandalism and violence were a smart way to deal with the funding problems we had for some of our courses. I was shocked. I couldn’t wrap my brain around the idea that simply disagreeing with some people, politely, in public, could get me threatened. Thirty years later, it seems nothing has changed. But then, as a student of history, I shouldn’t be surprised. People are people. They always were, they always will be.

    I am tremendously saddened by this Hugo business. I am horrified by some of the rhetoric that’s been spewed — by people on every side of the argument. I am disgusted by the blatant lies and smearing and intimidation tactics that have been used by some to silence those voices that have spoken up in defence of fandom in all its shapes, colours and creeds. I applaud Brad for his reasoned, thoughtful and restrained conduct throughout the campaign.

    I have no idea what comes next. My fingers are crossed that the petty, vindictive calls for a No Award clean sweep will not be heeded. I’m looking forward to receiving my Hugo packet and reading the works that are on the ballot. I am furious that I won’t be receiving some of the original nominations, though.

    As for next year, well, I’ll be doing my best to spread the word on books I read this year that I think are great. I’ve avoided doing that in the past but now … well, I think I’m going to take my inner bookseller out for a ride.

    God bless, Brad. Stay safe, and thank you.

  95. BTW –

    OK – I’ll play this game. I’m bored.

    I didn’t question anyone’s integrity.

    Bullshit.

    You can take our word for it, or not. You don’t have to SAY the words “I question your integrity” if you by your own choice decide to question whether there’s there’s even a REASON to believe we’re fans or how and why we voted when Brad, and others around here have said so. Repeatedly. So either we’re delusional, or we’re lying.

    Or you’re ignorant and/or dishonest.

    Even if every single SP3 voter was genuine, it does not alter the fact that there is still little evidence that SP3 was a success this year.

    I questioned the premise that the nominations prove there are more fans than Fans and the premise that the backlash that the slates have received is entirely unjustified. Sad Puppies claim victory by democracy and rationalize that victory as justified on the grounds that the voters are fans.

    Stop reframing your question to something different.

    I specifically responded to “The implication is that those who nominated this year to put the SP3 works on the slate were actual fans of SF/F who voted based on their perception of quality” (and admittedly left off the critical line “Is there any basis for that belief?
    )

    And if you want to make it “I was ‘just’ (no you weren’t) asking about the numbers’ – we’ve stated that as well. For that matter, the nomination results, given the number of people who’ve mentioned they voted for the first time, are the very evidence you ask for.

    Hell- the utter furor and storm that started BEFORE the announcements, and the sweep, compared to the previous years, are selfsame “Reason”

    Given the amateur job of recasting the question, I go with dishonest. Though that may include “with yourself”

    So stop with the immature jailhouse lawyer games. I know far better ones than you. Stop reframing the question to make yourself look innocent. Stop pretending you didn’t say what you said.

  96. Gerrold is a pitch perfect symbol of what created Sad Puppies. These people are absolutely clueless about what it is they do. Gerrold is repeating the same pattern: group incitement and defamation. Pushback is proof of anti-diversity, racism, misogyny and homophobia. Delete and ban commenters.

    I don’t know if you noticed it Gerrold, but we’re way past the point of allowing that sort of doublethinking bullying anymore. SJW crusaders and their nutty feminists have no monopoly on HTML.

    I’m always amused SJWs are horrified by Vox Day. Compared to who? Gerrold and Tananarive Due? Those people hand-grenade me just for being born, as do all SJW Klanners.

    I THOUGHT THE HUGOS WERE SUPPOSED TO BE SAFE. YOU PROMISED ME I’D BE SAFE FROM MISANDRY AND RACISM WORLDCON.

    If you want to put this in context, pretend your imaginary enemies are swarming WorldCon on Twitter crying about the Hugos being not being safe and whining that Gerrold or Due might make a racial joke. Imagine Tweets from a multi-nominated Hugo author about a “homosexual dude parade” or a “black broad parade.”

    You’d think the fact those don’t exist this year but did in fact happen last year would wake up people to exactly what’s going on and why.

  97. “I am horrified by some of the rhetoric that’s been spewed — by people on every side of the argument.”

    I call BS. Find an instance from the Sad Puppies side of the argument that’s spewed horrifying rhetoric, and tell us exactly where to find it. Please. I insist.

    Otherwise retract your spurious claim.

  98. Considering some of the unfriendly fire I’ve seen, especially when GG and aGG argued Puppies to each other, I’m less prone to ask anyone to prove or shut up. I have also seen, and probably participated in, some blue-on-blue myself…

  99. I don’t buy that he-said, she-said either. Read this Tweet. Fairly innocuous. Read her feed. Then multiply it by thousands of other anti-male anti-whitey quotes over 5 years where that entire SJW community is in perfect ideological agreement with every bit of it and happily participating.

    “Cecily Kane @Cecily_Kane · Apr 18 My dog’s sense of entitlement is UNREAL. She’s worse than a male human”

    No misandry from Skiffy and Fanty there. If you read her Twitter feed for context, I’m telling you – it’s downright scary. This is what created last year’s Hugo’s and Nebulas and also Sad Puppies. They have obviously not learned a single thing from the experience.

  100. Thanks Brad. Please keep fighting against biggotry. It may put you in low spirits to see all of the SJW trying to defame you, but a lot of people are tired of that stuff from them. I know I am. It gives all the causes they are for a bad name for them to do that. At first, maybe their groups were oppressed and discriminated against, but that doesn’t give them the excuse to censor and attack neutral parties, and favor to only their own agenda. Don’t lose heart!

    Honestly I didn’t even know about sad puppies or know what the Hugo award really was before I found something about it on wikipedia, and after doing some research I have found that my sentiment is expressed here. I am glad I am not the only one to be thinking this way. Please keep sad puppies alive for next year, and maybe I will buy a packet and vote then.

  101. @James May–

    Yes, most of my readers are not people who self-identify as Science Fiction Fans of any kind. I consider what I write to be science fiction, but of the New Wave school of the 1960s and 1970s–my influences are people like Phillip Dick, Samuel Delany, Michael Moorcock, George Alec Effinger, and Robert Sheckley. My work doesn’t have rocketships or rayguns or any of the trappings that the hypothetical person on the street things of as “Sci Fi.”

    I suppose that I started marketing with the idea that the “mundanes” don’t read science fiction because they weren’t imaginative enough to handle the fantastic ideas. What I found was that science fiction isn’t viewed as too fantastic by the readers that I’ve reached, it’s viewed as too dull. In my limited experience readers who identify with the mainstream are very open to fiction that involves the fantastic or speculative, provided that they also get what they want in terms of character and plot.

    I think that there is a huge unreached market for the fantastic, outside of the self-inscribed circle of Fandom. I think that the above comments regarding Comiccons and other non-Trufan venues are evidence of the same thing.

    And, BTW, I am a man.

  102. Scalzi is now claiming on Twitter that someone says he “didn’t sell any books”. No link, naturally.

    I, at least, never said that. What I said was that he doesn’t sell enough books to account for the Scalzimania phenomenon with respect to the Hugo Nominations. He’d need to be Agatha Christie, Barbara Cartland, and 47 Scholars of the Church of England combined in order for that to true.

    Given that two and three year old Scalzi books are demonstrably getting their asses kicked, saleswise, by 40, 50, and even 60 year old books by Clarke, Heinlein, etc. it seems pretty clear that he’s not exactly Harold Robbins or J. K. Rowling.

  103. I just visited Scalzi’s blog to see whether he is still sprouting insults or is back to pretending to be a half-reasonable human being. He often keeps his bigotry and hate speech for Twitter, while he is Dr. Jekyll in his blog. Not always, though, and lately he’s been in David Gerrold mode even in his blog.

    I was surprised to see this blog entry:

    —————-
    A Thing to Remember When Dealing With Sad Puppies
    April 22, 2015UncategorizedJohn Scalzi
    [On second thought, this was not well-argued and I’m withdrawing it until I can more fairly and accurately make the point I want to make. Will update when I do. In the meantime, note to self: Don’t write screeds when operating under lack of sleep — JS]
    —————-

    And I was surprised: Scalzi removing a post? What level of hatred and bile had that article reached? I mean, we are talking about Scalzi here. It’s not like he will be ashamed at insulting and misrepresenting the people who don’t think like him.

    So I was curious, and tried to find the original post. Here it is for your enjoyment:

    —————-
    A Thing to Remember When Dealing With Sad Puppies
    April 22, 2015UncategorizedJohn Scalzi
    (Warning: Hugo neepery. If you’re bored with it already — entirely understandable! — give it a skip.)

    I notice that some of those identifying with the Sad Puppies, and particularly Messrs. Torgersen and Correia, are out there puffing about, as if they are leading the charge against the horrible SJWs who control the Hugos, thinking of themselves out loud in a haigographically overblown manner as if they are already blocking out in their heads the inevitable Ken Burns 10-hour documentary of their heroic exploits. But in fact:

    1. Nearly everything that was on the Sad Puppy slate that made it onto the Hugo ballot was also on the Rabid Puppy slate, promulgated by Vox Day.

    2. Conversely, very little that was on the Sad Puppy slate that was not also on the Rabid Puppy slate made it onto the Hugo ballot.

    3. Several things that were on the Rabid Puppy slate but not on the Sad Puppy slate made it onto the Hugo ballot.

    Therefore, it’s Vox Day and not either Mr. Torgersen or Mr. Correia who was the true slatemaker here. Their roles are, at best, as supporting footmen in Mr. Day’s self-interested crusade (and at worst, as noted before, his useful idiots).

    So when any of the Sad Puppies start barking about how they’re leading some sort of romantic charge against whomever, for whatever reason, or start blathering as if they are somehow responsible for anything with the Hugos this year, it’s entirely fair to point out that in fact, their slate largely failed, when the elements of their slate were not also supported by a self-interested bigot, an association with whom they are now desperately trying to flee.

    They aren’t in control of any of this; they never were. They aren’t in a position to issue manifestos or self-congratulatory paeans to their moral rectitude because (among many other things) they didn’t get the job done; that was done by the aforementioned self-interested bigot. This isn’t their parade. The Sad Puppies can run in front of the parade with pom-poms and sparkly batons and made a lot of showy hand movements, but doesn’t mean that they’re leading it. The parade has already turned in a different direction, and they’re out there by themselves.

    Which may be the saddest thing about the Sad Puppies: Apparently they don’t know that they are also-rans, the supporting act, and reduced to taking credit for someone else’s achievement, if “achievement” is the word to use here. The only way they can legitimately claim credit for (or have credibility discussing) any of this is to admit they’ve been working hand in glove with Mr. Day all along, which is something they are now loath to do. Otherwise, it’s all empty, pointless grandstanding, and ignorable as such.

    Just a thing to remember when a Sad Puppy puffs himself up in a blog post or comment thread near you. You’re looking at a failure, trying very hard to convince himself — and you — otherwise.
    —————-

  104. Frankly, after seeing Gerrold’s insulting and bigotted “open letter”, I think every paying member of WorldCon who has any sympathy with either Sad Puppies, Rabid Puppies, integrity, decency, or anti-bullying, should be writing to Sasquan NOW and demanding that he be removed as the MC for the Hugo ceremony.

    The fact that Sasquan didn’t do this a couple of weeks ago is one of the three things that has convinced me that the integrity of the concom is in question this year. No convention should be willing to put up with a presenter who promises publicly to make the awards ceremony into a horrorshow of retaliation. Yet they’ve shown that they’re fine with this.

    (Please, no one say that they might be in backchannel communications with Gerrold to please tone it down. His public statements have gone far, far beyond that and the hook should have come out some time ago. You can’t let this keep happening and meanwhile pretend that the damage it’s doing is ignorable as long as someone is stuck in an endless conciliatory email round with the bombthrower [who just happens to be GoH and awards presenter for your convention].)

  105. Well, I have no idea what people like. I was blown away the first time I read “Time Considered as a Helix of Semi-Precious Stones.”

    I like all kinds of stuff as long as it’s well-told. But what’s well-told? Generally speaking I like everything in the SF Hall of Fame volumes and the first 4 Hugo Winners books. There’s some common denominator there which escapes me, but a certain level of heightened thoughtfulness is in play. But I guess if people knew exactly when they’re in the zone they’d be able to reproduce it at will and then an even higher standard would emerge.

    That zone is a mysteriously thing. I’m still in awe opening any page of C. S. Friedman’s In Conquest Born and seeing how it seems as if every sentence is cleverly constructed to advance the book. She was never able to do that again, at least in my opinion.

    I get the same feeling from The Age of Innocence. It’s like every paragraph matters. Her House of Mirth from 5 years earlier in ordinary in comparison.

  106. Chris Gerrib writes:

    Maybe 1 out of 100 Comic Con attendees even know what the Hugo is one of my co-workers, a professional, manager, graduate degree, is a big Star Wars fan. I mean, “3-foot high Darth Vader statue in his office” and “I flew to San Diego for the day to attend Comic Con” fan. I’m more than cool with that.

    But he doesn’t read anything but Star Wars. He will never vote in the Hugos, because he doesn’t care to. Arguing that “but Comic Con fans who don’t read any of the broader fiction categories support me” is like arguing that “100% of the people who are allergic to beer think my microbrew should be Beer of the Year.”

    I suspect that the fraction of people who have heard of John Scalzi at a large comic con outnumbers the attending members of Worldcon. Scalzi and Kowal visit these things because there are enough book fans there to make it worth their while, book fans who read more broadly than Star Wars tie-ins. It may be a smallish fraction, but a large absolute number. How many such folk know what the Hugo is, or how they are decided? Some will have seen Hugo-related bragging on covers. That does not mean that they wouldn’t have an informed opinion about your microbrew. The publishers hope that the Hugo bragging will influence readers to buy, or they wouldn’t do it.

    In the last few days, I’ve seen lots of blog comments from people who do read more broadly than Star Wars tie-ins who either hadn’t heard of the Hugos or had no idea where Hugos come from until Sad Puppies happened long. I wonder how many local SF con members know where Hugos come from.

  107. And now our Master of Ceremonies of the Hugos, David Gerrold, not happy with insulting many WorldCon members, is insulting the physical appearance of a woman she disagrees with. Classy as always:

    David Gerrold wrote:
    >Oh, dear. Oh, dear.
    >Maggie, purple is not your color. It makes you look like a large eggplant.
    >What’s worse, when you speak — you sound like a large eggplant.

  108. And now our Master of Ceremonies of the Hugos, David Gerrold, not happy with insulting many WorldCon members, is insulting the physical appearance of a woman she disagrees with.

    I wonder if Seanan McGuire has heard about this.

  109. Frankly, after seeing Gerrold’s insulting and bigotted “open letter”, I think every paying member of WorldCon who has any sympathy with either Sad Puppies, Rabid Puppies, integrity, decency, or anti-bullying, should be writing to Sasquan NOW and demanding that he be removed as the MC for the Hugo ceremony.

    I don’t think SP should be demanding Gerrold’s removal, after all, we’re supposed to be better than the SJWs about tolerating people we disagree with. I don’t think any of the SP candidates will do anything to embarrass the effort on the awards stand should we win, and if he acts unsportsmanlike it will only strengthen our contentions. We can certainly place a distance between ourselves and the group that demanded the removal of Jonathan Ross from hosting Loncon 3 because he might make an inappropriate joke…

    And now our Master of Ceremonies of the Hugos, David Gerrold, not happy with insulting many WorldCon members, is insulting the physical appearance of a woman she disagrees with.

    Added without further comment.

  110. Now I’m wondering what an eggplant’s voice sounds like – given they’re in the same family as tobacco, I’d imagine they sound like Patty &/or Selma. Unless it’s an aubergine, which would sound like Carla Bruni-Sarkozy.

    Oh, and leave Gerrold in. Watching him melt down and act like a two-year-old at someone else’s birthday party, having to give SOMEONE ELSE the toy that should be his, HIS, HIS!!! is too potentially awesome to pass up.

  111. Did Gerrold just insult all women for not #JustListening? Was that a gendered slur? Where can I donate money to a sexual violence shelter for homeless men? How can feminism let this stand?

    Arise ladies, the patriarchy has struck a blow – misogyny is on the march.

    I don’t want Gerrold removed. He’s the poster child as to why the Hugos got 10,000 pizzas delivered. Having the friend-to-all-whites Tananarive Due as co-host is icing on the cake.

    What I love about SJWs is how completely lacking in principles they are. According to the fearsome strawmen SJWs have constructed of Vox Day and Larry C., those two ARE Vox Day and Larry C. The fact adults in the 21st century don’t get that is mind-boggling to me. They have no standards for racism and bigotry whatsoever – NONE!

    But pizzas have minds of their own…

    … and more principles than an SJW.

  112. “Stephen J, there’s a difference between saying “try this” and saying “you never try this because you’re a privileged racist stuck in a monoculture.” One is opening a door, the other an insult. SJWs are insulting.”

    Conceded. I’ve noted before that SJ advocates would do much better with their campaigns if they learned a few techniques of salesmanship; fire-and-brimstone denunciation has its place (even Christ used it), but you can’t preach a Gospel effectively if you consider the people who most need to hear it to be already beyond redemption.

    That said, I believe it’s a truth of human nature that most people in hostility feedback loops sincerely believe it was never them who made the first attack, and one of the great pitfalls of the particular brand of moral outrage to which SJ philosophy is prone is that it considers simple disagreement to be tantamount to such attack, as it “invalidates the suffering of the disadvantaged”. (That it is precisely this invalidation which they are performing on the bad experiences Larry Correia, and other conservative/libertarian fans and authors, have had in fandom has yet to occur to any of them; but they are not alone among human beings in failing to spot the planks in their own eyes first.) So being willing to say, “I understand why you think you are more sinned against than sinning here,” can sometimes help make headway.

  113. Some places serve california roll seaweed out, out here. Its actually 50/50 now that i think about it.

  114. Well, I don’t operate on assumptions or feedback loops. In the case of SJWs, it’s always something I not only read, but again and again until patterns leaped out at me. People at Glyer’s like to pretend I’m biased but I never heard of this weird stuff until SJWs introduced it to me and I started looking into it. Everything I say about this stuff is based on quotes that are typical rather than outliers. I’m not trying to fake a case – there is no need to with these crazy people. They are very public with their nuttiness.

    For example, in the case of these crazy feminists, I noticed they were constantly signal-boosting stories based on the race and sex of the authors. I bet I’ve seen 500 Tweets like that. I have never see one going the other way by the so-called racist patriarchy in SFF. Now, that’s an awful strange oversight for a racially supremacist patriarchy to make.

    Yet that is exactly why these intersectionalists say they boost these stories – because we are actively hamstringing them, and they make no secret about that part of it. So in essence, they gather for themselves the innocence the other side deserves, and simply ignore their own obvious racial and sexual cult of bigotry and supremacy.

    And it is a cult. These are not just some “gals” having a girl’s night out, they are radical ideologues who are so on the same page you can’t tell their weird vocabulary apart one from the other. This is a case of a few people with real names vs. unknown hundreds to millions of white male heterosexuals who don’t even exist. Reading their Twitter feeds is actively frightening. These people are paranoid, they are sociopaths, and they are completely without principles.

    They are all part of gender studies. I know that because I’ve read the text books. SJWs parrot the same phrases and ideas over and over again. Nothing they talk about is free-thinking or improvisational – it’s all as if by rote. That’s why I call it a cult – because they come off as Stepford Feminists.

    This movement has had decades to perfect their weird kafkatrapping arguments about privilege, punching up, fake gender and the whole nine yards. Even weirder is how effortlessly they’ve managed to mainstream all this as a legitimate successor to Jim Crow and equal rights feminism to some truly naive radical chic middle class crusaders. The fact they are so angry shows how much we’ve hurt this cult, and I for one am enjoying the carnage. They more than deserve it.

    The weird failure of Americans in all this is they simply can’t wrap their heads around this type of thing coming from ANY woman or non-white. They just won’t accept that. They’re not used to it.

  115. David Gerrold thinks that because he’s a leftist and a SJW, he can make sexist remarks and its A-0K because he has his official ‘No Leftist can be racist or sexist” certificate. No doubt if you brought up Justice Thomas the racial slurs would fly from his mouth. But of course, that would be OK – ’cause he’s a SJW.

  116. I don’t think any SP3 supporting woman should have to fear some sexist remark by Gerrod when he MC’s the Hugo Awards. That’s one reason he needs to go.

  117. He can do it with impunity because he knows they’ll never challenge him on it.

  118. ‘AG: There’s a reason I call Scalzi “Janus”’

    First name: “Hugh”.

    Re: Gerrold

    I’m really looking forward to Seanan McGuire’s response to someone actually insulted an overweight woman, given the screeching meltdown she had over someone who might make such a remark.

    My prediction: dead silence.

  119. You see… this is how we know they’re lying. All the time. About everything.

    I don’t know who that woman is or what she thinks about anything, but does it *matter* if she’s a paranoid blow-hard with a mistaken notion or two, or even if she’s truly awful? The “go to” insult is her looks because she’s a woman. Bravo, male feminist!

    For the last few years it’s been “we want a safe environment for everyone because we’re inclusive” but the truth is that Require’s Hate was encouraged to attack and harass approved targets. There’s no explaining that away. It only became a problem when RH attacked “good” people. The *attacking* wasn’t the problem… the target was. I read the comments of Mixon’s post at the time and a couple of people, quite reasonably, tried to point out that the base problem was encouraging this harassing behavior. They were shut down pronto, and in no uncertain terms told that harassment was approved for other targets and that no one was willing to say otherwise.

    Just like sexist insults and attacks are not the problem if someone attacks a woman’s looks, or accent, or life history… the targets are. It isn’t and has never been about some objective idea that women shouldn’t face sexist insults as a matter of principle.

  120. Brad… Just a nod of support. Gerrold is an unmitigated ass. Sasquan should fire him immediately.

  121. David Gerrold, please don’t trigger my anxieties or deny or undermine my lived experiences.

    Like all the “marginalized,” Gerrold think his identity elevates him above the norms of human behavior. That’s why you see so many of these truly awful people with Twitter feeds you’d swear had come from the KKK if you changed only one or two crucial words.

    This troupe of jazz hands monkeys recently harassed a talk by Christina Hoff Summers. They had a “safe-space,” which was the back row. I imagine they feared this elderly woman would have less chance of covering the distance from the stage to the back row if she decided to suddenly turn feral and physically attack them. Now you know why Seanan McGuire had apoplexy at the idea of seeing a TV comedian who is about as much of a threat as the corner of a building. There is nothing normal about these people and they should be ridiculed as much as possible until they learn to act like normal human beings in public spaces or just abandon those spaces.

    Calgary’s paranoid feminists got Honey Badgers – who are women – thrown out because of what… they might speak? Every time these clowns do crap like this and delete comments they expose themselves for the half-witted little shits they are.

    I don’t have a problem with pushing the Hugos clean out of existence. They not only tolerate openly racist behaviors by shit-insane man-hating feminists, they deny those people nothing. At some point someone’s going to have to stand up to these people and shove them out the nearest door. There is just no place for these insane people in a public space. The funniest thing about all this is these fierce feminists who must not be stereotyped have entered SFF and immediately turned it into a cat-fight gossip rag like the National Inquirer complete with drama-queen level fits over what amounts to the idea a lady-bug might land on their arm and trigger a PTSD attack, cuz that’s not at all what spoiled bratty little girls do.

  122. “They’re being replaced by new kids who seem obsessed with identitarian politics ”

    I had to read this 3 times before I realized: you mean that they’re leftist.

    When I see “identitarian”, I understand it in the European sense; that is to say, right-wing nationalist. Cognizant of their identity, and unwilling to have it airbrushed away in some proposition nation thought experiment.

    There are quite a few of those young people in North America, too.

  123. Rollory, they’re people who throw their victim identities around like a weight. One of the reasons you see so much on SFF Twitter feeds about black transgender is they are the biggest victim so to speak. They are also the most credible voice – the most wise about oppression. That’s what intersectionalism is. Those who have the most intersections of such a thing as being simultaneously disabled, non-white, trans, an illegal immigrant, non-Anglophone speaker with ADD, OCD, PTSD and bi-polar is kind of the lottery, a thing as valued and admired in this ideology as a circus performer who can juggle a bowling ball, a cat, a machete and a potted plant all at once. Presumably if one could worry about a dozen things all at once this would be of value.

    In SFF these folks are trying to lever this victimology into an artistic and intellectual status. The problem is that’s not how merit works. So we shouldn’t be surprised bloggers are being nominated for Hugos who are flat out idiots and so-called SFF writers whose fiction reads more like the old Eddie Murphy comedy sketch where he recites a poem called “C-I-L-L My Landlord.”

    Paraphrasing from Jane Eyre, if you put a premium on failure people will endeavor to fail, and perhaps even turn it into a race. We recently had a black female SFF author who claimed mistaking two black women for each other is “institutional racism.” When you’ve lowered the victim bar that low it’s clear the goal is to turn white people into the opposite of the biggest victim: the biggest oppressor. The fly in the ointment of this clever plan is these people are both crazy and morons who fool few people other than John Scalzi on his 40 acres of privileged real estate built on native American bones and slavery.

  124. Brad. If these grapes are too sour, then why not “save the world” by starting your own vanity publishing house.

    Times. Change.

    Readers change.

    And writers grow old.

    Bitter Old Men — a tale as old as time.

    You are starting to sound like the Old West stagecoach driver whom the railroad put out of work.

  125. “Bitter Old Men.”

    You’re talking about David Gerrold here, right?

    P.S. you don’t have a clue what the term “vanity press” means.

  126. “Vanity Press” = a term describing a publishing house in which authors pay to have their books published.

    What did *you* think it meant? 😀

  127. Pingback: A Just and Lasting Puppy 4/22 | File 770

  128. @ Frank,

    You mean like Beale did with Castalia House?

    The again, with KDP and other epub platforms out there, anyone can self pub, and if they do it right, can do so on a pretty small budget, and make a quite large return. And get noticed.

    The path from author to reader is shorter than ever, and more than a few authors, established and just starting, are asking themselves “Who needs a middleman?”

  129. And who need an award when it’s cash that pays the rent?

    And best of luck to Lt. Niedermayer during his upcoming deployment.

    (See what I did there?)

  130. ““Vanity Press” = a term describing a publishing house in which authors pay to have their books published

    So you think Brad should pay himself to publish his own books? How does that work?

    Oh, right: you’re stupid.

  131. Something I’m going to put out there: Read Eric Flint’s “Prime Palaver #8” (April 26, 2002) in the Baen Free Library. I can’t link directly to it specifically, but if you follow this link (http://www.baenebooks.com/10.1125/Baen/9781625791214/9781625791214.htm), then select Chapter 8 from the box in the left menu, you’ll get it. It’s a powerful, cogent argument for why one should carefully distinguish between an author’s work and an author’s political/sociological beliefs. Not authors alone, either.

  132. “Frank Watson needs to get past troll 101. Talk about Troll Cliches.”

    Yes, we’re not exactly dealing with a brain trust here.

  133. “So, how many “fans” did SP3 bring to the table? ”

    Me… I’m not sure I count because I was already writing SF, but I didn’t know I could nominate and get a supporting membership until I read about Sad Puppies 3.

    I haven’t read any of the Sad Puppies/Rabid Puppy nominees yet except Goodnight Stars and some Jim Butcher. I have read several of the ‘complained about’ works (The Water that Falls…) and there’s definitely a problem with the Hugo short fiction categories, although the best explanation is possibly Eric Flint’s – short stories simply aren’t commercial nowadays and they’re now written to be read by other writers.

    I think the solution is to merge most of the short fiction categories, and create a new people’s choice category for licensed novels (e.g. Star Wars licensed novels) and pulp. And possibly other categories, such as video game scripts, or interactive/online storytelling. That would better represent today’s marketplace.

    It would never have occurred to me to nominate a Jim Butcher book for the Hugos, as they’re airport reading and not some huge brooding atmospheric tome about colonisation of Europa, but he is a gifted pulp writer and deserves an award. Writing page-turning thrillers is hard and Jim is a master at the craft.

    P.S. You seem a perfectly decent bloke, Brad. Good luck with your deployment.

  134. The sad thing is that “The Man Who Folded Himself” was a real eye-opener to me as a young man who was trying to figure out his sexuality. The message that I got from that book was that we are free to explore, to choose to become what we want to become. It was a very exciting concept.

    Now, of course, Gerrold is parroting the party line of sexual Calvinism–homosexuality is some kind of inescapable curse that marks the elect with an indelible stain. I suppose that cements his victim status–you can’t be a victim of something that is your own choice. But it’s a damned depressing outlook.

  135. I don’t think SP should be demanding Gerrold’s removal, after all, we’re supposed to be better than the SJWs about tolerating people we disagree with. I don’t think any of the SP candidates will do anything to embarrass the effort on the awards stand should we win, and if he acts unsportsmanlike it will only strengthen our contentions. We can certainly place a distance between ourselves and the group that demanded the removal of Jonathan Ross from hosting Loncon 3 because he might make an inappropriate joke…

    No. Do you allow the bully to keep punching you in the face because you’re “better than he is?” Do you allow barbarians to burn down your villages, rape, pillage and enslave your families because you’re “better than them?” Do you allow wild beasts to eat you alive because you’re “better than them?”

    How well has that conciliatory position worked out for you the last century? Here’s a hint: check out the ranks of the government bureaucracy, the education industry from Kindergarten through higher education. Have a look at the media. Have a look at our arts and entertainment industry.

    We have consistently lost everything because we’ve refused to admit that we’re in an existential struggle for the soul of our very civilization. When is it OK with you for us to say, “I’ve had enough, I’m taking a stand now on this platform, small and insignificant though it may seem, and I’m saying ‘now more!’ get your hate out, and keep it out.”

    You have no understanding of what tolerance means. Tolerance does not mean submission and surrender.

  136. I had to read this 3 times before I realized: you mean that they’re leftist.

    When I see “identitarian”, I understand it in the European sense; that is to say, right-wing nationalist. Cognizant of their identity, and unwilling to have it airbrushed away in some proposition nation thought experiment.

    I know that there are different axes to some degree that define right and left between America and the rest of the world, but c’mon. China is fiercely protective of Han chinese nationalist interests. The Soviet Union had no qualms about exploiting nationalist sentiment during and after WW2, and was basically a pro-Russian nationalist platform, under the rubric of “Communism in one nation.” Chavez and Castro were arch-nationalists. Hitler, Mussolini, Peron and Franco were arch-socialists even as they were also nationalists. When you go through the ranks of Leftists throughout the world looking for lack of nationalism, pretty much the only one you can find is Trotsky. When you’re so far left that the only person left of you is Trotsky, is probably long past time to stop pretending like nationalism is a right-wing phenomena. It’s completely apolitical on any definition of a left-right axis.

  137. No. Do you allow the bully to keep punching you in the face because you’re “better than he is?” Do you allow barbarians to burn down your villages, rape, pillage and enslave your families because you’re “better than them?” Do you allow wild beasts to eat you alive because you’re “better than them?”

    No, but I may very well let the bully punch me in the face if I know the teacher is watching him this time. This isn’t a matter of “better than them“, it’s a matter of picking and choosing the tactics that give the most advantage. I fully understand that we’re morally justified in demanding Gerrold’s removal under the rules the SJWs established. I just believe that turning him into a martyr may not be worth the tactical tradeoffs associated with the effort to remove him. I also can’t see him doing any harm as presenter; the worst thing he could do to us is play the presenter role honestly and make himself look neutral. Any misbehavior as presenter makes the SJW side and Gerrold himself look bad.

    How well has that conciliatory position worked out for you the last century? Here’s a hint: check out the ranks of the government bureaucracy, the education industry from Kindergarten through higher education. Have a look at the media. Have a look at our arts and entertainment industry.

    The problem has been that the right hasn’t been choosing its battles intelligently, because it’s a mass of individuals with different agendas not a grand unified hive-mind. Because the media is in the tank against the right, small tactical victories often become pyrrhic because they get spun to make the right look bad. It’s not fair, but we have to pick and choose our battles, and things that may be moral victories may not be worth it if they can be spun in such a way that makes us look bad.

    We have consistently lost everything because we’ve refused to admit that we’re in an existential struggle for the soul of our very civilization. When is it OK with you for us to say, “I’ve had enough, I’m taking a stand now on this platform, small and insignificant though it may seem, and I’m saying ‘now more!’ get your hate out, and keep it out.”

    Lashing out blindly against any target in range isn’t going to save civilization. To save civilization, we need to convince enough of the people that we’ve got a civilization worth saving, which is why in the long game, things like Science Fiction and video games are important. It’s not fair, the deck is stacked against us, so it won’t be easy. But, in order to win, we’re going to need to persuade people to trust us, and sometimes that means acting with mercy instead of strength.

  138. Rollory: When I see “identitarian”, I understand it in the European sense; that is to say, right-wing nationalist. Cognizant of their identity, and unwilling to have it airbrushed away in some proposition nation thought experiment.

    Joshua Dyal: I know that there are different axes to some degree that define right and left between America and the rest of the world, but c’mon.

    There’s also a difference between American nationalism and European-style nationalism. In Europe, nationalism is tied to identity politics at an ethnic level: there’s a single dominant ethnic group, and anyone that doesn’t belong is an outsider and will always be one. (I say European-style, but the same is pretty much true anywhere outside the US and a few other places in the Americas.) America has had out-groups, groups that weren’t seen as American, from time to time, but they’ve gotten less and less as time goes on, and since it’s founding, there hasn’t been a discrete ethnic in-group. Sarah Hoyt is an American, despite having been born in Portugal, because she says she is.

  139. Well said, Joshua. Tolerance is a two way street. I’m not interested in a homogenous list of Hugo nominees whatever the flavour. I want true representation, true diversity (because diversity shouldn’t be a dirty word) that has been selected by the broadest possible cross section of the reading/fannish public. Tolerating the silencing of dissenting voices is cultural suicide.

  140. Lashing out blindly against any target in range isn’t going to save civilization.

    Who’s blind? This is the tactical mistake I’ve often made in the past; I’ve assumed that the SJWs were like me, that they were capable of reasonableness, that there was a possibility of compromise with them. This is how we’ve always lost. This isn’t a friendly boxing match using Queensbury rules, this is a pack of savage beasts who understand nothing but that when we refuse to beat them back when they try to assert dominance over us, then we must be submissive, and they will remain unopposed.

    Quite frankly, there is no room for that kind of OCD dominance in civilized society, any more than there is room for cannibalism or rape in civilized society. That doesn’t make us intolerant because we refuse to tolerate intolerable behavior. If Gerrold were to repent of his hateful and dishonest attacks, we’d happily welcome him back as we would any prodigal son.

  141. There’s also a difference between American nationalism and European-style nationalism. In Europe, nationalism is tied to identity politics at an ethnic level: there’s a single dominant ethnic group, and anyone that doesn’t belong is an outsider and will always be one. (I say European-style, but the same is pretty much true anywhere outside the US and a few other places in the Americas.) America has had out-groups, groups that weren’t seen as American, from time to time, but they’ve gotten less and less as time goes on, and since it’s founding, there hasn’t been a discrete ethnic in-group. Sarah Hoyt is an American, despite having been born in Portugal, because she says she is.

    There’s more of that in America than you give credit for. And the more the SJWs in politics continue to wield ethnicity and other identity markers like a bludgeon, the more that becomes relevant. Which is kind of ironic, given that Rollory’s post I was responding to was making a distinction between the two types of identitarianism approaches, where as James May alludes, they are swiftly conflating into the same thing, if they ever were truly different in the first place.

    It is to our credit as Americans that we tend to view the choices you make rather than the color of your skin as defining who you are. But it’s certainly debatable if that’s proven to be a lasting proposition or not.

  142. Until the SP3 controversy hit I was unaware someone could vote for Hugos with a $40 poll tax. I did not learn in time to nominate – but I will be voting on this and future Hugos if the SJWs don’t lock out ordinary fans. I plan to read the selections and vote on what I find worthy.

    I’ve read, but not enjoyed, most Hugo winners in the last 10 years. I thought they were broken. I hope that this campaign helps fix the issue. The easiest way to fix the Hugos is move the voting membership to DragonCon which has 60,000+ attendees. That would hit a broader section of fandom without focusing more on comics like Comicon.

  143. The idea these people are more angry at Sad Puppies than they have been for months and months is not true. Their stupid ideology has hated us just for existing for a long time and now they’re trying to put the cart before the horse.

    Scalzi and his klonopin-induced haze of feminists were promoting and mainstreaming hateful demonization theories like white privilege a long time ago. The Audre Lorde-inspired Mary Ann Mohanraj started Strange Horizons 15 years ago. K. Tempest Bradford was pumping intersectionality at her Angry Black Woman site which claimed “white people fear us” in 2009. Jemisin claimed we were “racist as fuck” a long time ago. Jim Hines has been selling dehumanizing rape culture theory along with his kittens and goblins for a long time. Suddenly SJWs are angry? When haven’t they been angry at straight white men?

    People like Kameron Hurley and all daffy feminists in SFF have claimed an anti-diversity movement has existed not only for the last several years but for the last 100 years. When Hurley this week makes noises SP is an anti-diversity movement led by white supremacist men scared of losing their privilege that was been thrown around before SP ever existed.

    “…the ‘fantasy’ most EF (epic fantasy) delivers is of white male power & centrality, as much as dragons. That *is* conservatism, now.”

    That’s Liz Bourke at Tor in Feb. 2013 quoting N. K. Jemisin. Notice how Jemisin defines a demographic of white men merely existing as authors as a de facto ideology and then defines that ideology as “conservatism.” They call us that every time we disagree with them or even wake up in the morning; we’re “wingnuts” from the day we were born. I’ve told you this all along: this parade of intersectional female-worshipping racists takes any white demography, turns it into an ideology to pretend their feminist nuthatchery is really just “liberalism” and then lets that ideology have it with both barrels. That’s called “demonization theory” and mainstreaming hate speech so it appears as if it’s a noble project.

    SJWs were angry then and they’re angry now and the basic charge is and always has been the ludicrous crime of white men having written SFF. They have made no secret of that and throw it around in quote after quote after quote. That’s the charge – all of it. That white people gathered in one place. They’re so angry about that they won’t review us and launch initiative after initiative aimed specifically at diminishing the footprint of white men in SFF.

    Please tell me these intersectional feminist clowns are not a diversity division of the KKK. Even today they’re muttering on Twitter about white men as if it’s the Black Death they’re seeking a cure for. If you asked any number of them to not mention “whites” or “men” in a feminist sense for one year they couldn’t do it. Considering their “white male power” SFF authors have managed to effortlessly avoid demonizing women and non-whites for 100 years, that’s a startling contrast, especially when you realize these feminists say the exact opposite is true. Every time you read feminist rhetoric in SFF they are projecting their own stink onto a blank wall. When has anyone ever said don’t read black women for a year or “read this! it’s by a white man!”

    Right now Scazli’s angry “conservatives” are “popping up.” Yes they are, and unlike his stupid hoard of gibbelins and their racist privilege theory and scare quotes, they’re popping up with actual and real quotes.

    And now SJWs can put an asterisk next to the Hugos to go next to their scare quotes and realize that if they’d used quotes instead of racist innuendoes and incitement about a white supremacist colonialist SFF, that asterisk wouldn’t be there.

    So just keep deleting comments, taking video games off of shelves, booting women from conventions, ditching Frank Frazetta and comic covers and a thousand other things; that’s all working out real well for you.

    You’d solve your problem simply by deleting this racist feminist movement in SFF.

    I’ve been left with an easy choice: who’d I’d rather have in my corner – Arthur Chu, Amanda Marcotte, K. Tempest Bradford and all the rest of them, or LC, Milo Yiannopoulos, Mercedes Carrera and all other sane live-and-let-live people on the planet.

  144. I’ve assumed that the SJWs were like me, that they were capable of reasonableness, that there was a possibility of compromise with them. This is how we’ve always lost. This isn’t a friendly boxing match using Queensbury rules, this is a pack of savage beasts who understand nothing but that when we refuse to beat them back when they try to assert dominance over us, then we must be submissive, and they will remain unopposed.

    First, I think it’s a mistake to assume that groups of people are unified hive-minds with a shared purpose. We’re dealing with individuals; forgetting that is a mistake for many reasons, not least of which is that it gives them more power to control the flow of battle. Analogies are great ways to explain things, but they are always imperfect reflections of the real situation. It’s just as easy for me to describe this as a total war. Sometimes it necessary to sacrifice a less important region to win a victory in a greater one. Sometimes you have to pull a Coventry to avoid losing a long term asset. Sometimes it’s more important to win allies than kill enemies.

    Which brings me to point two: there’s a massive amount of people that have not chosen a side. If we write them off, we lose, because we can’t fight them and the SJWs. To go back to your ‘wild animal fight’ analogy: we’re a hunter in a fur coat with a knife fighting a bear in a raging snowstorm. There’s another hunter out there with a gun. He’s faced with two hard-to-distinguish enemies. He’s going to shoot the one he thinks is the most dangerous. And the bear is really good at looking harmless…

    Who’s blind? This is the tactical mistake I’ve often made in the past;

    You’re mapping your experiences, which are merely of one small sector of fighting, onto a very large and complicated war with shifting alliances. I certainly can’t see all of it, either.

  145. It is to our credit as Americans that we tend to view the choices you make rather than the color of your skin as defining who you are. But it’s certainly debatable if that’s proven to be a lasting proposition or not.

    And what’s ironic is the reason we’re moving away from that colorblind society is the efforts of the SJWs and proto-SJWs of the Great Society era. It’s a combination of the career Democratic pols seeing identity politics as a way to pull in voting blocs, the career identity-politics hustlers seeing a way to power by encouraging group identification under their leadership, and the socialists and wannabe-revolutionaries see it as a way to promote the glorious People’s revolution.

    If we could say ‘something in urban minority culture, fueled by government dependency, is at the root of a lot of modern urban ills’ then we could perhaps start working on how to fix it. But because the problem can be blamed at least in part on Progressive social meddling, and fixing it would reduce the power of those who have gained power by exploiting identity politics, they will fight tooth and nail to keep power even if it means people suffer.

    Which is kind of ironic, given that Rollory’s post I was responding to was making a distinction between the two types of identitarianism approaches, where as James May alludes, they are swiftly conflating into the same thing, if they ever were truly different in the first place.

    As long as they can get power for themselves by working together, the political, civil, and academic Progressive leaders will remain in alliance, even as those they claim to represent keep suffering from their lousy stewardship. The problem is that this identity politics eventually needs an out-group to continue, so it builds its own opposition. The loose nature of the alliance means that most of its members will have some out-group traits, so the only way to keep them in line is through carrots of “bread and circuses” (such as Affirmative Action) and threats for leaving the group, which is why they are so hard on conservatives that are women and minorities.

  146. “Which brings me to point two: there’s a massive amount of people that have not chosen a side. If we write them off, we lose, because we can’t fight them and the SJWs”

    Yet the SJW’s write them off and till recently have been winning everywhere. In fact, the SJW’s always write them off. The fact is, moderates are useless. They don’t care how nasty the SJW’s are, but get upset when the anyone attacks the SJW’s and gives them a taste of their own medicine.

  147. If your primary goal isn’t winning, but not upsetting “The moderates” or “The undecided” you’re going to lose – every time.

  148. Yet the SJW’s write them off and till recently have been winning everywhere. In fact, the SJW’s always write them off. The fact is, moderates are useless. They don’t care how nasty the SJW’s are, but get upset when the anyone attacks the SJW’s and gives them a taste of their own medicine.

    The SJWs are very good at looking and sounding as though they care. The SJWs are really good at looking harmless and really good at retreating to the Bailey when they are under rhetorical attack and really good at playing the victim card. It also really helps that much of the media is either in with the SJWs or is gullible enough to buy the SJW song-and-dance routine, so the people that need to call them on things for the moderates to pay attention. Holding the media gives the SJWs a decisive advantage. It’s not fair, but complaining that it’s not fair doesn’t help things. Making the media neutral again isn’t going to happen by launching a direct assault on the heavily fortified positions, it’s going to happen by undermining the trust the moderates have in the media and presenting viable, trustworthy alternatives.

    GamerGate is important because it’s a threat to the hold of the SJWs on the media.

  149. You can never be genteel with SJWs unless you knuckle under to them. I can understand why you are frustrated with the situation, but Gerrold should be a red flag for you. You don’t have to go along with Vox Day, but you can’t abandon him either, any more than he can, or will, abandon you. Like it or not, you’ve been caught up in the culture war and you’re going to have to fight, or knuckle under.

    No one has to like it, but if you won’t fight, then you will be defeated by default.

  150. If your primary goal isn’t winning, but not upsetting “The moderates” or “The undecided” you’re going to lose – every time.

    If your goal is winning and you don’t care how upsetting the moderates makes it harder to win, you’re also going to lose every time.

    Analogies to war are imperfect because we aren’t killing our enemies, but eroding their will to fight. Nobody is being carried off the battlefield on a stretcher. In war, you can win by killing the enemy faster than they can get more troops, but that’s not an option here. Actions that create more enemies are a real threat, because there is no reliable way to remove them from the enemy side, and the numbers of likeminded people are a major reinforcing element in the enemy will to fight. Our best chance may be to fracture the SJW coalition and trigger a preference cascade of those not completely committed to the SJW cause.

  151. Listen, SJWs are getting their asses kicked. Two major SJW players in Gamergate have been humiliated out of their jobs and one is even begging for money on the internet. Ethics policies have been instituted at video mags even while our Oscar Wilde SJWs have claimed victory and are still making witty jokes that start out “It’s about ethics in…” In fact, it actually was about that. SJWs lost.

    In SFF the problem with having a non-commercial blog you’re the boss of is it can seem like everything’s going your way. Your commenters are cooing at you and all is right in the world. The problem is you’ve banned how many people, deleted how many comments and scared how many people off the idea of ever even commenting or visiting your site?

    These people live in echo chambers. They’re safe spaces they’ve created for themselves. It’s this struggle to do that in shared public spaces where SJWs are getting their asses kicked. Every time they do something like getting Honey Badgers booted from a con people are watching, and they’re not liking what they’re seeing. Back in the echo chamber, everyone’s going “right on, dude.”

    Over at Amazon Top 100 in SFF, these SJW startling new author are a no-show – that’s where they’re getting their asses kicked. No one wants to read RaceFemLit, especially when its basis is that the very readers themselves are racist privilege asshats too stupid to check themselves and their misogyny.

    Read this shitbird of a round-robin at Strange Horizons to see how these people parse a short story collection.

    http://strangehorizons.com/2015/20150302/2bookparker-a.shtml

    Foz Meadows is a participant and she Tweeted about the author: “I am shocked that the author of Academic Exercises turns out to have been a straight white man. So shocked! Behold my shocked face.”

    As usual, imagine she’d used “Jew” or “black” instead to get the full Frankfurt am Main beer-garden effect. “Straight white man” is a slur in fem ideology no different than made up slurs for Jews or black folks. Worse, imagine an ideology where “black man” is itself a slur. They have a name for that and people outside echo chambers know that.

  152. No one has to like it, but if you won’t fight, then you will be defeated by default.

    I think I’m being misunderstood here. I’m not talking about not fighting, all of this is arguing semantics about the best tactics to fight with. I think continuing to hold Gerrib’s comments as examples of the SJW hypocrisy out to the world is a more effective blow against the SJWs then forcing him out and it makes it easier to justify not forcing Vox Day out. If we. force Gerrib out, the SJWs can then use our hypocrisy as a weapon against us.

    Our strong argument, “We believe in not forcing people out. We have not forced Gerrib out although he has said this awful stuff. The SJWs believe in forcing people out, and in fact forced someone out of the last WorldCon for this exact offense” becomes their weak argument “Gerrib was wrong, so accepted his removal. They, however, have not forced the evil puppy-killing Vox Day out.”

    On an unrelated note, I think at an abstract level, one of the issues here actually is differing ideals of how fighting should be accomplished. I’ve always admired the guile-hero archetype as much or more than the classic action-hero archetype. Both achieve heroic ends, but by using different means. Each have their uses in story and each has their place.

  153. Well, it’s a bit of a perceptual trap isn’t it? How do you force an ideology out of SFF when it’s cultural custom and practice that has enabled that in the first place?

    I understand different people have different views on why the Hugos was pranked but let’s look at last year’s Hugo-nominated Foz Meadows. Does anyone have a single doubt in their minds why she was nominated, or Kameron Hurley? “It’s a good thing.” They goes after straight white men. Multiply that by many times. So, if it’s the entire culture enabling this, prank the whole thing.

    But it’s a tough question. What if Lovecraft was as racist as some say? What would we do if we had 150 Lovecraft’s well-placed in SFF’s core institutions today and supported by many rank and file? Worse, what if they were all tied together by a very specific anti-gay, anti-woman, anti-PoC ideology complete with fake academic lingo and carefully constructed demonization and dehumanization theories? The stupid irony there is SJWs assert that’s not only true but has been for 100 years. These feminists are complete nutters. Their lack of awareness is nothing less than stunning. The only thing they see is themselves.

    The only thing you can do is shed light on this cult and let the culture sort itself out. Mocking and pranking it mercilessly is the way to go. There is no doubt who’s holding the moral high ground here. People who single out groups of humans based on what they were the day they were born and then demonize them are sociopaths.

  154. And now our Master of Ceremonies of the Hugos, David Gerrold, not happy with insulting many WorldCon members, is insulting the physical appearance of a woman she disagrees with

    Where do I find the original text?

  155. “I think continuing to hold Gerrib’s comments as examples of the SJW hypocrisy out to the world is a more effective blow against the SJWs then forcing him out ”

    No, you’re completely and utterly wrong. Leaving aside the fact that SP3 supporters at the Convention shouldn’t have to put up with a MC that makes sexist or derogatory about them, simply pointing out his hypocrisy will accomplish nothing. The SJW hypocrisy is pointed out constantly and guess what – very few people care. Yeah, they are hypocrites, so what?

  156. Greetings.

    You do not know me. I am a historian with more roots in the horror genre but obviously heavy in sci fic. I stumbled across this thing accidentally recently. It is just as bad in Horror and comic book fandom. The history field suffers from this mostly in academia but is balanced by non-academics and military historians. I am in the Library field and it is there too but quieter. YOU and Larry—who I also sent this too– are right. They are wrong. Philip Sandifer is calling you a fascist. He would not know a REAL fascist if one kicked him in the shin. Good luck. That is all.

  157. If pointing out SJW hypocrisy accomplished anything, this struggle would’ve been over long ago.

  158. As a prole who has never voted in the Hugos before, I thank you for motivating me to finally register as a supporting member. So I can vote for No Award above the slate nominees. Because democracy, rules, and I can vote for whatever I want, because I think the recent Hugo winners are fine, and because I think conservatives are not.

  159. I think I’m being misunderstood here. I’m not talking about not fighting, all of this is arguing semantics about the best tactics to fight with. I think continuing to hold Gerrib’s comments as examples of the SJW hypocrisy out to the world is a more effective blow against the SJWs then forcing him out and it makes it easier to justify not forcing Vox Day out. If we. force Gerrib out, the SJWs can then use our hypocrisy as a weapon against us.

    Two things: Nobody’s forcing Gerrold out. I’m suggesting we don’t want to REWARD him with the MC position if he’s showing himself to be spectacularly unsuited to it. I’m not suggesting he not be allowed to do anything else.

    Second; it doesn’t matter what we don’t or don’t do. The SJWs will lie anyway. If they’re going to lie anyway, I suggest pursuing victory rather than a weak compromise that they will not honor.

  160. “If pointing out SJW hypocrisy accomplished anything, this struggle would’ve been over long ago.”

    That’s false. This is a brand new ideology in SFF and the internet platforms to strike back from still have the smell of wet paint. Milo has only been in this video game thing a matter of months. The spreading around of SJW quotes and ripping apart their stupid demonization theories about rape culture and white privilege is ongoing.

    In fact Gamergate was won by signal-boosting SJW lies. The difference is the massive video gaming base is one. There is no low-brow and high-brow video gaming culture. The equivalent massive reading base in SFF is a thing completely apart and has lived in Potter, Katniss and Bella. There are no large revenue-generating webzines in SFF that stand to lose millions in ad dollars.

    What you’re basically fighting is a majority of people who have full time jobs completely apart from their writing and blogging. The only way they suffer is in book sales most don’t really have in the first place. It’s only beginning to dawn on some they’ll never have those sales and others that this is costing them sales.

  161. These people live in echo chambers. They’re safe spaces they’ve created for themselves. It’s this struggle to do that in shared public spaces where SJWs are getting their asses kicked. Every time they do something like getting Honey Badgers booted from a con people are watching, and they’re not liking what they’re seeing.

    Far more people will pay attention to the Honey Badgers because they were kicked out than would have if they’d been allowed to stay at the con.

    If pointing out SJW hypocrisy accomplished anything, this struggle would’ve been over long ago.

    It’s not going to be over quickly. We’re trying to shift American culture, which is a Herculean task.

    No, you’re completely and utterly wrong. Leaving aside the fact that SP3 supporters at the Convention shouldn’t have to put up with a MC that makes sexist or derogatory about them, simply pointing out his hypocrisy will accomplish nothing. The SJW hypocrisy is pointed out constantly and guess what – very few people care. Yeah, they are hypocrites, so what?

    Since I’m wrong, completely and utterly, what do you think winning looks like? Are the SJWs just going to decide to quit one day and go home? If the victory condition isn’t getting people to care enough to stand up to the SJWs and say stop, then what is it?

  162. One of the biggest mistakes I make in my tabletop gaming hobby is at some point I get angry enough to switch from trying to win to trying to wreck one of the other players, usually out of stress or frustration. One of the symptoms is throwing a lot of effort into completely unproductive efforts just to keep things from the other player. When I do this, I’m often aware that I’m throwing away my already slim chances of winning but it feels good at the moment.

    Second; it doesn’t matter what we don’t or don’t do. The SJWs will lie anyway. If they’re going to lie anyway, I suggest pursuing victory rather than a weak compromise that they will not honor.

    There’s no compromise with the SJWs in not pursuing Gerrold. This isn’t a negotiation or a deal with them; it’s a unilateral decision to deny them a moral victory. Gerrold as presenter, noxious as it may be, does less damage than the moral victory they get by being able to claim that we recognize that shaming people is a valid tactic and won’t use it on someone they’ve been able to successfully paint as worse (and if they’ve named him as presenter, it’s forcing them through pressure to get them to change). Gerrold shouldn’t be presenter, and should never have been named as presenter. The Honey Badgers should never have been forced out of the convention, but the SJWs forcing them out does more for the Honey Badgers cause by exposing the vile lengths the SJWs are willing to go than the Honey Badgers could have gained by staying at the convention.

    Likewise, we have to “thank” Hyrosen for his gracious illustration of the hate and discrimination we’re fighting against as much as we thank Bob for his support.

  163. Civilis; you are right in saying that the analogy with war is not perfect. Which is exactly why you’re oh so wrong in your determination of how to proceed.

    The SJWs aren’t an enemy army. They’re a school yard bully. The “moderates” aren’t undecided. They just haven’t been victimized yet, so they sit back and watch and do nothing. They hate the bully, they may even fear him, but as long as their heads are down, they don’t care too much about what he does.

    And the way to deal with a bully isn’t to stand up to him with reasoned debate, in the vain hope that the moderates will see the bully as a bully. EVERYONE already knows that he’s a bully. The way to stand up to him is to fight back. This doesn’t make the moderates say to themselves, “Oh, wow, you hypocrite! Now you’re hitting too! I think I’ll side with the bully!”

    No, they cheer. It clears thought pathways in all involved. The victim who hits back realizes that he’s more powerful than he might have thought. The bully realizes that his behavior is riskier than he thought, and he better be MUCH more cautious about where he applies his bullying. And the moderates realize that they are as powerful as the former victim; they are now opened to the notion that fighting back is not only acceptable, but it works great, and it’s not even that hard to win.

    The SJWs have EXACTLY the psychological pattern of a traditional bully; papering over lack of self-esteem with brittle narcissism. The “moderates” as you call them have exactly the psychological profile of bystanders in such a case. If they’re not directly impacted, they just sit back and watch.

    And more and more I’m convinced that the Sad Puppies have the psychological profile of nice guys who are trying to convince a pathological narcissist to leave them alone using reason. The Rabid Puppies have correctly identified what all of the actors are psychologically, and know that the only lasting solution to a bully is for the victim to fight back so that the bully and the bystanders alike know what the consequences of bullying are.

  164. ‘Two things: Nobody’s forcing Gerrold out. I’m suggesting we don’t want to REWARD him with the MC position if he’s showing himself to be spectacularly unsuited to it. I’m not suggesting he not be allowed to do anything else.’

    Precisely. And what about all the SP3 convention attendees? Why should they have to be afraid that a hostile MC is going to make derogatory remarks or sexist remarks about them? Why should their money go to reward a MC that has nothing but contempt and dislike for them?

  165. And what about all the SP3 convention attendees? Why should they have to be afraid that a hostile MC is going to make derogatory remarks or sexist remarks about them? Why should their money go to reward a MC that has nothing but contempt and dislike for them?

    Because it will be on tape.

  166. @Joshua: The problem is that you’re making a mistake about what other people know.
    The problem is that the SJWs haven’t been, and largely still aren’t schoolyard bullies in the traditional sense–would that they were, it would make our task so much easier. Instead, they’re more like queen bee teenage girls–they spread their venom in quiet conversations among their coterie and slide daggers into people’s backs, instead of going up and taking people’s lunch money–most of the time, anyway.
    In other words, for the moderates, metaphorically punching the SJWs in the face isn’t slugging that guy in schoolyard who goes around flipping people’s lunch trays–note here that I speak of persons to the left of Torgerson but the right of Hines, not the self-proclaimed “moderates.” It’s like walking up and punching the girl who slandered you to all her friends and tried to sic some of them on you. The moderates have no idea of the context–because they don’t run with those people–and all they see is the punch. Suddenly, you’re the bully.

  167. I think you give these “moderates” way too little credit.

    But I guess we’ll see, won’t we? How long until WorldCon?

  168. 99%+ of the world’s population are not intersectional gender feminists. The idea that even 1% – 70 million people – are such feminists is laughable. The fact that peculiar brand of feminism is orthodoxy in core SFF and its supporters garnered 100% of last year’s Nebula and biggest Hugo Awards tells you you’re dealing with a cult.

    That means that to the outside world, SFF’s “social justice” looks a lot like hate speech.

    “Are the SJWs just going to decide to quit one day and go home?”

    A cult is like an addiction. Eventually you see more and more of your tomorrows slip away until there are none left. Either you quit or – in this case – you destroy your career. The effect will be much the same.

    Or there are some who can tread water forever to write kibbles ‘n’ bits SFF, keep their day job and give us fatuous advice on rape. Judging by the Twitter feeds and blogs, I’d say a lot of these people so define themselves by this peculiar battle against the white patriarchy they are incapable of ever giving it up. Without it they’re nothing. Can you count how many new authors and bloggers have built a reputation mostly on going after “The Man”? What’s Ancillary Justice without all the hoo-ha? Nothing from nowhere.

  169. The Rabid Puppies have correctly identified what all of the actors are psychologically, and know that the only lasting solution to a bully is for the victim to fight back so that the bully and the bystanders alike know what the consequences of bullying are.

    The problem with the Rabid Puppy theory is that the guy that fights back has to actually win for the consequences of bullying to apply and the crowd has to know which is the bully and which is the no-longer-a-victim. if you stand up and lose the fight, then the bystanders learn what the consequences of trying to stand up and failing are, and are probably more scared of the bully than they were before, or the real bully is now also a hero.

    If our analogy High School is like the high school I attended, most people only really know a handful of people, and have no reason to care about the rest; what they do know often comes from rumor and stereotypes. The SJWs have managed to cast themselves as the 90lb weakling. They look cute and non-threatening; if you only pay attention to the Bailey arguments and not the Motte arguments or what they actually do, they even sound reasonable. They have cast us mean old Libertarians / Conservatives / GamerGaters as the bully. The rumor mill, the media, has amplified the story presented by the SJWs, so it’s the story most bystanders think they are seeing when the “weakling” and the “bully” face off behind the school. They “know” the big guy is the bully. They “know” the weakling is the hero. They see the big guy throw a punch at the little guy and they “know” who the bad guy is right away, because they’ve been conditioned to the story that that the SJWs have been telling.

    The problem is that the rumor mill is failing; enough rumors are getting out that the weakling isn’t weak and the bully isn’t a bully that people don’t which is right. Eventually, some people will (and have) realized that the SJWs aren’t weaklings and we aren’t the bullies. Some people (Hyrosen) will always be willing suckers for the simple narrative. But, eventually, enough people will figure out they’ve been told lies and turn on the “weakling” and the rumor mill in a preference cascade. Then it’s time for the “weakling” and the rumor mill to learn the consequences.

    Ironically, it’s the conservative traditionalism and decency that the SJWs have been struggling to overcome that allows them to get away with casting themselves as the “weaklings”. They are unwilling to give up the protection advantage of being seen as the victim (the “weaker sex”) when it benefits them while insisting that that view is sexist. The whole SJW mindset is that “we, or our ancestors, or someone with a similar skin color, were unjustly bullied, so we can’t be the bullies” and they actually believe this.

    You and I are after the same goal. The playing field is stacked against us. If now is not the time, there will be a time to stand up and take the fight openly and completely to the enemy, at which point I will be glad we’re on the same side.

  170. “Because it will be on tape.”

    And Gerrold’s sexist derogatory remarks are already on the internet for all to see. I have no doubt Gerrold would agree with the position that rewarding him with the MC position would be “punishment enough” and that refusing to reward him would be a terrible idea for SP3.

  171. Reward him with the MC position and the SJW’s are happy and so are the clever strategists who think it will backfire on him. I’d rather not be clever and subtle and just not give him the MC position.

  172. Civilis,

    “No, but I may very well let the bully punch me in the face if I know the teacher is watching him this time.”
    “The problem with the Rabid Puppy theory is that the guy that fights back has to actually win for the consequences of bullying to apply and the crowd has to know which is the bully and which is the no-longer-a-victim.”

    Your logic is flawed.

    In your first statement that I quoted above, you assume the teacher will correctly interpret the situation as you feel it occurred and then act appropriately. Unfortunately that is not the case now, and has not been for decades. In all likelihood, the teacher will pretend not to have seen the offense (and not act at all), or punish both parties equally to avoid charges of favoritism. “It Takes Two To Fight” was the rule that my principal in elementary school followed back in the 1970s. Didn’t matter who struck first, didn’t matter if one boy didn’t respond or defend himself at all: both got punished.

    As to your second statement that I quoted…once I shook off my incredulity of the one-size-fits-all disciplinary rule, I correctly determined the only course of action that would stop the bullying: massive counterattack regardless of the odds. Bloody them good without regard to whether or not I would win, with fighting fair, and to hell with what their friends might do to me later. Bullying me was going to get the bully hurt no matter what.

    And the result was a stop in the bullying. No one wants to get hurt. So they avoid it.

    That scenario is what is playing out now for the Social Justice Wankers. They reveled in demonizing and persecuting people for trivial non-offenses, and no one intervened to regulate their behavior. But the victims (GamerGaters, assorted Puppies) are not taking the abuse anymore. And more pushback is happening on other fronts.

    As a fat old hypocrite once wrote: winter is coming.

  173. Winter probably is coming. These folks got Milo on their ass now. He knows exactly who Sad Puppies is. People who think he’s some frivolous character have never seen him in debate. He’s upped his offer to Sarkeesian to 10 grand to debate and she’s still mum.

    Frankly I think having Due and Gerrold host the Hugos rather proves my entire point about the Hugos. If Due ever shuts up about black people it is undetectable. The idea she is willing or even capable of rewarding literature by merit is silly. If I only had her to go by I’d think Octavia Butler is the greatest SFF author who ever lived, but that’s kind of a dial tone from that corner of the cult, and a particularly hypocritical one since they never shut up about asserting 100 years of white SFF authors share their racial narcissism.

    Gerrold has thrown in his hat with a cult and is so hopelessly biased and inappropriate compared to someone like Jonathan Ross it’s pitiful, and yet there is no concerted hysterical swarming of Gerrold to have him removed. As usual, the double standard is a canyon and it’s evident WorldCon has learned nothing about appropriate behaviors or the phrase “compared to what?”

    Another poke in the ribs is likely.

  174. “Next year watch nominations/voting to be restricted to attending members.”

    Given that now there are SJWs giving out “scholarships” for memberships when the cost is around 4 packs of cigs & you get the written works for it, which side will be hurt by raising the cost to vote to over $200? The tranny crack hoes Marian Barry parties with can afford 4 packs of cigs. The works you get are worth the $40 but the Schadenfreude of telling GRRM’s fans clustered up, to look at the War of the Roses to see where he got the story & why he is going to have the dwarf who pays for sex marry the dragon lady was priceless.

  175. Gerrold is author guest of honor at the convention. It would be tricky to choose a different MC after they asked him to do it.

  176. Jonathan Ross wasn’t a guest of the convention, or even the toast master. He was just going to do the Hugo ceremony. Worldcon GoH is a big deal. One of the two reasons Terry Pratchett gave for not accepting the Hugo nomination for Going Postal is that Hugo nerves would interfere with being GoH. The GoH at Loncon was Ian M. Banks, who passed away before the convention, and they didn’t replace him.

  177. “Gerrold is author guest of honor at the convention. It would be tricky to choose a different MC after they asked him to do it.’

    The question isn’t will *they* choose a different MC, but rather will people protest and demand someone more objective and less sexist as MC.

  178. Still, you’d think they could apply standards consistently. As it stands, standards are things they hold their opponents to, not themselves.

  179. In your first statement that I quoted above, you assume the teacher will correctly interpret the situation as you feel it occurred and then act appropriately. Unfortunately that is not the case now, and has not been for decades. In all likelihood, the teacher will pretend not to have seen the offense (and not act at all), or punish both parties equally to avoid charges of favoritism. “It Takes Two To Fight” was the rule that my principal in elementary school followed back in the 1970s. Didn’t matter who struck first, didn’t matter if one boy didn’t respond or defend himself at all: both got punished.

    My school, in the 80’s, was fortunate enough not to have the ‘it-takes-two-to-fight’ disciplinary rule. Unfortunately, the bullies I had to deal with were generally smart enough not to do anything they could get caught at. They were also enough older that I wasn’t capable of doing any effective damage to them. I knew people much smaller than I was that could pull off the whole berserker defense and make it work. I was fortunate that most of the bullies I faced fell under what would be the troll archetype today. Once it was clear that I wasn’t going to give them an opportunity for enjoying their harassment, most went away. The one holdout, the really stupid one, fell victim to the fact that I’d found a friend with similar geeky hobbies, one with real martial arts skills and no compunction about using them in defense of a friend.

    My point being that there is no right answer here. We each weigh the costs and rewards of proposed courses of outcomes differently. Trapping yourself in a narrative (like an analogy) is a great way to lose freedom of action. Figure out what your ultimate goal is, look at the proposed actions, ask yourself “how does this action help me reach my goal?”, and, most importantly, “what is the downside to this action, and is it worth it?” All actions have a down side.

  180. Still, you’d think they could apply standards consistently. As it stands, standards are things they hold their opponents to, not themselves.

    Keep in mind that “they” are not the same people who ran Loncon. The Hugo administrators don’t run the ceremony.

    My Google-fu may be weak, but I haven’t been able to find a link to the eggplant line. Where and when did he say it?

  181. Interesting to see the latest thought rippling through the ‘herd of independent minds’ AKA the lockstep mavericks… That SP is a failure because the RP got more of their over the top. If they think that’s a good sign, they’re sadly mistaken. That said, I say they’re whistling past the graveyard. Granted, next year, they can get their lemmings in marching order,but it has opened a front they were not prepared to defend.It has also energized their opponents and brought back a number to fandom who have been driven away by dull, uniform PC.

    BTW, someone should introduce Scalzli to the concept of ‘bulletin board material’ and why it is a bad idea to produce it, or at least disseminate it. Would SP3 have been the way it was after his classless tweets after the block voting on SP2?

    One more thought, bringing together Scalzi and the RP. My pet theory is that Vox Day launched his attack slate was that he wants to take the SF literary establishment (and yes, John, you are the establishment, self image or no) and knee them in the reproductive organs. Repeatedly. Yes, this is retaliation for his expulsion. No, I will not declare either side right or wrong in that contretemps. I am describing a state of affairs.

  182. “My Google-fu may be weak, but I haven’t been able to find a link to the eggplant line. Where and when did he say it?”

    It’s on his Facebook page. Publicly viewable.

    https://www.facebook.com/david.gerrold

    You’ll have to scroll down quite a bit to see it. Look for the picture of the woman in the magenta jacket.

  183. WorldCon may be a big deal but it has also appointed itself de facto nursemaid to the goofy world of gender feminists. I have yet to see them use the word “no.” I’m just waiting for them to go to a jazz hands alert status. Whether they know that or not, they are just a hair away. Only in an insane asylum does one fear a TV comedian. They have also allowed themselves to be the dumping ground for WisCon FemProg. They may as well call it “The Rolling Acres Award” and have the award-minders on stage wear white suits. Who’d have ever thought the Hugos and Nebulas would make WisCon redundant?

    1985: “Hahahah. Those daffy feminists.”

    2014: “You told me I’d be safe from the outside world, WorldCon. I was assured of this. Waaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh!”

    2020: “And the Hugo for Best Novella goes to… “If You Were A Vengeful Non-Binary Pokeman Cat That Falls on You from Jim Crow Clouds.” (jazz hands, jazz hands)

  184. P. S. what kind of gay man doesn’t know the difference between eggplant/aubergine and magenta?

    He probably can’t even tell ecru from taupe. Philistine.

  185. 2020: “And the Hugo for Best Novella goes to… “If You Were A Vengeful Non-Binary Pokeman Cat That Falls on You from Jim Crow Clouds.” (jazz hands, jazz hands)

    Oh, ho ho ho! That’s rich, that is. Very nice. (grin)

  186. “Because it will be on tape.”

    This.

    And yes, all of his sexist and harassing remarks are on the internet for anyone to see, but people are allowed to be *ssholes on the internet. Comments in a quasi-official capacity at World Con that can be used to show just how UN-welcome a huge swath of science fiction fans really are would be pure gold.

    Good behavior would also be acceptable.

  187. hyrosen says:
    As a prole who has never voted in the Hugos before, I thank you for motivating me to finally register as a supporting member. So I can vote for No Award above the slate nominees. Because democracy, rules, and I can vote for whatever I want, because I think the recent Hugo winners are fine, and because I think conservatives are not.

    Twelve year old girl?

  188. I help put on an annual meeting for a small organization and I can state that without a doubt that the SP and RP did not “ruin” anything for the (poor, downtrodden, oppressed, martyred) con workers. You know what ruins gatherings of like minded folks? The hotel messing up the room block. The internet that you paid ridiculous amounts for failing and the hotel shrugging. Someone getting injured or ill.

    Bringing in more like minded people/fans is a wonderful thing and should be celebrated!

  189. @hoosiertoo: No, just an SJW. 12 year old girls have the twin excuses of not knowing any better and dealing with puberty hormones.
    Furthermore, a 12 year old girl, after having looked at Jim Butcher’s body of work, could have told you that the only way he is a conservative is if you think Elizabeth Warren is a moderate.

  190. Does anyone here think it’s possible Sandifer lives in a diving bell at the bottom of the Marianas Trench?

  191. @JHames:

    He’s such a ding-a-ling that I’m sure he lives in some sort of bell or another…

  192. It’s always funtime in SJWland. Here’s a story involving Alexandra Erin on Geek Wiki:

    “… shortly thereafter Snow’s ex-partner Jack identified her as an abuser and said that she raped him. Alexandra Erin, Jack’s girlfriend, confirmed that Snow raped Jack at WisCon 2011 and that she (Erin) witnessed it.”

    http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Heartbreak_%26_Heroines_Kickstarter_campaign

    A “woman” rapes a “guy” and a “woman” witnesses it. I call those conjecture quotes because what they actually are is a riddle for the ages and an assault on science and the English language.

    [TRIGGER WARNING] For bald-faced idiocy, romance gone awry, female impersonators, stunning drama, the Pantry of Danger known as WisCon, unwonted hijinks, mental dishevelment, weird slang, silent endurance, adversity, unforeseen thrills, a cameo appearance by C-NO-Gender human-cyborg relations, veni, vidi, veni, moral vacuums, intersectional recipes for cheese-whiz, ribaldry, ladies, the unknown and #JustListen.

  193. Regarding the Sandifer piece.

    All it (and the many devotees of same) show me, are the names and faces of people who’d not be likely to give me the benefit of the doubt anyway.

    If VD did not exist, they would hang me for something else.

    If I did not exist, and if SP3 was merely a figment, VD would be doing what he is doing anyway.

    It’s a shame this field seems to contain so many people eager and willing to seek any excuse — any excuse at all, no matter how flimsy — to make a man into a villain.

  194. Well, to me it was a tactical mistake to drift away from what’s really behind all this, and it’s not left/right politics. There is nothing political about a cult devoted to the defamation of an entire sex or ethnic group. Keeping it focused on that gives you the moral high ground. There is no moral high ground in wanting different stories or more conservative/religious views represented. There is an ocean of difference between pushing back against hate speech and awful dinosaur stories. However the race/sex revenge sub-genre Swirsky’s piece represents is another matter.

    And there’s more on the way. Don’t be surprised if “The Fisher Queen” and “The Devil in America” take Novelette and Short Story at the Nebulas. They are classic intersectional revenge stories against rape culture men and Jim Crow whites.

    You only have to look at what straight white men like Scalzi and Hines have to do to stay on the right side of this cult. Again, it’s nothing to do with a political stance. They directly signal-boost two of the most silly demonization theories of intersectional feminism: white privilege and rape culture respectively. Every male SJW toes this line and conspicuously so, like waving a little red book. They are not allowed independent action; it’s all or nothing.

    In other words, you’re right. There is literally nothing you could do to win the respect of these people other than bend the knee and start parsing the world through a feminist lens. Failing that, you were persona non grata before Sad Puppies and still are. LC was being demonized with libels just for existing. This carrot SJWs are hanging out where if you only did this or that is bullshit. Only by becoming an “ally” could you be awarded the status of a little shit like Sunil Patel. And remember what happened to him when he stepped out of line and helped in the wrong mansplaining way.

    “Natalie Luhrs @eilatan · 17h .@ghostwritingcow Wow. Way to appropriate @SarahPinsker’s words. Not cool. Especially considering the subject.”

    “Retweeted by Natalie Luhrs Fran Wilde @fran_wilde · 17h If you think reframing an eloquent thing a woman said but selectively editing then posting it is ok, you are neither a friend NOR an ally.”

    “Sunil Patel ‏@ghostwritingcow Jun 7 Everyone please stop sharing the Storify I made of @SarahPinsker’s comments w/o her permission. That was wrong and I apologize.”

    Keep in mind, there is no more groveling male figure in SJWdom than Patel, unless it’s Paul Weimer and Shaun Duke.

    If you think I’m kidding about this lake, look at the feminist grilling K.J. Parker is getting in a round-robin at Strange Horizons and even friend-to-intersectionalists Ken Liu at Book Smugglers. Look at Marjorie Liu’s latest little guest post about women in comics and who got the Honey Badgers thrown out of a con. It never stops – not for one day.

    People think I’m exaggerating when I say intersectional feminism is the orthodoxy behind every move these people make. This has nothing to do with being liberal or against conservatism. These people are completely intolerant of anything they perceive as too white or male, and that is no liberal principle. They claim they wish diversity but in fact despise diverse opinions. What they mean by diversity is more colored and sexual versions who support their cult and in their victimology minds give it more credibility. Notice how one of their single biggest gripes about the GOP is it’s lack of color. But any PoC conservative is especially insulted.

    In fact any “PoC” or gay person who strays off the plantation is called a traitor. Milo’s gay and they want nothing to do with that bit of diversity. Amanda Marcotte was nuts enough to call Honey Badgers “misogynists” while claiming HB were nuts. What happened to #JustListen? How in the world do women default to misogynists? How do Syrian Girl and Mercedes Carrera become misogynist Gamergaters? How did George Zimmerman become white? In the ditzy world of intersectionalism, it’s easy. The funny thing there is Syrian Girl and Carrera are far more well-spoken, well-informed, intelligent and reasonable than a moose like Marcotte.

  195. In your first statement that I quoted above, you assume the teacher will correctly interpret the situation as you feel it occurred and then act appropriately.

    The “moderates” aren’t the teacher in this analogy. They’re the other students, who know more about what’s going on “on the ground” than the teachers do.

  196. I was aware of Sandifer LONG before I was aware of SAD PUPPIES or even the term SJWs through my interest in DOCTOR WHO which he writes extensively about. My phrase for him initially was Pretentious Liberal Loon. As some may or may not know about three years of the program are missing due to short sighted BBC policies….well Sandifer decided that TWO of the stories that survived from the decimated era either in full or in part…THE CELESTIAL TOYMAKER and THE ARK were somehow in the most convoluted logic possible….RAAACCCIIISSSTT!!! and needed to be censored….either be destroyed or just placed in a vault and forbidden to be seen because they were not HIS WHO. When the Sad Puppies hit, he declared that Fandom had gone “fascist” which, as a historian, just boggles my mind at the trivialization of the world. Sandifer should read what happened in Greece or the former Yugoslavia when Fascist Italy marched in. THAT is Fascism. Has he ever heard of the Fascist Prison camp Rab?? These people take what should be fun and entertaining and make them dour and sad and what is important and historical and make them trivial and petty. Sandifer is a dope.

  197. As I stated the hypocrisy charge never works against the SJWs because its been pointed out forever. The SP2/SP3 and the Hugo’s are case in point. Both have proved that SJWs don’t care about quality fiction or the books themselves. They only care about WHO writes them and their politics and connections.
    But if you go to a SJW and ask them “Do you give votes/awards based on politics?” – they will lie and say no! And if bring up their behavior with SP2/SP3 a year from now they will lie and say it was never about politics – it was about blah, blah. That’s why the charge of hypocrisy never works.

  198. Brad. I am a stranger but I would not worry OVER much about Sandifer calling you a fascist. Again he obviously has no idea just WHAT a fascist actually is so his historical ignorance is profound. There is a great silent film…..that because it is silent and…HORRORS in black and white I know everyone under forty are pathologically incapable of watching called BOLSHEVISM ON TRIAL which just nails the ignorance, hysteria and self absorbed melodrama of the Left in ways a modern film never would BUT it IS what you are dealing with….a gaggle of narcissistic hysterics…………………those types lean towards totalitarian ideologies be in fascism, National socialism, communism, SJW anything so they can pretend to be an Elite and persecute a chosen group of inferiors. They cannot exist otherwise…………

    And the end of another great movie CONFESSIONS OF A NAZI SPY, FBI agent, Edward G. Robinson shakes his head in wonder and observes, “It is like dealing with madmen.”

    There is much wisdom to be found in old movies………..which is why the Left keeps the modern film industry under such tight control.

  199. @hyrosen
    “As a prole who has never voted in the Hugos before, I thank you for motivating me to finally register as a supporting member. So I can vote for No Award above the slate nominees. Because democracy, rules, and I can vote for whatever I want, because I think the recent Hugo winners are fine, and because I think conservatives are not.”

    Yes, you most certainly can vote however you like. Please don’t try to convince anyone you voted on the merits of the works, though. Your last sentence is pretty much a dead giveaway that you use other criteria.

  200. Brad, thanks for the great work. As a guy who spent fair bit of time downrange, before ‘downrange’ became a thing, I suspect that negative aspects of this kerfluffle will fade into meaninglessness even as your deployment requirements come into sharp clarity. Both will be ancient history and only the glow of accomplishment will remain just as soon as you return to your family afterwards.

    FWIW, I am another person that decided to cough up $40 for a supporting membership – heck someone has to offset the funded membership drive that at least one previous Hugo winner is underwriting.

    Stay as safe as you need to but be ready to stack horse. Hoo ya.

  201. “Does anyone here think it’s possible Sandifer lives in a diving bell at the bottom of the Marianas Trench?”

    Worse, he’s been to grad school in the humanities, which means he’s likely been immersed in an academic environment for 25-30 years. Very he’s never had a real responsible job, nor had any meaningful social contact outside of his intellectual hothouse. His entire worldview is based on the 40 year old Soviet propaganda memes programmed into him by his academic mentors.

    Think “suspended animation Neanderthal dumped into the modern world” and you wouldn’t be far off.

  202. “Well, to me it was a tactical mistake to drift away from what’s really behind all this, and it’s not left/right politics. There is nothing political about a cult devoted to the defamation of an entire sex or ethnic group. ”

    Here you are, I think, wrong. As you say, it’s not right/left politics per se, but neither is it intersectional feminism as such. If it weren’t those things, it would be witches, or the Whore of Rome, or Martin Luther, or Mormons, or Irish immigrants, or…

    The fundamental divide is between those who want to control other people (and those who want to be controlled), and those who have no desire to be in either of those categories. Thus it always was.

  203. Civilis,

    “My point being that there is no right answer here. We each weigh the costs and rewards of proposed courses of outcomes differently. Trapping yourself in a narrative (like an analogy) is a great way to lose freedom of action. Figure out what your ultimate goal is, look at the proposed actions, ask yourself “how does this action help me reach my goal?”, and, most importantly, “what is the downside to this action, and is it worth it?” All actions have a down side.”

    Friend (and I mean that non-ironically),

    You are trapping yourself in a narrative by trying to not let yourself be trapped in a narrative.

    If, as you say, “all actions have a down side”, please tell me what the downside is for a person who:

    * Sees trash in the street and acts to pick it up?
    * Realizes their job sucks and acts to secure a better one?
    * Is physically attacked and acts to defend themselves?

    Taking a few moments to make your environment less ugly has no clear downside. Losing a bad job is not truly a downside. And if you’re going to get injured, wouldn’t you rather have that injury be bruised knuckles from punching a bully in the face?

    Some random observations for you to ponder:

    Live & Let Live is not a viable strategy for people who live in a world full of Social Justice Wankers. If you aren’t constantly parroting their line, you will become a target eventually.

    If you look like food, you will get eaten. So don’t look like food.

    “My principle is to do whatever is right, and leave the consequences to Him who has the disposal of them” – Thomas Jefferson

  204. Sad Puppies was started to prove Liberal bias in the Hugos. SJWs deny bias exists.

    If a new SF/F story were published today, about a mother of a special needs child living on a frontier world who despises the corruption of the Ruling Class and decides to fight for power to correct injustice, would SJW’s embrace the story?

    If a second story were released next week, about a young man raised in poverty because of his caste who builds a time machine to the future where he rises above the bigotry to the highest office in the land, would SJWs embrace the story?

    What if Sarah Palin wrote the first story, and Clarence Thomas the second, both thinly disguised memoirs? Would SJWs embrace their stories? Would they even bother to read them? Or would the stories be denounced unread because of the authors’ political beliefs?

    The recent hysteria on the Left makes the answer obvious and that’s as much as you need to know to understand why Sad Puppies is not only right, but just. Thank you, Brad, for carrying the baton this year.

  205. Well, Sandifer has that Capt. Nemo/Ahab look about him and writes like a man on a crusade against things he’s largely made up out of his head. He should write a Dr. Who fanfic episode where Version 2.0 Dr. Who has tied his phone booth around Moby Dick like a little hat using a big pink ribbon and Version 3.0 Dr. Who is in Nemo’s sub and they smash head on into each other and then Version 4.0 Dr. Who launches himself in his phone booth from the Seaview’s torpedo tubes from Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea.

    There could be lots of klaxons and alarms going off and then victim of multiple vectors of intersecting oppression Hadji from Jonny Quest could arrive in a Soviet MIG and announce his father Capt. Nemo is a terrorist tool of the racist British Raj patriarchy and a Muslim traitor to all colonized Hindus and lob an A-Bomb at the whole lot and then The Herculoids die.

    This paves the way for a new TV series called Nurse Quien featuring her gendered sidekick from Damascus Sally Saladin.

    THE END.

  206. Who is this Sandifer dude and why should I care about what he has to say concerning Sad Puppies, Doctor Who or any other subject?

  207. Well, Vox was very… VOX in his Pacman YouTube interview (the clickbaity title didn’t help…); expect another wave of Concern Trolls and Denouncement Shouts.

  208. For me initially the SP list was “here is some good work, try some of them out”. Then, accidentally, I spent $40 on the Hugo thing. I stumbled over to Amazon and used my wife’s gift card to purchase some ‘new’ (to me) authors’ selections. I filled up my wish lists at several sites including the local public library. It’s all your fault Brad. Thanks!

  209. “All harassment is unacceptable.” writes Brianna Wu as he uses his Twitter feed to harass men and whites with defamatory comments non-stop.

    “Gamergate is a hate group that has no place in geek culture” – Brianna Wu

    I’m glad he understands these principles because I agree. Now he only has to correctly identify intersectional feminism as a hectoring supremacist hate group and disappear.

    “Brianna Wu @Spacekatgal · Apr 19 All men benefit from structural sexism. Men bragging about moderate views doesn’t make them intelligent, it makes them unaware of privilege.”

    “Brianna Wu @Spacekatgal · Apr 16 Part of male privilege is unconsciously assuming women require your input when we’re not asking for it – especially on matters of sexism.”

    “ALL MEN”? Really? What a fuck. Plus, that would include him. Keep in mind, this is the cult which maintains ALL men benefit from rape.

    “It (rape) is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear… Rather than society’s aberrants or ‘spoilers of purity,’ men who commit rape have served in effect as front-line masculine shock troops, terrorist guerrillas in the longest sustained battle the world has ever known….when men raise the spectre of the unknown rapist, they refuse to take psychologic responsibility for the nature of his act.” – radical feminist Susan Brownmiller from her 1975 book Against Our Will

    Someone please tell me how demonizing 3.5 billion men is not hate speech. Then tell me again how Wu and Sarkeesian are “critiquing” video games. They are not critiquing games, they are critiquing men, and they are using hate speech to do it. Intersectionalism is a racist cult of lesbian-centric lady-worship. By intersectionalist standards, anyone not fully on board with white male privilege and the idea biological sex is a completely subjective “spectrum” is tantamount to being in a KKK. At one end of that spectrum, heterosexuality is the most insane, regressive and oppressive. The most confused at the other end are Frank Herbert’s noble Fremen.

    “All hate groups have beliefs or practices that attack or malign an entire class of people, typically for their immutable characteristics.” – Southern Poverty Law Center.

    Intersectionalist “critique” of gaming is no different than a Federal Reserve Twitter feed going on about Jews and pretending to critique “banking.” Let me use the word “all” properly. ALL supporters of intersectionalism are members of a de facto hate group. They are not identified by their race or sex but by their words, a thing intersectionalists refuse to do themselves in their silly rhetoric.

    The fact RavenCon would have someone like this as GoH is a disgrace. The Hugos is a similar disgrace. SFF has its Wu’s and Sarkeesian’s by the bucket. Both the Hugos and the Nebulas are intersectionalist lakes.

  210. I just wanted to point out that last year, Ross resigned. He was not dis-invited by Loncon and there is no indicated that they would have done that – their statement the next day included an apology to Ross for the attacks on him.

  211. Yeah, they didn’t defend him either did they? The one’s hounding him and threatening to not go should’ve been told to not let the door kick them in the ass. Instead the ladies KKK got their way. Everyone knows Ross resigned. Stop pretending we’re reacting to something we’re not reacting to.

  212. Trying to pretend that Ross was not *driven off* by a bunch of fainting lunatics and their enablers is absurd. Trying to pretend that the fainting lunatics did not see his “resignation” as a VICTORY is a blatant denial of reality. The *apology* for the attacks on him after he resigned are a tacit admission that the attacks are WHY he resigned.

  213. Fascinating stupid remarks from a Twitter convo between Buhlert, Pound and Erin and other Usual Suspects:

    “Undead for 2015 ‏@AaronPound · Apr 22
    @CoraBuhlert @eilatan @PrinceJvstin @shaunduke I think one reason the Pups hate WorldCon is that it is built on volunteers.”

    and

    “shaunduke ‏@shaunduke · Apr 21
    @CoraBuhlert @AaronPound @eilatan @PrinceJvstin Frankly, they’re going to run out of spaces where they’re welcome.”

    Is that a veiled threat? Or just wishful thinking?

  214. Every con I’ve gone to uses volunteers. I imagine that’s the same for the ones Larry and Brad go to.

  215. The second one worries me. Will they try to use fake harassment complaints to kick Sad Puppies members out of conventions? After what happened to the Honey Badgers, I am not optimistic.

  216. Run out of spaces where we’re welcome? Funny how I never see these joyless pricks up on volcanoes or the Inca Trail or motorcycling around Karpathos. But then, if you’re always muttering to yourself and other lords of the internet on Twitter about a fearsome racist patriarchy why take chances? A rock might get into your shoe or it might rain on you.

    Shit, I’ll never run out of places to get away from these morons. I got the whole world, and that don’t include putting up funny pictures of fucking cats.

  217. Gerrold is a 71 year old man whose greatest achievements in his career occurred almost 5 decades ago. He’s the SFF version of the jock who peaked in high school.

    On the plus side for him, at least he’s more relevant than Arthur Chu. So, there’s that…

  218. Arthur Chu is a “social justice stormtrooper”.

    Like the Imperial kind, he can’t hit his targets.

  219. That’s a base slander, Chris – the Stormtroopers were ordered to miss, so the Empire could locate the main Rebel hideouts.

    The analogy still holds, though; I’m fairly certain AChu is incapable of independent thought after his repeated, self-inflicted ‘mindkills’. People above him in the ‘Prog-Stack’ just point him at a target and hit ‘Enter’.

  220. Principle is a tool of self-criticism that is used so we can step outside ourselves and know when we are being unfair. It’s not frickin’ rocket science.

    Devotees of intersectionalism like Chu do the exact opposite. Rather than rules like in a softball game, they have rules constructed on your race and sex. It’s a never ending con game where one race and sex never lose and the other never win.

    This why I always refer to SJWs as an alliance of the racist and the naive. The first has no use for principle, and the second has no idea what it is or how to use it.

    That’s why you can always tell what an intersectionalist is as much by what they say as what they never say, e.g. diversity/middle weight boxing, only white colonialsim.

    Milo tried to school popehat in this yesterday and popehat was completely confused. Popehate started talking about legal theory when in fact Milo was talking about how you spot a con game. This is the simple observation that threw popehat for a loop.

    “Milo Yiannopoulos@Nero Women are being raped, killed, oppressed in the Middle East. Western feminists are on stage complaining about Instagram comments.”

    Popehat came back with:

    “Popehat@Popehat .@Nero @RobProvince What is it with Brits and the fallacy of relative privation?”

    For some reason someone Storified the whole exchange. People without principles will often inadvertently highlight their own stupidity.

    https://storify.com/NoraReed/nero-looks-like-even-more-of-a-fool-than-usual?utm_campaign=&utm_content=storify-pingback&utm_medium=sfy.co-twitter&awesm=sfy.co_b0Vzq&utm_source=t.co

    You will never win an argument with people who can’t figure all that out. It is the central flaw in all intersectional thought intersectionalists themselves embrace and sell to naive SJWs. Mau-mauing the flak catchers – the radical chic.

    Simple comparisons are like a mystery of the universe to any SJW. Western feminists aren’t just accidentally not talking about the middle east. They are quite purposeful about that memory-hole. That reveals what intersectionalists are really angry at, and it’s not based on a principle.

    A famous saying going around SJW world is “My feminism will be intersectional, or it will be bullshit.”

    What it should really be is “My feminism will be anti-white, or it will be bullshit.”

  221. @Chris:

    I’d say so; at least in that whenever he comments, I feel brain cells shrivel.

  222. I will face my Chu. I will permit him to pass over and through me. When the Chu is gone, there will be nothing. Only I will remain.

  223. Brad, I hope that you return from your tour of duty safe and sound. I hope you are completely uninjured, and that nothing remotely exciting happens while you are there. I hope that your wife will not lose her husband, that your daughter will not lose her father, and that your readers will not lose their source of inspiration, entertainment, and diversion.

    There is no hidden trap in this message, no hostile undercurrent, no secondary meaning.

  224. Sandifer on Twitter:

    “Phil Sandifer @PhilSandifer
    · Apr 24
    Brad Torgersen seems not to like that I called him and @monsterhunter45 allies of @voxday. Fine. How’s “collaborators.”

  225. Phil Sandifer is an ankle-biter. I said my two bits on his blog. I am sure he’ll still be talking about this in five years. I plan to have 15 more novels in print with Baen by then.

    Winston S. Churchill — “You will never reach your destination if you stop and throw stones at every dog that barks.”

  226. One note about Scalzi: I really try not to feed that particular ego any more than is necessary. I used to comment on his blog and give him the benefit of the doubt — as someone who might be an honest player — but eventually I concluded that I was looking at a guy for whom the whole universe is just a concave mirror. I haven’t looked at his blog since . . . 2013? I honestly can’t remember. He runs a very successful cult of personality there. I got off the train once I realized that’s precisely his game: the growing, feeding, and nurturing of sycophants. That’s all his comments section is. That’s all his blog is. He’s in a bit of a spot now, with TOR’s failure to turn him into a cash cow. The field is waiting to see if there is any more “there” there. I am afraid the field’s liable to be disappointed. Scalzi is not a storyteller as much as he is a bloated intellect. Again, one of the self-selected “betters” who knows what’s best; as opposed to little people.

  227. I have to admit, I find it hilarious that Tor apparently dropped him about a year after he picked up a Hugo.

    Honestly, doesn’t that kind of prove the point that the Hugos aren’t what they used to be?

  228. The silliness of how all this started is what’s amazing. Flogging racist theories about white privilege has nothing whatsoever to do with SFF. Pushing gay theory while defaming all heterosexuals has nothing to do with SFF. The notion that whites are “diabolical” has nothing to do with SFF. Allegories of face-punching restaurants and fears people want to drag authors behind trucks has nothing to do with SFF. Claiming “I do not contribute to sexism and rape culture” has nothing to do with our genre. Writing “As a female reader in this genre… I think men are at their most useful when they critique masculinity, their own…” is not SFF. Writing “I am shocked that the author of Academic Exercises turns out to have been a straight white man” is not a literary critique. Asking if “I missed any good recent black #scifi/fantasy shorts?” is nonsensical. People don’t go to SFF cons to hear “All men benefit from structural sexism” or “Part of male privilege is unconsciously assuming women require your input when we’re not asking for it.”

    That shit is every single day and on multiple web platforms from within core SFF.

    The idea we in any way had anything to do with the emergence of that flood of insane bigotry is a joke. Garbage-headed feminists and their SJW flak catchers started that all on their own and based on precisely zero reasons.

    Considering the dissonance between the subject matter and the genre, the whole thing betrays a bizarre obsession with a more than unhealthy sprinkling of people with almost crippling mental health issues. When naive SJWs take that paranoid racist feminist ball and run with it and never say “no,” that’s going to cause just a little bit of friction. When a Hugo nominee literally has a nervous breakdown over a TV comedian and WorldCon says “Yes,” that is symbolic of the alliance between sociopathic bigots with severe personality disorders hiding behind “social justice” and otherwise normal people who for some reason are stupid enough to bite into that con game of a sandwich.

    I have personally seen several score people announce they will never read these authors again. Multiply that by the far greater majority I haven’t seen and then again for those who haven’t mentioned it.

    And for what? The Hugos have become a joke it’s tough to even satirize.

  229. Re: Sandifer. I should not worry over much about him calling anyone….not even Vox Day a fascist and/or a collaborator not only because he obviously does not know what a fascist is and/or does nor what a collaborator is BUT…………and I am sorry if I am harping but the man called for the destruction of two DOCTOR WHO serials basically because HE did not like them. Now I am hard pressed to discern the difference between your average book burner and Sandifer. Someone has referred to this behavior as hypocrisy. Hypocrisy implies a certain degree of self awareness and choice. IS someone like Sanifer or indeed ANY of the SJWs self aware?? Are they capable of making moral choices? Nigel Kneale used to examine this form of group insanity in a Sci Fic context(QUATERMASS 2, QUATERMASS AND THE PIT and QUATERMASS) blaming it on aliens. Since obviously aliens are NOT responsible NOR drugs NOR alcohol, it must be assumed that we are dealing with some form of mental illness that either is contagious OR causes its sufferers to swarm into group minds….gestalts that are hostile to anything not of the group aka tribe. So it might be best to stop attributing logical recognizable human traits to them and just act as if one was dealing with a intractable alien species…like Daleks or Cybermen…………

  230. “IS someone like [Sandifer] or indeed ANY of the SJWs self aware?”

    Given that it’s apparently escaped his notice that he is, himself, a Person of Pallid Penis, I’d say no.

    Yo, Phil? Your failed academic career should make you happy, not bitter. If a diversity-minded hiring committee can hire a white dude who spouts nonsensical, ahistoric cant (e.g., conflating libertarianism or classic liberalism with a socialist movement like fascism) or hire a Unit of Umber Uterus who spouts nonsensical, ahistoric cant, guess which one they’re going to pick? You just don’t check off enough boxes, my friend. Welcome to the world you made.

  231. “I have to admit, I find it hilarious that Tor apparently dropped him about a year after he picked up a Hugo.”

    I like his smug assurance that of course Baen will pick him up if he asks, even after he engaged in the Two Minutes Hate against Toni Weisskopf.

    Maybe he got fooled when his “TV show” (which we haven’t heard much about lately, come to think of it) got optioned by FX and he suddenly decided that Rupert Murdoch’s “withered, reactionary grandpa teats” were pretty tasty after all. Maybe Murdoch has a honey badger attitude toward such things.

  232. Scalzi is probably very nervous about the prospect of a Galaxy Quest TV series. Who will want Redshirts now? Hollywood will go for the established brand every time.

  233. Doctor, I wonder why you lurk here. Trolling people like me. What brought you to this site? Did Brad call a Doctor to try and revive his flatlining career?

    There’s a new one-frame cartoon in my community newspaper. It’s about a wiener dog in space. You wouldn’t believe the trouble that dog gets into. Perhaps you’d like to nominate it for a Hugo.

  234. Oh, look. It’s Computer Hour at the Rest Home for the Intellectually Flaccid. Good to see you’re getting the help you so desperately need, Phil.

  235. Philbert Watson: Quite the ad hominem you’ve got there. Maybe you need to let a doctor check that out.

  236. Flagging career?

    http://monsterhunternation.com/2015/04/24/new-monster-hunter-international-project-announcements/

    Baen Books Announces Eleven New Science Fiction and Fantasy Acquisitions

    Works include Lois McMaster Bujold Vorkosigan Saga Novel, and Original Novels from Best Selling Authors Larry Correia, Michael Z. Williamson, Sharon Lee and Steve Miller, Catherine Asaro, Brad Torgersen, and Charles E. Gannon.

    Further acquisitions include a new hard science fiction novel by AnLab award winner and multiple Hugo finalist Brad Torgersen, and a new Skolian universe science fiction mystery novel from two-time Nebula award winner Catherine Asaro, via agent Eleanor Wood.

    (Congrats, Chief Torgersen.)

  237. Yeah, but he’s being published by Baen, not a “real” publisher. 😉

  238. Oh, no, Brer Agent! Don’ throw me in that Baen Patch! They actually pay out royalties in thar!

  239. Lots of stuff gets optioned and never produced. Sometimes it gets optioned multiple times and never produced. Any smart author takes the money and takes his or her honey out for a fancy meal and calls it a win.

  240. Unaware SJW comments of the week #295:

    “Cecily Kane ‏@Cecily_Kane 6h6 hours ago I feel like SFF could maybe use a guide of general principles for how to be welcoming and inclusive without othering the hell out of people.”

    3 hours, 24 min. later:

    “Cecily Kane ‏@Cecily_Kane 1h1 hour ago And I think maybe reviewing/fanwriting/critic culture could especially use it? Dominant face of it is so male, so white, so western.”

    There’s your feminists “principles” all wrapped in a contrary unaware ball of stupid.

    *

    “Cecily Kane ‏@Cecily_Kane 3h3 hours ago @DamienAWalters IME the dudes who say they don’t ‘see’ gender are real quick to point out their lack of inclusion”

    That’s not it at all. We’re pointing out hate speech. It only follows that morons act on their whining about “so male, so white, so western.” That is exclusionary speech, not inclusive, and it is group defamation when it is daily and for months on end.

    *

    “Usman Malik ‏@usmantm 10h10 hours ago My response 2 a comment hinting my fiction is being sold/read bc I’m brown: I’m NOT ur Diversity Poodle. Read me on my own merit or not.”

    “Cecily Kane ‏@Cecily_Kane 10h10 hours ago @usmantm So dehumanizing. :/ You’re a great writer from what I’ve read”

    Hahahah. From what you’ve read? What have you read? That’s she’s not white? Stop promoting work by skin and sex and I’ll stop showing the quotes which show that’s exactly what you do.

    *

    “Ken Liu ‏@kyliu99 10h10 hours ago @usmantm @Cecily_Kane I thought people like this always loudly proclaimed that they can’t even see race? Perhaps they are indeed blind… to talent or taste, that is.”

    No, I’m not blind Mr. Liu, I can read the things you say just fine, including remarks like “‘authentic’ seems often to mean ‘what white people would approve'” You folks are smelling your own stink; stop smearing it on others. Pretending you don’t promote naked race and gender is silly.

    *

    “Ken Liu ‏@kyliu99 Apr 24 @ghostwritingcow @asymbina this kind of in-your-face hate kind of freezes me. I have to process it and protect myself. A lot of negativity.”

    No negativity. I have never written anything so stupid as “‘authentic’ means what Asians would approve.” Never. The “negativity” you’re feeling is embedded in your own quotes. I don’t negatively stereotype millions of people for being born – SJWs do that, and every single day. Calling it “social justice” is fooling no one.

    *

    “Mishell Baker ‏@mishellbaker 10h10 hours ago @usmantm @kyliu99 @Cecily_Kane There is a lot in classic sword & sorcery that lines up with straight white male conservative values.”

    That is false you moron. Your racist remarks don’t equal Sinbad or Ishtar. Are you people incapable of reading or understanding your own words, like these:

    “Cecily Kane @Cecily_Kane · Apr 25 Writing a post RN about amazing female protagonists written by women”

    That takes us right back to diversity poodles, doesn’t it?

    You will never win an argument with these people, because the idea there is an “argument” in the first place is a sham. They have a visceral biological hatred they dress up in cute words and “punching up” theory. Their circular arguments always point away from themselves and onto us no matter what. The idea this daily drudge didn’t find its way into voting the Nebula and Hugo winning stories from last year is laughable. “Talent or taste”? You folks never discuss such matters, why should we not believe what you actually DO discuss? Here’s a refresher: what you DO discuss is the inadvisability of straight white men and the heady fun of non-whites, women and gay literature. That is not literature. That is emptiness. Writing about what you do is not “negativity” or itself “racism” – it is your own words and your own racism. I am not surprised you find your words disturbing. I do. And there are so damn many of them.

  241. I suppose “poodling” is a bit like this… In the past I’ve submitted short stories to magazines, in the future I will again… should I SELL one…

    If a “new author” anthology buys it, I will be happy, but will understand that my story won out over other beginners only. If a “women in science fiction” anthology buys it, I will take their money, but I will understand that my story won out over other women only. If my story is purchased by an anthology called “Scandinavian Futures” and I had to explain that my maiden name is appropriately ethnic, I will think it’s a hoot and I will buy about 10 copies for my relatives… etc., etc.

    But I will understand that any of those successes, while they are certainly party worthy successes and no reason to turn my nose up at them, are also “small pond” successes. In any of those scenarios I did, in fact, have a greater chance of “winning” because I was facing a smaller pool of other writers. Looking for those opportunities is *smart* but it’s smart because they ARE tilted in your favor because of… whatever you can fill in that blank for because you’re NOT actually competing with the whole of the pros.

  242. It is a very small market of readership, which WANTS its entertainment to wag an incessantly-accusing finger at it.

  243. Did Sad Puppies take 3 years to reach critical mass? There was no such blow up the first 2 years. Perhaps Vox Day has many more supports than anyone though and it was the weight of Rabid Puppies that caused the storm that swept the nominations.

Comments are closed.