Fisking the broken narrative

Someone forwarded me a copy of Kevin J. Maroney’s editorial from the April New York Review of Science Fiction. I don’t normally read Maroney’s column, and I don’t even normally read NYRoSF, but some of Maroney’s commentary screams BROKEN NARRATIVE at such a high decibel level, I thought it might be worth it to examine some of that commentary in close detail. The quoted blocks in italics are Maroney, while the standard text blocks are my own.

I don’t know that I have anything particular to add to the specific discussion except perhaps to bemoan the near-total destruction of the short fiction categories this year.

Kary English “destroyed” the short fiction category? Ed Lerner too? Michael F. Flynn? John C. Wright? What and whom, pray tell, would Kevin have preferred on the final ballot? In the short fiction categories? That’s a question worth asking. Has Kevin even read any of the works? The first duty of all reviewers with integrity, is to not judge anything sight-unseen. So I am honestly curious. Did Kevin read all of the short works in the short fic categories, before employing phraseology like “destroyed” in his editorial?

Okay, there’s one point I feel I have to hammer on. The entire Puppy movement, rhetorically, is based on the idea that the science fiction enterprise has changed tremendously and not for the better, since the fabled Golden Age when all of the Puppies were young.

The sentence above alerts me to the fact that Kevin is not aware that each iteration of Sad Puppies has taken on a different flavor. Sad Puppies 3 especially, since it’s a different person carrying the guidon this year. At a basic level, Sad Puppies 3 can be accurately described as operational push-back against a small pool of taste-makers getting to decide for all of Science Fiction and Fantasy (SF/F) what’s worthy of recognition with SF/F’s self-labeled “most prestigious award.” It wasn’t about dialing the field back to the Golden Age as much as it was about using the extant democratic process to broaden the extent of the Hugo’s coverage; to include Hugo-worthy works (and authors, and editors, and artists) who’d ordinarily fall into the blind spots. And let’s be clear: the Hugo selection process in 2015 does have blind spots. Such as the consistent bias against tie-in novels and tie-in novel authors; for all definitions of “tie-in” which include, “Books based on universes originating from sources other than literary.” Ergo, games, movies, television, etc.

The head Sad Puppy himself, Brad Torgersen, has taken to referring to his enemies as CHORFS, “Cliquish, Holier-than-thou, Obnoxious, Reactionary, Fanatics.” So, yes, the person who is bravely positioning himself as the force that will stop the people who want to change things believes that his opponents are “reactionaries.” This is, apparently, someone whose understanding of words is limited to “what sounds like an insult?”

Here again, I think Kevin has not examined the sequence of events in close detail. CHORF became a necessity once it became clear that Teresa Nielsen-Hayden (among others) was teeing up the outrage machine, in the week before the release of the Hugo final ballot in April. Why a new acronym? Because the SMOFs supporting Sad Puppies didn’t need to be lumped in with Teresa and the other SP3 detractors who were actively building their narrative of affront and apoplexy long before the Hugo final ballot went public. If Kevin dislikes insults, he should come sit in my chair for a month, and get called every name in the book. All for inviting people to the democracy — because inviting people to the democracy is apparently the worst sin any SF/F author can commit?

Leading to a broader topic, I’ll point out that the Best Graphic Story category consists of four superb non-Puppy finalists. I’ve also been told the Fan Artist category is a good selection of candidates, though I’m not personally qualified to judge them. These categories mostly escaped unscathed because the slates listed only one Graphic Story nominee and no Fan Artist nominees, apparently because the Puppies didn’t deem them worthy of attention.

Ah, so Kevin’s litmus seems clear: if it was part of Sad Puppies 3, it’s bad. Everything not part of Sad Puppies 3, is superb. Again, sight-unseen? If so, that’s damned shabby of you, Kevin. And you should know better.

That’s how this works now. There is a small community of people online who are dedicated to inflicting damage on targets of opportunity.

Yes, and some of their better-known exemplars are people such as Arthur Chu, who tried to cram Sad Puppies 3 (square peg) into GamerGate (round hole) and when it wouldn’t fit, he kept pounding anyway; to include labeling me a racist — me, the guy who’ll be interracially married 22 years this year. In this particular instance, Kevin is looking at the gun through the wrong end of the barrel.

This group, which I think of as Panzergroup Asshole, is reactionary, virulently anti-woman, and racist whenever it suits them.

Well, again, I have to wonder: which end of the gun is Kevin looking at? I think some of the commentary of people like Chu, and others, has definitely been virulent. Or if Kevin is referring to Sad Puppies 3, I would like to see Kevin qualify the statement. With specific quotes. Kevin’s opinion is 100% fueled by the broken narrative: everything and everyone he doesn’t like (about Sad Puppies 3) is racist and sexist, because (mumble, mumble) and therefore (reasons, reasons) and because Kevin isn’t friends with anyone who disagrees with him, it’s an open-and-shut case.

Their tactics include online harrassment in a variety of forms, identity theft, death threats, exposure private information, SWATting , and whatever else they can do without actually leaving their chairs.

To repeat myself in triplicate: which end of the gun is Kevin looking at? Nobody on Sad Puppies 3 has been harassing anyone; though some of the people on Sad Puppies 3 — and myself and Larry Correia in particular — have been harassed a great deal. Maybe I should uncork my little screenshot store of all the nasty, petulant, histrionic, mean-spirited, false, slanderous, and downright disgusting things which have been said against Sad Puppies 3, the contents of the slate, myself, Larry Correia, and many others? Kevin’s right, about people being jerks. I just don’t think he realizes (based on the above) who the actual jerks have been.

GamerGate is just one instance of PA, a cadre of PA wrapped in a protective layer of the clueless and the easily duped. The ideas are dumb; the threats are real and terrifying. And if there is one lesson that Panzergroup Asshole wants to convey, it is to live in terror at the possibility of attracting the attention of Panzergroup Asshole.

Okay, my knowledge of GamerGate is limited, because I am not a gamer in the way that people (in this decade at least) identify as gamers. Most of my video games I like, are all old. And I don’t put much time into them these days, because whatever time I don’t spend doing military duty or my civilian job or family stuff or church stuff, is dedicated to writing books and stories for publishers like Baen, Analog magazine, and so forth. But even I can tell that Kevin’s image (in his mind) of what GamerGate is, is so one-dimensional, that it’s almost not worth considering. Kevin is saying “GamerGate!” the way he might say “Klu Klux Klan!” and it’s because (again) there’s nobody in his life (I infer from the nature of his editorial) to disagree with him, or give him a fuller picture. GamerGate (at this point) is so big, complex, convoluted, and replete with various “sides” that to simply spew “GamerGate!” and think that’s the end of it . . . demonstrates no depth of knowledge on the issue.

They are terrorists — they want people, especially women, to be so afraid of drawing attention that they just sit silently.

Golly, you mean like one of Arthur Chu’s minions, who tweeted a fake bomb threat against an establishment where people were hanging out to talk about GamerGate and Sad Puppies 3? Like harassing the establishment’s proprietor with asinine text messages all day long? Now, I am military, so to me a “terrorist” is someone like the Tsarnaev Bros. Guys who literally kill people. I avoid dumbing down “terrorist” because there are literal killers, and then there are people who just like being dicks on the internet.

And when it comes to being dicks on the internet, I think the anti-SP3 (and anti-GamerGate) sides (fuzzy, diffuse, partially overlapping Venn circles) win it going away. Why? Because they believe that being self-righteous flaming rage nozzles (of tolerance!) somehow gets them off the hook for having to behave like rational, adult human beings. Zealotry — even well-intended — has a history of going off the rails. So let’s be totally clear about the nature of the actual problem here. Especially when Sad Puppies 3 was wholly above-board, demanded nothing, threatened nothing, and played clean. We invited people to the democracy. The end. All else is merely rhetorical masturbation.

The Puppies deliberately sought the attention of GamerGate. They gathered monsters around themselves and said, “Here is a target which you should attack, because it does not give enough honor to the right kind of people.” And they attacked.

Again, GamerGate (as a label) encompasses so many different people, parties, sides, etc., that I can only speak about the folks who’ve contacted myself, Michael Z. Williamson, Sarah A. Hoyt, etc. That would be the Honey Badger Brigade. Who were spendidly nice to us (on the podcast) and who were all very intelligent, thoughtful, flesh-and-blood human beings who simply wanted to be able to have fun and enjoy what they want to enjoy, without having their recreation politicized by zealots who seem obsessed with “wrongfans” having “wrongfun” according to (mumble mumble crackpot academic theory mumble mumble activist jargon axe-grinding mumble mumble.) The Honey Badgers weren’t monsters. They were like us: tired of being told we’re bad, simply because we won’t fall into line with the doctrine and the ideology being pushed by the zealots.

The Puppies have a number of advantages in their fight. It is easier to attack a broad target than to defend it at every point.

Hey Kevin, is that why you seem to think GamerGate and Sad Puppies 3 are not only indistinguishable, but whole-cloth terrible? Down to the last man and woman? Because you think it’s wrong to attack broad targets?

Much of the society works on assumptions of commity and reciprocity that the Puppies simply eschew. They don’t care what damage they cause as long as their ears are filled with their own cheers.

Yes, which is why (if you go to the comments section of any of the well-attended anti-Puppy blogs) there is such an echo chamber (cough, excuse me) community of diverse (cough, monocultural) thinkers! Because the only people cheering their own, are the Sad Puppies. Or are we GamerGaters? At this point I’ve had “GamerGate!” spewed at me so often, I think I should just print up a copy of the Vivian James artwork (wherein she’s holding a sad puppy) and say, “Fine, fuck you. If I have to choose the Honey Badgers, vs. some self-righteous zealots who don’t even know what they’re talking about, I choose the Honey Badgers 20 times out of 20.”

And even if it is impossible for them to “win” — whatever that might mean — they can still cause a lot of damage even while losing every battle. If the Hugo Awards are left a smoking ruin in their wake, what’s it to them?

The only real way I see the Hugos being a “smoking ruin” is if the CHORFs fulfill their stated pledge to bork the 2015 awards by placing “NO AWARD” at the top of every category; thus no awards will be given. This will be an entirely self-inflicted wound (by the so-called devotees and cherishers of the Hugo) because clearly you have to destroy the village, to save the village. I mean, that’s just good common sense. If you love a thing and think it’s awesome, you absolutely must obliterate it — to keep it from falling into the wrong hands. Because this is what open minds and open hearts do. They destroy something they claim to love, so that something they claim to love can be kept pure. Because the “wrong” people must never be allowed to have it the “wrong” way.

If there is any other way to leave the Hugos a “smoking ruin” this year, I haven’t thought of it yet.

This is not to counsel despair. But we need to be aware that the battle against the arrayed forces of assholery will, at times, be unpleasant to watch and wearying to fight. But the fight is genuinely important, and it won’t win itself.

—Kevin J. Maroney
speaking for himself

Thanks for the pep talk, Kevin! I agree with you wholeheartedly! The Forces of Assholery have been trick-or-treating at my virtual doorstep for 45 days and counting. They’ve smeared me, smeared my family, smeared my friends, and smeared Sad Puppies 3. Again, clearly the way the Forces of Assholery save the thing they love and cherish, is to be complete pricks to whoever they feel like, whenever they feel like, badger and threaten and cajole and shun and shame, all that good old fashioned 12th century village stuff. Torches and pitch forks! Tie them to the stake! Burn them! Infidels!

Or maybe “your” side needs to just settle down and vote on the ballot like normal?

That’s what the rest of us adults do — even when we aren’t thrilled with what’s on the ballot.

And when we decided to actively promote things we liked more, we did it 100% clean and for the public eye.

Again, did you even read the short fiction categories, before editorializing?

Or are you so in love with the broken narrative, that you can’t step beyond that particular sandbox, and look at the bigger picture?

Advertisements

554 thoughts on “Fisking the broken narrative

  1. “Since the fabled Golden Age when all of the Puppies were young.”

    Maybe when David Gerrold was young. Larry is 38, Brad is 41. 😉

  2. It’s really amazing how little some people know about what’s going on, and how willful they are about keeping it that way. I was browsing a fandom community just the other day when I saw someone saying outright that the mission of SP3 was to stop minority voices (like her) from being heard in the SF community. The respondents mostly agreed with her, and people trying to point out some of the inaccuracies in the way she saw things were treated like idiots for believing SP was actually about what it said it was about, and not a coordinated attack on minorities in science fiction. What can you do when people will look at any possible evidence to the contrary and just say ‘lies’ without a second thought?

  3. Great reply. I’d never even heard of that guy or his sci-fi “review”. Probably for good reason, I think.

    One small nitpick: GG mascot is Vivian James, not Lillian. (cause it sounds similar to “video games”)

  4. I know you want the Hugo Awards to mean what it once meant Brad, but I’m about at the point where I don’t care anymore. Let the CHORFs and their sycophants have them, and let it fade away and become nothing but an insular little group giving the award to each other over and over again.

    After all, time and time again, they have said that the Hugo doesn’t belong to the fans, that it belongs to WorldCon, which it is a WorldCon thing, but fans make up WorldCon. Of course we all understand what they really mean, which is that the wrong types of fans are now trying to participate and they just can’t have that. How dare we sully the pristine floors with our unclean boots and the pristine walls with our unclean words.

    Let them vote No Award and let Vox nuke it next year if that is what they want. Let WorldCon fade away to obscurity. Gods forbid new blood is introduced and WorldCon grow. They can’t have it being something large and wonderful like DragonCon. Just imagine all of the wrong type of fans actually enjoying themselves and enjoying the wrong types of entertainment.

  5. Hell, the Golden Age died in the 50s, ten years before **I** was born. . . Although, recalling Gerrold’s “Trouble with Tribbles” book (which I got somewhere around age 10. . .), yes, HE would have been young when SF was still arguably in the Golden Age. . .

  6. The response of idiots like this is what is pushing me to be stronger in my own way on these issues Brad. Good post!

  7. Kevin Maroney is just totally ignorant. And it really shows when he referenced “the battle against the arrayed forces of assholery,” What. Irony. He probably doesn’t even realize it. Talk about a clueless asshole….

  8. I am endlessly amused when the anti-Puppies act like the SP are the old white male establishment of SF, trying vainly to hold onto their long-held power, and then, to counter them, they trot out . . . David Gerrold and George R R Martin, the Nielsen Haydens, etc. . . .

  9. It’s all been an education for me, I have rarely seen people so willingly embrace the spirits of vitriol and rancor, to purposely spread lies and slander in such a fashion as the Hayen/Wolheim crowd, but I am an accountant, we try to deal with logic and honesty. I am glad to have this opportunity to work with the Puppies though, and I will enjoy any August wins immensely. Keep your chin up!

  10. I suspect (though again, I have no proof) that there are a lot of WorldCon members who are withholding judgement until they get their voter packets (which should be later this month). Time will tell.

    The big thing that I would say that I’ve learned from all of this is that I’m glad I never did anything with that Twitter account that I set up, because I have the impression that Twitter is just once huge toxic cesspool.

  11. Lost my original comment. Stupid kitties walking on the keyboard 🙂 Anyhow, Mr. Torgersen, I do think you are a decent fellow and I remain a buying member of your public so even though I do disagree with you I hope you don’t decide I am a CHORF or whatever other term for your opposition that you may apply. I have read all of the nominated short stories and a few of Mr. Wright’s nominated works and I am not impressed with the storytelling contained therein. I am particularly disappointed in the stories that appeared in Analog, as I have always thought of it as a bastion of hard science fiction and good stories. I admit that I have not been reading the magazines in the last few years, due to the lack of local bookstores that stock them, and I find the decline in quality disappointing. However, if these are what you and the other people who nominated with you think of as quality sf, I have some anthologies from the 1960s that you may wish to peruse for a quality comparison.

    I have also read Mr. Butcher’s, Ms. Leckie’s, Mr. Kloos’ and Ms. Addison’s novels. I enjoyed each of them, it is true, but I would not call all of them Hugo worthy. I have not yet read Mr. Anderson’s book nor the Three Body Problem, so I cannot say which book I would vote for exactly yet.

    I have never concerned myself with the Hugo Awards because I knew they were the Worldcon awards and I have never attended one. Your actions have made me think twice because I cannot imagine having the awards given to substandard work, just because of an ideological dispute.

    Also. Really. Gamers and movie fans are not necessarily fans of written sf. That is not a requirement to be a gamer or a moviegoer. So just because a zillion people go to Dragon Con does not mean that they are fans or even care about the books that are the core of the Hugos. Some of them do. But I would bet that most of them don’t. So your arguments about opening the tent are specious in that if someone doesn’t follow the field in terms of reading the books, what business do they have voting on the awards for those books? I don’t deny that sf tv shows and movies are sf, but that still does not mean that fans of the same are going to automagically be able to judge books if they haven’t read them.

  12. Who has gotten women — the Honey Badgers — ejected from a convention just for selling WrongArt? Yeah, it ain’t GamerGate and it ain’t the Sad Puppies. It’s the ones who claim to be the forces AGAINST assholery.

  13. “The Diverse Editors List: a post-production essay”

    http://www.strangehorizons.com/2014/20140428/1editors-a.shtml

    Excerpts:

    “Tobias Buckell (Diverse Energies)—a Caribbean born mixed race individual” Hahaha. Buckell looks as white as Vox Day

    “Joyce Chng (The Ayam Curtain)—Singaporean Chinese Christo-Pagan bi woman”

    “Carrie Cuinn (Dagan Books, Lakeside Circus; also edits shorts and novels as a freelancer)—bi, hearing impaired, ADHD/autism”

    “Fabio Fernandes (We See a Different Frontier, Terra Incognita)—a Portuguese-speaking Latino cis man” Or in other words the same as Larry Correia

    “Nalo Hopkinson (multiple anthologies)—Queer Jamaican Canadian woman, neurodiverse with a chronic condition”

    “Iulian Ionescu (Fantasy Scroll)—East-European Blue-Eyed Man”

    “Mary Jaimes (Scigentasy)—a white woman of Mexican descent”

    “Brit Mandelo (Strange Horizons and anthologies including Beyond Binary)—a queer and genderqueer person”

    “An Owomoyela (Strange Horizons)—an asexual, neutrois American of German and Yoruba descent”

    “Julia Rios (Strange Horizons, Kaleidoscope, In Other Words)—A bisexual half-Mexican (or Mexican-American or Latin@) genderqueer woman”

    “Michael D. Thomas (Apex Magazine)—Genderqueer and bisexual”

    “Rose Fox (edits SF/F/H book reviews for Publishers Weekly, also freelance editing of manuscripts and anthologies including Long Hidden) – Jewish Anglo-American queer genderqueer polyamorous person.”

    “Natalie Luhrs (Masque Books)—a queer polyamorous white woman”

    “Shweta Narayan (Stone Telling)—a chronically ill agender/genderfluid bisexual Desi person”

    “Comments
    “Posted by Kevin J. Maroney on May 2, 2014 at 2:29 PM
    “Raising my hand tentatively–I’m the longtime co-editor, now publisher, of The New York Review of Science Fiction. I’ve been in a committed, uncloseted poly threesome for 25+ years. I don’t see anyone else here listed purely for being poly, so I might not make the cut.”

    *

    These people slay me – they really do. This is what they consider a big deal. It’s all about the rocket ships and science fiction. Gee, I wonder how they’ll vote in any award in any year? How much money do you think Pfizer has made off that bunch?

  14. Inclusiveness is only inclusive if you limit your inclusiveness to include only the *right* people.

    Inclusiveness including incorrect people invalidates inclusion, and becomes exclusionary, regardless of the ratio between ‘Right’ and ‘Wrong’.

  15. Twilaprice said “Also. Really. Gamers and movie fans are not necessarily fans of written sf. That is not a requirement to be a gamer or a moviegoer. So just because a zillion people go to Dragon Con does not mean that they are fans or even care about the books that are the core of the Hugos.Some of them do. But I would bet that most of them don’t. So your arguments about opening the tent are specious in that if someone doesn’t follow the field in terms of reading the books, what business do they have voting on the awards for those books? I don’t deny that sf tv shows and movies are sf, but that still does not mean that fans of the same are going to automagically be able to judge books if they haven’t read them.”

    What exactly is the core of the Hugos besides science fiction and fantasy works? Things that a vast majority of gamers and movie fans do read? Does the Hugo Awards not have a category for movies?

    So what exactly is the core of the Hugos if not science fiction and fantasy works? Is it a certain type? Is that your meaning Twilaprice?

    How do you know they don’t read science fiction and fantasy?

    Why shouldn’t they vote for stuff they read? Is it because it is not the literary pap that is pushed by the CHORFs?

  16. Over on FB, in a thread by Betsy Wolheim, I had to pull out this quote in response to John Wesley Hardin (whoever the hell he is):

    No one is ever fanatically devoted to something they have complete confidence in. No one is fanatically shouting that the sun is going to rise tomorrow. They *know* it is. Whenever someone is fanatically devoted to a set of beliefs or dogmas or goals, it is only because those beliefs or goals are in doubt.
    — Robert M. Pursig, _Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance_

    Because it’s clear what he’s fanatical about, and he’s flailing like crazy. He and his tag-team partner Travis Creason, have even resorted to trolling through MY FB profile to find ammunition for their arguments against me (There was another fellow, Jonathon something who thought his final thoughts were SO pithy, the made them then blocked me, which rendered them invisible to me). On the one hand they are obsessed with VD, and then they try to say he’s a nobody, a blow hard, except when he’s an evil master genius who stole the Hugos that they must fight. Hardin even attacked my Novelette, which I know for a fact he hasn’t read (because nobody’s bought it in months.). But facts don’t matter when they can smear people over who is in their friends list (which is why Creason apparently keeps his Friends List either hidden or empty.)

  17. Good column as usual. Mr Anderson is projecting because he is imputing to the Sad Puppies all of the hatred and vitriol that has been heaped on the SP’s heads.

    Twilaprice: Condescending much? How dare the opinions of the unwashed masses of media fans be allowed to count as much as those of the Holy Literary Fen. Have you been to DragonCon? There are tons of literary panels. There are many well-read fans who are also gamers. Only a narrow minded fan would assume that a media fan doesn’t read.

    You should inform yourself of the difference between “I don’t like this book” and “this book is not well-written.”

  18. @James May and the Strange Horizons article: Relative to their proportions in the general population, it appears that these ‘diversities’ are spectacularly *over-represented* among SFF editors….

  19. @James May and the Strange Horizons article: Who cares what somebody’s marital preferences, ethnicity, or health problems are? All that matters as a writer is what you wrote. All that matters as a reader is what you read. As a voter all that matters is the thing nominated.

    As for health conditions of the writers, I’m playing the world’s smallest violin for you. I have chronic medical issues too, which are irrelevant to the issue at hand.

  20. I was particularly excited to find out that ADD (or ADHD) got you counted as diverse. Also, chronic illness.

  21. James May: thing is, in the 21st century, America’s progressives think that being able to claim any kind of victimization, is like getting a trophy or a medal. The more of these things you can pile up, the more speshul you are, and the more you magically get to “win” every single argument you ever have with an un-speshul person. And no, it doesn’t make any sense to me either. But then, the things the progressives fixate on make less sense to me every day.

  22. I am endlessly amused when the anti-Puppies act like the SP are the old white male establishment of SF, trying vainly to hold onto their long-held power, and then, to counter them, they trot out . . . David Gerrold and George R R Martin, the Nielsen Haydens, etc. . . .

    This one always makes me chuckle. Especially now that I am spending 24/7 in an Army environment. To watch the anti-SP3 ‘diversity’ people — almost entirely white, almost entirely well off, almost entirely of the same ideological persuasion — tut tut and stick their noses up at SP3 . . . that’s just hilarious. Please, white guardians of ‘diversity’ in the field, phone me when your daily working environment and relationships are as actually diverse as a deploying Army unit. Until then, I just have to take your claims of ‘diversity’ with a boulder-sized chunk of salt.

  23. Let’s right here and now forget any bullshit about this being conservatives vs. liberals. This is a bizarre and heavily racialized sexual supremacist cult dedicated to flaying any straight white man. They’ve passed their nuttiness off as Jim Crow and women’s suffrage and do-gooder useful idiots have bit into that bullshit sandwich and swallowed it hook, line and sinker. These people are not “oppressed” in any sense of the term. Using their own standards for evidence of what constitutes identity bigotry, it’s clear intersectionalists don’t like whites, men and heterosexuals. They can’t come up with culture-wide quotes in any way that can match their own, or examples to match their own obsession with self-segregating and discriminating against others. Every time I hear some moron use the word “inclusive” I shudder at the intellectual dishonesty of these feral people.

    They have hanged themselves with their own testimony time and time again. If this is a game of quotes and actual persons with influence in SFF, SJWs lose this match in straight sets. Their quotes also reveal persistent and meticulous liars. They put one guy under a microscope of quotes while 50 others walk clean away who spout racist anti-male shit every day.

    #DiversityIsMadness

  24. @ twilaprice May 17, 2015 at 5:56 pm

    “However, if these are what you and the other people who nominated with you think of as quality sf, I have some anthologies from the 1960s that you may wish to peruse for a quality comparison.”

    As has been said throughout this affair, tastes vary. SP3 has been based on this very point, that some of us think the recent winners are NOT quality. Everyone is going to have different preferences. Realize this. Accept this. Deal with this.

    “…I cannot imagine having the awards given to substandard work, just because of an ideological dispute.”

    Ideology is BUILT on taste and preference. Result? See above. Everyone is going to have different preferences.

    Also, since this was never ABOUT ideology (citations required, if you think otherwise) but, as repeatedly publicly declared and demonstrated, differences in what we consider to be good writing, your Strawman(tm) is horribly deformed.

    “Also. Really. Gamers and movie fans are not necessarily fans of written sf.”

    NO-ONE HAS EVERY CLAIMED THEY WERE. (Again, citations if you disagree.) Another Strawman(tm) attack. You’re quite good at that, it seems. Distressingly CHORF-like. Ponder THAT.

  25. It’s fairly common, Brad; a good chunk of the ‘SJWs’ are Trust Fund Kids living as ‘indie developers’ in SF – not exactly a budget zip code. One who claimed ‘GG forced me out of my house’ ‘just so happened’ to have a three month European vacation planned which ‘just so happened’ to occur during the same time frame.

    I wish nonexistent internet bogeybeings would chase *me* off to Copenhagen, Barcelona, and Prague for a few months…

  26. This is rich:

    …virulently anti-woman…

    Because there’s not a single woman on the sl– no, wait.

    Because Larry Correia isn’t going to blurb my book and also book bom– no, wait.

    SMDH.

  27. @ emily61 May 17, 2015 at 6:51 pm

    “As for health conditions of the writers, I’m playing the world’s smallest violin for you. I have chronic medical issues too, which are irrelevant to the issue at hand.”

    They become relevant when one side drags them in as a metric for ‘diversity’, as the cited essay clearly does.

  28. Let’s have an intersectional contest to measure the most intersecting vectors of oppression:

    In the white corner you have Vox Day – Latino Ameridian double-socked first by waves of Spanish Conquistadores who destroyed his ancestral Nahuatl capital of Tenochtitlan and then German and English colonists who sped over his land on those bicycles with the giant front wheel. Don’t let his 100% white appearance fool you; he ain’t. His privilege is questionable and Strange Horizons was wrong not to contact him and put him on their list of Rainbow Goodness Ladder of Oppression.

    In the other white corner you have Tobias “One-Drop Kid” Buckell. Don’t let his 100% white appearance fool you either. He ain’t. He’s been certified underprivileged, marginalized and underrepresented by the best racialist appraisers in the business. He hails from ex-slaves captured by Arab Muslims and black sub-Saharan Muslims and then sold. He is forever barred from returning to Africa by a United Nations mandate and plus has received many naughty e-mails from Stormfront types.

    Whoever needs the highest sunblock level wins. Let them therefore stand in the sun and be judged. The winner faces Sarah Hoyt and Larry Correia in a bull-fighting contest in the fierce Andalusian sun of Lisboa. Boa Sorte!!

  29. Have I ever mentioned I’m an ADHD, OCD, PTSD Harper Valley PTA, Bahasa Indonesian-speaking, queer, genderqueer, agender/gender fluid, no tear ducts, mixed, pagan Hindu Sikh Wicca atheist, chronically stupid, carpel tunel, octagonal, cishet, fuck from Kalikbukbuk?

    Well… I am.

  30. @James:

    That may not be fair; Sarah and Larry have too much experience with bulls. And the products of their non-pointy ends.

  31. I didn’t read it and I thought it was great. Onto my Hugo list it goes because it’s important to meninism, whitopia and Eurofuturism in cis lunar space.

  32. Great Post Brad. Its been sorta sad seeing some people I thought were kinda cool revel themselves to be complete jackasses over SP3. They just don’t care about the truth or rewarding good SF with an award. Its all about the politics and who likes who and showing all their buddies that they are true-blue Liberals who don’t want to associate with anyone who associates with anyone who might know Vox Day. Sad.

  33. Evidently, just reading the stories and voting for the one you like is just too reactionary/fascist/bigoted or something.

  34. Pingback: The Canine Billion Names of Dog 5/17 | File 770

  35. This guy is ignorant of projection for the same reason fish are ignorant of water. It’s like he wrote a column based on the playground game of opposite day. What a maroon.

  36. Actually, until I was 6 I thought cows were carnivorous. I’ll take communists with machine guns for the win, but only if you give me shoes and dictionaries and a weaponized umbrella. 😛
    Wait, I am AT LEAST as diverse as Fabio Fernandes and WAY more diverse than Natalie Lurid. So — where is my attention for my “diversity”? Oh, yeah, I know. Wrongthink invalidates all of that. Also, I have two middle fingers and they may gaze upon them.

    Same for Kate Paulk, next year’s standard bearer who is so non-neuro-typical she refers to herself as chemically sane. (Mostly complications of narcolepsy meds, which cause their own problems.) BUT she doesn’t kiss the ring, so she’s … a Mormon neurotypical white male, like the rest of us. Mormon males with great racks for the win. (The church is tolerant about this type of thing, I hope, Brad? I mean, I don’t want to be kicked out since I don’t remember getting in.)

    Do I need to say it? They’re frass-nuts. They are so devoid of ideas; ideals and interests, that they can only judge literary works by the amount those might advance marxist causes combined with the “oppressed class” of the writer. These are barbarians or children, unable to appreciate aesthetics. They deserve nothing from us but our horse laughter and middle fingers, as we leave in the dust and CREATE stuff they aren’t even able to comprehend. Engaging in aesthetic/literary argument with them is like discussing Shakespeare with a kindergarten class.

    Oh, and yeah, the golden age ended way before I was born. I’m 52 and I’m almost the doyenne of the SP who are ALL crazy kids.

    The other side, though? Finalement, finalement, ils ont beaucoup de talent pour être vieux sans être adultes

  37. Brad: “Or maybe “your” side needs to just settle down and vote on the ballot like normal?”

    But everyone is doing that Brad. If a work doesn’t deserve to be there in the eyes of the voter, it goes behind No Award.

    Maybe it’s badly written.
    Maybe it’s not SF.
    Maybe it’s poorly edited.
    Maybe it got nominated due to a concerted voting slate / block-voting effort.

    Different people have different mesures of what makes a particular work worthy. All of these could be reasons to put a story behind No Award.

  38. “Maybe it got nominated due to a concerted voting slate / block-voting effort.”

    And it’s been repeatedly pointed out that slates/block voting has been going on for years, so trying to blame it on that is amazingly hypocritical. Nice try.

  39. “And even if it is impossible for them to “win” — whatever that might mean — they can still cause a lot of damage even while losing every battle. If the Hugo Awards are left a smoking ruin in their wake, what’s it to them?”

    Isn’t that what a Pyrrhic victory is? Winning, all-the-while losing so much that retreat or defeat would have led to a more favorable end-result? And even then, they keep telling themselves Gamergate is losing, when in all actuality, SOCJUS is the entity that is losing here.

  40. Dave W-“And it’s been repeatedly pointed out that slates/block voting has been going on for years, so trying to blame it on that is amazingly hypocritical. Nice try.”

    Please re-read my post. All I said was that that was a perfectly valid potential reason for some people to gauge something as unworthy,and to consequently rank it below No Award.

    Different people, different measures.

  41. Except it’s not–it’s like voting for President based on their haircut.
    The other three reasons actually have to do with writing quality. The fourth is the equivalent of saying “If I can’t have you, no one will!” and pulling the trigger.
    Which, if you want to be that way, is fine. Just don’t expect anyone to take you seriously.

  42. Yes, which is why (if you go to the comments section of any of the well-attended anti-Puppy blogs) there is such an echo chamber (cough, excuse me) community of diverse (cough, monocultural) thinkers!”

    This. So much this. In two-three weeks of seeing the comment threads on some of the more Anti-SP sites, I’ve really noticed this. The same voices, sounding the same cries, over and over and over and over again.

  43. As Brad and a number of you here already know, I consider myself to be a progressive, generally, politically, which means that far more often than not I am voting for the Democratic candidate in any given election. I do have libertarian leanings and am against gun control and believe in real, full free-speech rights. I love diversity, and I do note that in general, a diversity of cultures and genders leads to a diversity of viewpoints. BUT THIS IS NOT A LAW! Ten old white men can be as diverse in their beliefs and writing as it is possible for me to imagine. And a whole collection of writers with diverse backgrounds and even disabilities could all be writing similar drivel that follows a single “party line”. Now, I have not read much of the material being discussed in the Hugo award controversy, although you can bet I will be voting next time they come around if they don’t implode due to the CHORF assholes’ choices. But when I do get to vote, I will read everything on the ballot, and consider my choice carefully, and vote based on the writing, not on any political agenda whatsoever. And I strongly believe the screeching SJW’s should shut up, read, and do the same. Yes, I am a liberal using the SJW moniker, because I think the worst thing I can possibly do is to try to FORCE my beliefs on others, except when I see others being harmed/having their civil rights violated. I see nothing of the sort here. If they don’t like what Brad did, they are free to organize the “Happy Hounds” or whatever other name they chose for the next Hugos, and do battle on the same level playing field. Never accuse a man of cheating who is playing by the rules you wrote and have used to your advantage for years

  44. Maybe I should uncork my little screenshot store of all the nasty, petulant, histrionic, mean-spirited, false, slanderous, and downright disgusting things which have been said against Sad Puppies 3, the contents of the slate, myself, Larry Correia, and many others?

    I say do it, especially if you have somewhere that’s insanely difficult to hack. It’s served me really well when it came to Yamamanama / Clamps’s attempts to portray me as bigoted in places like Fundies Say The Dumbest Things. Also, Wayback Machine it, when you do.

  45. 60guilders – “… it’s like voting for President based on their haircut.”

    Or on who you would rather have a beer with (which IIRC was a thing in the last few elections?)

    It’s a valid measure. You may disagree with its appropriateness, but it is a completely valid and legitimate metric.

  46. 1.) Hey everybody, buy my new short fantasy story cuz I have benign tremors. Guess what I called it: that’s right – “Benign Tremors” – plus fuck cis white people.

    2.) Just a reminder that i have an SF story with two binary cis white protagonists but they have no feet because yes and screw straight white cis dudes, secure that their position and privilege will always be there. Smug white shits – I’d like to slap one right now.

    3.) You’re telling me how there has to be a narrative reason for a fly-fisherman character in a space opera and I am totally listening and not just rolling my eyes oh you stupid white cis dudes. Buy my anthology you paper-hanging white male sons of panzer-albinos.

    4.) Die in a fire white cis dudes but before you do experience the real streetwise deal and read my SF novel. It’s all about running away from cis white dudes. I have ADD and was born with the ability to hear in the infra-red so go fuck.

    5.) Plus, fuck whites and white saviors. I’m out of all fucks to give about white people. I’d forgotten why I didn’t read whites and then I did and then I remembered – “Oh, yeah – typical white shit with the racism and sexism.” Buy my space opera – it’s called “Incest Messiah.” It’s part of my series about banning the incest tabu so nuclear families will be destroyed and we can never see gender and oppress each other then. Remember: without people of color there’d never have been Star Wars cuz imperialism so just go fuck off whites.

  47. Buy my new SF story. It’s about two genderqueer aneurotypical characters on one of those asteroid things. Plus I’m genderqueer aneurotypical Asian. That’s a two-fer so expand your horizons you smug monoculture white settler colonialists.

    Remember: no people of color, no Robert Heinlein cuz slavery – and SF is a white very colonialist project n’ shit. You got no street cred or your stupid suburbia backyard racist BBQs without me. Go back to Europe and take your binary and toaster ovens with you.

  48. I don’t know James, but based on some of your earlier posts, I get a sneaking suspicion that you are not completely leveling with us about being a genderqueer aneurotypical Asian. You wouldn’t be telling us a whopper, would you, James?

  49. Because of racial, sexual and binary privilege, only straight white males tell whoppers, or are capable of racism and sexism. I could destroy the entire solar system and have my karma be intact while you will probably go to some Christian hell just for waking up in the morning.

  50. Brad, I know that communicating in the written word is not exactly your forte, so I hope this doesn’t come across as a low blow rather than a helpful tip, but you might want to re-read what Kevin actually said regarding your term “CHORF” if what you took away from it was that he doesn’t think you should be hurling insults.

  51. “Brad, I know that communicating in the written word is not exactly your forte,”

    Oh ho ho, you’re so clever. You guys are really working on your Concern Troll acts, aren’t you? Did someone tell you dudes that it’s somehow Super Effective? Protip: it’s not.

  52. Concern trolling? Oh, no, I’m not concern trolling. A concern troll benefits from looking genuinely concerned. What I’m doing is straight-up insulting Mr. Torgersen ability to communicate.

    But see, this is the difference between me calling him a poor written communicator and him calling me a cliquish reactionary, et cetera: my insult is based in the reality of the situation.

    The reality of the situation is that Kevin J. Maroney’s editorial didn’t question the term “CHORF” on the basis of a perceived lack of necessity or on the basis of insults are bad, but only purely on the basis of “words mean things, and at least one of the words you’ve chosen is ill-suited to the task for which you’ve selected it”.

    The fact that Torgersen’s response ignored this to focus on the points he would have preferred Maroney to make suggests that either written communication is not Torgersen’s forte, or else he simply ignores facts that are inconvenient to the narrative that he wants to construct.

    Or perhaps most likely, a combination of the two.

  53. The reality of the situation is that Kevin J. Maroney’s editorial didn’t question the term “CHORF” on the basis of a perceived lack of necessity or on the basis of insults are bad, but only purely on the basis of “words mean things, and at least one of the words you’ve chosen is ill-suited to the task for which you’ve selected it”.

    But I’m a progressive! I’m for progress! It says so right in the name! I can’t be a reactionary!

    The “CHORFs” are defending the status quo, where the award has become captive to a narrow-focused cabal, where only works that meet certain narrow criteria end up being nominated of all those eligible. The Sad Puppies are trying to change the system to bring in new blood and open the award so that the only criteria is that people find the work to be good. Since they are defending the status quo, the “CHORFs” are reactionary. Since they are trying to change the system, the Sad Puppies are revolutionary.

  54. The terms “reactionary” and “revolutionary”, like “progress”, “liberal”, and “conservative” have become (or, possibly, always were) marketing slogans rather than objective descriptions. They are useful only in that they serve to provide a connection with previous ideologies that used the same label, both to self-identify and to identify their opponents.

  55. You’ll notice how many people falsely try and portray anyone against SJW radical feminism as “anti-feminist,” “misogynist” or even “Men’s Rights Activists.” They do that by simply using the word “feminist.” But these people are generally not against traditional equal rights feminism. They are against the crazy gender version that is the current type promoted by every major figure in SFF, gaming and comics from John Scalzi to Brianna Wu. SJW ideologues don’t make any secrets of their goals so I don’t understand the confusion between the two movements. I support equal rights feminism 100%. I reject bigoted and racist intersectional gender feminism 100%. What you have in the Shulamith Firestone quote below is a drumbeat radical feminists said then and still say now, whether they’re talking about Age of Ultron or video-games where Anita Sarkeesian Tweets “Masculinity is a socially constructed and performed gender identity.” Sarkeesian is not an equal rights feminist. She says straight out “we don’t want equality within these oppressive systems.”

    Notice how Firestone below herself makes the distinction between the two feminist movements. What you have below was also the broad basis of what drove Ancillary Justice and why gay and bi-sexual ideological “feminists” in SF like Foz Meadow, Liz Bourke and Alex Dally MacFarlane liked AJ and hyped it so much from day one. This is really simple. Equal rights feminists: no discriminatory laws. Gender feminists: no gender. They are two completely different movements.

    “… the end goal of feminist revolution must be, unlike that of the first feminist movement, not just the elimination of male privilege but of the sex distinction itself; genital differences between human beings would no longer matter culturally. (A reversion to an unobstructed pansexuality – Freud’s ‘polymorphous perversity’ – would probably supercede hetero/homo/bi-sexuality.) The reproduction of the species by one sex for the benefit of both would be replaced by (at least the option of) artificial reproduction: children would be born to both sexes equally, or independently of either, however one chooses to look at it; the dependence of the child on the mother (and vice versa) would give way to a greatly shortened dependence on a a small group of others in general, and any remaining inferiority to adults in physical strength would be compensated for culturally… The tyranny of the biological family would be broken.” – radical lesbian feminist Shulamith Firestone, The Dialetics of Sex, 1970, Pg. 11.

    And notice how Jim Hines’ new poem portrays Brad as saying “I’m tired of those liberals.” That’s coming from a gender feminist who knows better, since he has been hyping this shit for years now. Let me remind you that Hines once had words like “cis,” “cissexist,” “transphobic,” “racism,” “sexism,” “homophobia,” “cis gender,” “able-bodied neurotypical,” “privilege,” “colorblindness,” “genderblindness,” and people were told to “examine” their “privilege” and a word like “diversity” was used in a sense it is interchangeable with “white racism,” and that was all on one single page. Hines damn well knows what he’s been selling isn’t “liberalism” or equal rights feminism and he damn well knows that’s not what we’re on about.

    Here’s what Hines is really promoting the day before, and it ain’t “liberals”:

    “… the authors talk about the portrayal of asexuality, the intersection of different aspects of identity, the treatment of Native Americans in fiction, myths and assumptions about military life, Princess Leia as an assault survivor, the power of fiction to open your eyes to other experiences, as well as representation of disability, religion, race, and so much more.”

  56. “Concern trolling? Oh, no, I’m not concern trolling. A concern troll benefits from looking genuinely concerned. What I’m doing is straight-up insulting Mr. Torgersen ability to communicate.”

    LOL, whatever you say, dude. It’s like you could hold Brad’s jock in that regard.

  57. ““Concern trolling” is just a word Brad and friends like to throw around in order to sound intelligent.”

    Oh, Marston, the adults are talking now. You can sit over there at the little table.

  58. James:

    Some of these non-cis lifestyle people just don’t get it.

    Most people, straight or gay, just don’t give a damn about their private lives, and pandering for attention or recognition just because one is “queer” or “bi” or poly is just as offensive as the straight guy flaunting his trophy wife or the straight 50-something woman flaunting her handsome boy toy, just to be doing it – and it’s offensive to both conventional and alternative lifestyle people.

    Moroney might be openly poly – I know a family like that (2 men, one woman), and have even attended pro-poly events at cons. But the ones I know do it matter-of-factly – crowing about it is seen as a matter of insecurity, or a hubris issue.

  59. CIRCLE THE WAGONS. IT’S THE GULAG OF INTERSECTIONAL OPPRESSION, WOE AND WHITE IGNORANCE.

    1. K Tempest Bradford ‏@tinytempest 16h16 hours ago Are you a POC who has been mistaken, repeatedly, for other POC at a con? Raise ’em up! I have a quick Q for you.

    2. Cassandra Khaw ‏@casskhaw 16h16 hours ago @tinytempest As in, one ethnicity constantly being mistaken for another?

    3. K Tempest Bradford ‏@tinytempest 14h14 hours ago @casskhaw that or being mistaken for someone else who is the same apparent ethnicity you are.

    4. Cassandra Khaw ‏@casskhaw 9h9 hours ago @tinytempest I’ve had people try to hit on me, promising we’ve had interesting conversations in countries I’ve never visited.

    5. K Tempest Bradford ‏@tinytempest 9h9 hours ago @casskhaw ew….

    6. Cassandra Khaw ‏@casskhaw 9h9 hours ago @tinytempest And, uh, people swearing up and down that I look NOTHING like my nationality after I gently correct them.

    7. Alyssa Wong ‏@crashwong 9h9 hours ago @casskhaw @tinytempest I GET THIS TOO.

    8. Cassandra Khaw ‏@casskhaw 9h9 hours ago @crashwong @tinytempest “Oh, um. I’m Chinese.” “REALLY? But your eyes aren’t quite so – ” *makes motions* ” … squinty?” “Yeah!”

    9. Alyssa Wong ‏@crashwong 9h9 hours ago @casskhaw @tinytempest ughhhhhh /lies on the ground >:|

    10. Cassandra Khaw ‏@casskhaw 9h9 hours ago @crashwong @tinytempest “Are you sure you’re not mixed?” “Yes. Pretty damn sure.” “SURE?” “Yes.”

    11. Alyssa Wong ‏@crashwong 9h9 hours ago @casskhaw @tinytempest sheesh, I’m so sorry :/// I get really upset when people act like mistaking my ethnicity for another is a compliment.

    12. K Tempest Bradford ‏@tinytempest 9h9 hours ago @crashwong @casskhaw that’s b/c it’s fucking upsetting.

    13. Cassandra Khaw ‏@casskhaw 9h9 hours ago @crashwong @tinytempest Yeah. Same here. :C

    THAT OUGHTA GENERATE A FEW WHITE BOYCOTTS AND RACIAL REVENGE FANTASIES FOR AWARDS CONSIDERATION

  60. Now they done gone and messed up…

    There’s some rumblings starting up concerning GG developing a slate of Gaming-related novels, short stories, etc., and running it in 2016.

    Favorite Quotes:

    “Seriously every time the sad puppy opponents scream GamerGate I feel more and more like we should submit our own entry slate next time and just blow out their comparatively(to us anyway) small awards.
    I’m sure we could find enough gaming based fiction to submit and just imagine the salt, it would be epic.”

    “If they complain that we’re taking over their awards, we have nothing left to lose by taking over their awards. What are they going to do, accuse us of double-overtaking their awards? Call us racist? Already done.
    #GamerSlate2016!”

    Keep in mind that GG just raised $30,000 for the Honey Badger lawsuit, and thousands of dollars for other pending cases. $40 a head for Supporting Memberships is peanuts in comparison.

    Something something sleeping giant, blah blah terrible resolve.

  61. What I’m doing is straight-up insulting Mr. Torgersen ability to communicate.

    Torgerson‘s. Possessive apostrophe-s, oh genius communicator.

  62. Yes, please, post the screen shots. It would shock some folks just how much abuse SP3 has taken the past two months.

  63. Sad Puppies and GamerGate got pushed into the same corner by the same people. Is it any wonder they’re teaming up to fight their way out of it?

  64. “It’s a valid measure. You may disagree with its appropriateness, but it is a completely valid and legitimate metric.”

    You statement is blatantly and obviously untrue.

    Voting for the merit of the work is based on the merit and is contained within the four corners of the manuscript. Voting to punish someone because he is popular, or white, or part of a slate of voters, or a puppy is precisely voting not based on the merit of the work.

    Since the vote is meant for, and only for, a sign of the merit of the work, to vote based on other criteria is as rank an injustice as one can imagine: it is like a juror in a murder trial convicting the defendant based on something other than the evidence presented, because you want to make a statement or you don’t like the color of his skin.

  65. “There’s some rumblings starting up concerning GG developing a slate of Gaming-related novels, short stories, etc., and running it in 2016. ”

    Oh, yeah. Totally forgot about those World of Warcraft novels. And the movie is supposed to be out Real Soon Now.

  66. http://www.jimchines.com/2015/05/do-you-wanna-take-the-hugos/

    Jim C Hines delivers an almost-amusing Puppy filk. But this remark from him in the comments is much more telling:

    “But the actual WorldCon should, in my opinion, be free of all this puppy nonsense as much as possible, if that makes sense?”

    It certainly does, Mr. Hines. Your side has made it abundantly clear that WorldCon is for WorldCon, not for peon fandom.

  67. @ Alexandra Eirn

    Concern trolling? Oh, no, I’m not concern trolling. A concern troll benefits from looking genuinely concerned. What I’m doing is straight-up insulting Mr. Torgersen ability to communicate….so poorly that your trolling wasn’t immediatly understood.

    @ James May
    It’s like they don’t understand people aren’t perfect. Who hasn’t been mistook for another person in their life?

    Heck, I’ve got a doppleganger out there that looks enough like me to fool my parents, I didn’t know I could call my folks racists because of it.

    But hey, a quick Q for the folks here, when commenting on hugogate how often have you been mistaken for a white supremacist and/or a misogynist and/or a racist, and/or homophobic and/or patriarchal?

  68. Alexandra Erin: “Brad, I know that communicating in the written word is not exactly your forte”

    Uh-huh. Sure it isn’t. That’s why his most recent work is over 200,000 sales rank slots higher on Amazon than your most recent work. Because he can’t communicate in the written word.

  69. Naw, that’s just his white cismale privilege that inherently gives him a sales advantage, don’t you know? 😉

  70. ““But the actual WorldCon should, in my opinion, be free of all this puppy nonsense as much as possible, if that makes sense?”

    I’m sure it would have made perfect sense to Hitler and Stalin. Perhaps even to Henry II. “Will no one rid me of these turbulent puppies?”

    P.S. if anyone wants a taste of Ms Erin’s sublime prose, you can find a free sample here:

    http://www.amazon.com/Lands-Passing-Through-Other-Sundry-ebook/dp/B00OO8Z9NW

    Use caution — I do not recommend reading more than one paragraph, nay, one sentence in a sitting, lest you be rendered unconscious through sheer literary ecstasy, or be stunned by a misplaced blow of the splitting maul with which she hacks at her wooden pseudoprose. One of those.

  71. Hines talks about “Puppy nonsense”? Like SF about SF as opposed to SF based on a hate speech supremacist cult which believes racist white men control the world’s resources and media and created an illusion of heterosexuality and the incest taboo in pre-history to control and oppress noble womenhood?

    “Jeanne ‏@fangirlJeanne 1h1 hour ago Being woman in this world, that constantly tries to destroy, dehumanize, and disempower you, is a hero’s journey. You are made of steel!”

    I mean, nothing screams the SF genre like putting disabled genderqueer people of color ahead of space exploration and nebulae and critiquing Avatar and Star Wars through a contemporary provincial lens of racialized colonial cultural appropriation about cornrows.

    Exactly what would it take to get these people to see how weird and out of place their obsessions are? Would the idea of crusading for professional golfers to dress like pirates be any weirder?

    “Foz Meadows ‏@fozmeadows 1h1 hour ago For serious, my online writers’ group just had to check a spreadsheet of 20-odd people to see if any of us is straight. Answer: one is.”

    “Foz Meadows ‏@fozmeadows 59m59 minutes ago @Bibliogato The diversity is strong with us.”

    And Orwell, but not math.

  72. So, I am going to campaign for some one (@James May I am looking at you) to compile all of the filth that has been written about SP3 and publish it this year so it can be nominated for the related work category next year. If you could get Brad to share his screen shots along with the hate mail Larry has undoubtedly gotten it would be great. The funny thing is some SJW’s would probably vote for it because they would agree with quotes.

  73. “For serious, my online writers’ group just had to check a spreadsheet of 20-odd people”

    This “writers’ group” keeps a spreadsheet of the sexual orientation of members? And she sees nothing wrong with this?

  74. I ran across this yesterday, and nearly died laughing. Nora Jemisin decrying others “martyrdom”.

    If Irony was a mineral, we could refine it, smelt it, and build a crystal fucking city out of it.

  75. In only two Tweets Meadows shows her crusade and that of her stupid fem familiars to be nothing more than a con game of silly posturing to mask their own penchant for intolerance, nasal moral supremacy, narcissism and segregation. Meadows and her pals constantly gripe about diversity and real world reflections of demographics in fiction but in fact have no interest in such things. Meadow’s overturns those real world demographics, calls 95% gay “diversity” and forbids a far more natural and unselective demography to others on pain of being called racists, homophobes and misogynists. Golden Age SF was a random non-ideological demographic – Meadows’ group is not. Intersectionalists like her constantly reverse that truth. It’s always the same: demography becomes ideology if you’re the enemy and ideology becomes a demography if not. There is no sign of racial or sexual collusion among Golden Age SF authors that can come close to matching that of intersectionalists today.

    But here’s what I don’t get about these people and also what they don’t get about themselves: they are so biased by identity they can’t see straight. They can’t make the simplest comparisons without flying off into nonsense. Here’s Eric Flint:

    “You don’t have to be a Jew yourself to be displeased by science fiction’s tacit accommodation to anti-Semitism even in the years after the Holocaust.”

    Okay? So he gets that idea of standing up for others when you yourself are not in the line of fire. But then a few paragraphs down he writes “Listening to you anti-SJW types whine about your persecution just makes me laugh.”

    We get that a lot. I’m whining about my fee-fees, or persecution, or a white man feeling persecuted and all the other bullshit. So only others can stand up for me? Who’s going to do that? Meadows? What the hell is GLAAD and the Anti-Defamation League: for straights and gentiles? Here’s the truth that Flint puts into schizophrenia-land and I never do: the KKK doesn’t persecute me and I feel the same way about them I do this sad cult of feminist hate speech. What I’m concerned about is the hate speech, not that it’s directed at me. If this were a white supremacy dug into SFF like a tick I’d be writing the same stuff. Why the hell does Flint brag about his own neutral bonafides in standing up for others and simply assume I or others never have and that we only act out of self-interest? Where are Flints quotes that speak to that? I’ll tell you where: the same place he claims “you never name names.” Wrong. Flint never reads me naming names – a far different thing.

    This runs into the other stupidity about these people: who among video gamers do Anita Sarkeesian and Brianna Wu think are going to push back the most: a group of Arab women? Logic is never big among any human who worships identity over principle. You won’t be able to see straight, make simple comparisons or use metaphor and analogy.

  76. Josh I have compiled that stuff. The problem is it’s never been edited. It’s like 200 blog posts all run together and bigger than a giant novel. It’s in the form of a book but it’s all first draft. What I really use it for is as an archive for myself. I use it to datamine quotes and arguments for presentation in much shorter bites and that’s how I mean others to use it who stumble across it. It’s just barely organized enough so I run a “find” and come to what I want. Someone on the net said it’s 300,000 words. I don’t know, but it’s big.

  77. “Pieter de Graz says:
    May 18, 2015 at 1:00 pm
    @locketopus
    It’s a far sight better than After The Blast.”

    Marston, did you really think that we can’t tell it’s you by now? At least copy your screennames from a different source than the last one you used. Back to the kiddie table with you!

  78. Yeah. Clampsy, don’t make me break out the Gollum “leave now and never come back meme.”

    When you’re so predictable that 9 words is all it takes (if that) to detect you, you’re stuck in a mighty fine rut my (not so) fine fellow.

  79. What are you jabbering about now, Clamps?

    1) After the Blast was written by Tom Knighton, not Brad Torgersen.
    2) After the Blast also outranks Ms Erin’s latest, though by a “mere” 175,000 slots rather than over 200,000.
    3) After the Blast has an actual story and competent writing.

  80. Clamps has a hate-on for Tom as well as Vox, Shadowdancer and Larry. He takes a shot at them whenever possible, no matter how non-sequitur it is. It’s one of his ‘tells’.

    Even though I’m saying it outright, he still won’t change his pattern. Not for long, anyway. He can’t help it.

  81. “Really? This is what you idiots consider competent writing?”

    By “idiots” I assume you mean “paying customers”, since a lot more of them have shelled out for Knighton that for Erin. Also: I’ve seen your stuff, Clamps. Glass houses. Stones.

    Re: Betsy Wollheim, above. She’s a red diaper baby whose father was best known for “liberating” the Lord of the Rings (i.e., publishing a bootleg edition without the formality of paying Tolkien any money).

  82. The stupid burns deep and long among recent Hugo nominees and it becomes ever more obvious why they were nominated and it’s not talent – it’s for goofy anti-male fuckery about sad warrior women erased by bad menz and “old white dudes”:

    “Foz Meadows @fozmeadows · May 15 mother nature: the ultimate SJW – Whenever sexist MRA douchebros start citing sketchy evopsych logic as a… http://tmblr.co/ZPNIgw1ktkS7p

    From the link: “Whenever sexist MRA douchebros start citing sketchy evopsych logic as a reason why women are fundamentally different to men and cultural/social gender roles are a fixed, binary necessity ‘because it’s just how nature works’ I want to laugh and laugh and laugh, because actual nature is not even remotely in the business of supporting their misogynistic bullshit, and it’s beautiful.

    “And for anyone who thinks, despite the overwhelming historical evidence to the contrary, that the idea of nonbinary gender is something modern feminists and SJWs invented overnight because reasons and which has no other basis in biology, well: the freemartins, maned lionesses, female insects with penises, pregnant male seahorses and mammalian female pseudo-penises of the animal kingdom – not to mention the wide array of biological differences underpinning human concepts of gender – beg to differ. And that’s just for starters.

    “Basically, gender and sexuality are fascinatingly diverse whichever way you look at them, and once you throw in the fact that humans are clearly capable of consciously altering our own cultures, the idea that we’re predeterministically slaved to a single sexist system is rendered even more absurd than ever.”

    I’m not an insect or MRA you farcical supremacist fish-wife. Neither is Mother Nature “misogynistic.” It wasn’t a company of cis broads who threw down the Aztecs nor did Cortes encounter anything different than existed in Europe when it came to male-female relationships. How did Euro dudebros communicate their patriarchal conspiracy across an ocean? How did men throughout all of history maintain this tacit collusion across 5 continents and thousands of years? Was that a “culture”? Paranoia, misandry and overweening arrogance does not a scientist make, although it’s an excellent breeding ground for cultists and Hugo nominees.

  83. The stupid burns deep and long among recent Hugo nominees and it becomes ever more obvious why they were nominated and it’s not talent

    The scary thing is that even out-of-context quotes can’t hide the fact that If You Were a Dinosaur, My Love was nominated for a Hugo. It’s hard to complain about the subjective quality of the writing of the Sad Puppies nominees when a story that is horribly written and not even remotely Sci-Fi got nominated in previous years. We were given an incredibly low bar to clear, and I haven’t seen anyone try put up an argument that we failed to clear it.

  84. Well, if GG gets involved next year, that means the -chans are probably gonna stick their thumbs in the soup, too – and the -chans enjoy things like flooding radio contests to try and send Taylor Swift’s ‘Concert at Your School’ to a School for the Deaf, and other similar pranks.

    So expect Dramatic Presentation nods to the latest Sharknado and whjatever Asylum shoves out the door, and other tasteless shenanigans.

  85. Mr. May, if I were on twitter, I would throw a fit about Ms Bradford and her friends being discriminatory against people with prosopagnosia. Prosopagnosia means that human faces are not distinguishable and is commonly referred to as face blindness. It occurs at a rate of at least one in fifty. It can be from birth or caused by brain injury. Prosopagnosiacs rely on cues such as coloring, hair style, body shape, and dressing habits to recognize people they know. If you or someone else so desires, the twits can be told to educate themselves at http://www.faceblind.org (and if you think it might apply to you or someone you know, there’s a frustrating little facial recognition test there).

  86. I welcome GG and their pranks. If WorldCon wants to pretend hate speech is social justice then I can pretend a Syfy movie is high-art.

    If WorldCon wants to pretend a deep-seated ideological hatred of men is actually my misogyny then I can pretend some bondage pony fic is literature.

    If WorldCon wants to pretend outright racism is politics then N. K. Jemisin can be best fan writer.

    If Tobias Buckell is a writer of color then he deserves to be unmarginalized.

    If WorldCon wants to pretend that stuff isn’t there, then neither are we. I wouldn’t think twice about sending the KKK 10,000 pizzas and them thinking they’re a social justice movement just doesn’t enter into that. I wasn’t born yesterday and if these morons want to use some standards of group defamation to hyper-analyse Vox Day and throw those standards into a ditch when it comes to their own 50 darlings then let standards be thrown into a ditch.

  87. @James May

    I really haven’t followed GamerGate (and have no desire to–it’s simply not my scene), but I don’t see why they shouldn’t be welcome. But I have a problem with “pranks” when it comes to Hugo nominations. Sad Puppies 3 seems to me to be an effort to get good writing (and TV, movies, editing, etc.) into the Hugos. Good writing is subjective, but Mr Torgersen appears to have made an effort to specifically pick things that he really thinks are Hugo-worthy. In my opinion, “prank” nominations would be just as bad as voting “No Award” without actually reading anything. It falls into the “We had to destroy the village in order to save it” category. I’m assuming that most people on the SP3 slate who got Hugo nominations are genuinely happy to be nominated and will be going to WorldCon to accept the award if they win it. I hope the same thing will be true of the SP4 slate.

  88. @Holly

    If I’ve learned anything from all of this, it’s that I don’t want to use my Twitter account. I have one on the (very unlikely) chance that I ever become a writer myself, but it just sounds like an enormous cesspool to me.

  89. Most Puppies (including Vox) agree and are playing it straight, waiting to see what the Anti-Puppies ultimately do. If they somehow manage to No Award everything and/or change the rules to keep their control, then you’ll see some scorched earth. It really depends on them at this point.

  90. “Of course, everything Shadowdancer Duskstar wrote in that thread is a melange of misconceptions, malice, ignorance, and just plain stupidity.”

    LOL, keep repeating that, Marston, maybe someone will believe you. You know what must really get your goat? That Vox looks at you and feels pity. That’s how sad you are. You’re not even worth getting mad at.

    “I won’t go into any details about Yama except to say this: he is not someone to be hated or feared. He is someone to be pitied. That doesn’t excuse his execrable behavior, but it does, to a certain extent, explain it. You could do worse than to pray for the poor bastard.”
    http://voxday.blogspot.com/2015/01/the-end-of-troll-hunt.html

  91. @Dave W.

    I don’t think it’s as simple as Puppies versus Anti-Puppies. Those two groups certainly exist, but I think there are a lot of people (me being one of them) who are fairly new to all of this and are just trying to figure out what’s going on. I started by reading George R R Martin’s blog, then Larry Correia’s, then Brad Torgersen’s, so I have a fairly good idea of what the three of them think. Martin obviously disagrees strongly with Correia and Torgersen on the whole concept of slates, but all three seem to be saying that you should rank the nominees based on merit, and not whether or not they’re on the SP3 (or RP) slate. I’ve done this for the Dramatic Presentations, and now I’m waiting for my voter packet to come online. If I’m able to make it to the convention, I plan on opposing any rules changes. (I think Martin has said the same thing.) I don’t consider myself a Puppy, but I don’t consider myself an Anti-Puppy, either. I know that I’ll be pissed if I sit through an awards ceremony and nobody wins anything. But at this point, I don’t think anyone really knows how all of this is going to fall out, and I don’t think anyone knows what’ll happen next year. Will there be an Anti-Puppy slate? I hope not, but I strongly suspect that there will be. How will the Sad Puppies and the Rabid Puppies react to that? I have no idea, but I’m becoming more and more resigned to the prospect of sitting on the sidelines and watching two groups of people have a massive arms race with one another, and that’s not what I joined WorldCon (Last year was my first year.) for.

  92. @Frank
    ” But at this point, I don’t think anyone really knows how all of this is going to fall out, and I don’t think anyone knows what’ll happen next year.”

    Like I said, both the SP & RP are waiting to see what happens. I agree with you in that we don’t know what the Antis are going to succeed in doing. Just time to wait for now. I can’t speak for anyone but myself, but I damn sure want to see some authors I like win. For example, I think John C Wright is freakin’ brilliant and deserves at least one of those nice rocketships. Another example, I just finished Big Boys Don’t Cry and it was just full of Awesome And Win. Powerful is a word I’d choose. Tom Kratman wrote a great one there. I’ve still got a lot of reading to do, too.

  93. Read the link I posted. It will tell you more than you ever need to know.

  94. “http://s17.postimg.org/oxwzj5esf/Erin.jpg The Paris Hilton of WisCon and part-time gender-juggler at Medieval World (belch)”

    “who is that person?”

    That is, I believe, the aforementioned Alexandra Erin.

  95. I believe there is a disconnect in the two sides, they are speaking past each other because they come from different backgrounds. The Sad Puppies are generally down to earth people who say what they mean and mean what they say, and then also expect the people they are dealing with to do the same. The CHORFs are mostly people who are willing to lie about whatever topic at hand in order to advance themselves/their cause du jour, and therefore also expect everyone they deal with to do the same. It perplexes them and is aggravating to us.

  96. I’m not sure there was any reason to post a pic of Alexandra Erin. There is more than enough foolishness in her words that we hardly need to resort to mocking her appearance. That sort of thing should be beneath us.

  97. No point in responding to anything Clamps says. He’ll be deleted in a few hours. And then back tomorrow with another transparent pseudonym.

  98. I keep telling you guys not to acknowledge the troll. That’s what trolls care about, especially this particularly damaged specimen.

  99. Ignoring him doesn’t seem to help. He’d still come back again, and again, and again . . .

  100. @s1al – my evidence thread shows that he trailed me to my online gaming clan forums during the time I wasn’t blogging much. Ignoring him doesn’t work. He follows the people he hates around. He’s particularly invested in trying to discredit what evidence I’ve got because it easily exposes him to anyone who decides to google his usernames.

  101. @Shadowdancer: Yeah, for a few specific people he makes an exception, but around most places ignoring him actually does work. I’ve seen him on pretty much every blog of any significance related to the Hugos, but he doesn’t stay unless people talk to/at him.

  102. I wasn’t simply mocking someone’s appearance. I was reminding everyone of the mental derangement and delusion that is not only core to this bizarre movement but actively respected and looked up to. If someone wants to defend these weird gender theories then stare them in the face and defend them right to the hilt. It’s fine to feel sorry for people but if they are actively promoting an ideology of racial incitement together with dehumanizing demonization theories of all men on Earth then my compassion dries up real goddam fast. Let’s not forget these people daily assert all men benefit from some daffy feminist definition of oppressive sexism, privilege and rape culture. That’s hate speech. Let me remind you of N. K. Jemisin’s Guest of Honor speech at WisCon; a remarkable speech to say the least. If Brianna Wu – who is a man – wants to get on Twitter and whine about “mansplaining,” I see no reason to be forced to share in that delusion or any other madhattery that is directly contributing to this entire farce. These people went nuts at an ad with a woman in a bikini for crying out loud. WisCon has a racially segregated room to protect non-white feminists from the white ones. The entire movement is one giant padded cell. If they want help, I’ll give it. But if they want to smugly lecture me about the nature of reality they’ll get a dose of reality themselves. I am not on this Earth to support mad people who attack my very existence and that of 3.5 billion other people.

  103. I’ve generally considered myself a Progressive (more along the lines of TR), I’ve voted for both Rep. and Dem. over the years and always end up on the “liberal” side of the graph on those questionaire sites that graph out political leanings. I believe Brad has also been described as “liberal”. SP isn’t about liberal or conservative. But, it seems one side does tend to lean heavily to one side of the political spectrum and insists on coloring everything they touch with a particular shade of crayon; while the other side is in reality diverse of political mind and background, and wanting what they say they want (well written stories), rather than a checklist to mark off before voting. I know which table I want to sit at.

  104. The Hugo Voter’s packet is now online and available for download at the Sasquan site. You will need your Sasquan member number and Sasquan PIN to get it.

  105. Erin’s first comment in this thread was to openly insult Brad, so I don’t feel the slightest bit bad about returning the favor to him. If he didn’t want to fight, he shouldn’t have thrown the first punch.

    As for Marston/Clamps/Yama, he uses so many screennames, exposing and mocking him is a public service.

  106. Firestone appears to completely ignore biology (in a scientific context, not a social one). It’s hard for me to give any weight at all to someone’s ideas when they are so illiterate in observational day-to-day life.

  107. I really haven’t followed GamerGate (and have no desire to–it’s simply not my scene), but I don’t see why they shouldn’t be welcome. But I have a problem with “pranks” when it comes to Hugo nominations.

    There’s tasteless shenanigan pranks, and then there are ‘pranks’ like bomb threats to bars, SWATing, and getting multiple media outlets to publish libel. At least some within the SJW / CHORF alliance are perfectly comfortable with using the latter ‘pranks’ to advance their cause.

  108. Only 300K? That’s barely a novel these days. In another decade it’ll only be a novella if things keep going like they are.

  109. “@Dave W – Thanks; it IS a public service at this point.” No problem. Pest Control is a dirty job, but must be done. :-p

  110. http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/DARVO

    Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender. A behavior of perpetrators of wrongdoing, when accused of attacking their victim, reversing the roles of victim and offender.

    Or Clamps’ only attempt at an argument beyond “no, you’re wrong.”

  111. “http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/DARVO
    Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender. A behavior of perpetrators of wrongdoing, when accused of attacking their victim, reversing the roles of victim and offender.
    Or Clamps’ only attempt at an argument beyond “no, you’re wrong.””

    Nice, thanks Nathan. And of course he proves it seconds later. 😀

  112. Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender. A behavior of perpetrators of wrongdoing, when accused of attacking their victim, reversing the roles of victim and offender.

    To those sitting on the fence, note which one is here, where they are clearly not wanted, despite repeated requests to leave and even outright blocks, and ask yourself, is this the behavior of one who is being stalked or one that is stalking? If you were the victim of harassment, would you create multiple pseudonyms to get onto the harasser’s website even after being kicked out?

  113. For those who are unaware as to Yamamanama’s six year long stalking, this is my reason for maintaining a forum full of screenshotted evidence. Take note of the bolded parts.

    Purpose of the sticky:
    1) To document the ongoing stalking and harassment of yamamanama / clamps of myself all over the Internet, regardless of what the site or forum is about
    2) That he will also target and stalk my friends and people who have previously participated on this blog’s discussions and the discussions on Jordan179’s blog
    3) That he actively goes to non-Leftist blogs with the intent to harass and troll
    4) That he will circumvent bans with an ever growing list of pseudonyms, aliases and sock puppet names
    5) That, after he is banned, he will go to the blogs and forums of other participants who haven’t banned him and use their venues to respond to comments on the site he has been banned from from there
    6) To provide other victims of his harassment a reference on how he is identified despite the gamut of different usernames, such as his written speech patterns, his known usernames and variants, and other identifying markers such as obsessions and people he hates that he will randomly bring up regardless of topic at hand. I don’t rely on IP addresses because there are dynamic IP addresses, but if you have one that traces back to Marshfield, Massachusetts, it’s a pretty good bet that it is him.
    7) That he will harass authors, artists and people who he feels is garnering ‘more attention’ than he is in some form or way, regardless of what they are doing, instead of improving his work or skills
    8)To let other victims know that YOU ARE NOT ALONE.

  114. I know I shouldn’t engage this loser, but when he keeps attacking a woman who has just lost her son? That’s behavior that doesn’t merely cross the line, that starts on the other side of the line.

  115. My friend is the victim of Vox Day’s harassment. Asshole.

    I don’t know if this counts as Reverse Victim and Offender, but it’s up there: because Vox Day ‘harassed’ his friend in the past, it’s acceptable for him to harass Shadowdancer continuously as long as he wants

    Also, if you were the one being harassed, would you throw in irrelevant even if true artistic insults at your harasser (or ‘harasser’)?

    Read and judge for yourselves.

  116. My apologies. I had dinner, then a meeting, then used the base gym, and then had a shower. Came back to an alert that there was a Clamps outbreak. The Clamps outbreak has been neutralized, for now.

  117. Oh, and haven’t you all heard? Vox Day is their excuse to be mentally ill without consequences — every good Social Justice Bully knows that. Text harassment? Fake bomb threats? No problem! Just yell “Vox Day!” and it’s all good.

  118. Don’t let him get you down. For whatever reason some people only take pleasure in disrupting other lives. I’d say he’s jealous that you have a rewarding life, but I don’t know him well enough to say that. I just find him annoying

  119. @kamas – Despite my losses and grief, I’m still here. I have loved ones, friends, other children still alive, and a wonderful husband. I’ve plenty to live for, plenty of joy, and plans.

    Life is too short to spend on hatred.

  120. You know what’s cool? Cowboy Bebop. I just started watching it this week. A lot of anime leaves me cold, but this is really good.

  121. Bebop’s a great show. One of the few that is as good or better in English.

    Samurai Champloo is similar, but in a pseudohistorical samurai setting.

  122. And it ties into the discussion that crops up here once in a while about the Japanese taking cultural influences and reinterpreting them. I mean, a space Western with a jazz soundtrack? Took me totally off guard.

  123. Christopher,

    Want a cool one-shot? Find a copy of Redline. It’s like Wacky Races on Acid. But with a great soundtrack and minimal CGI. (Note: Contains minor violence and minor toplessness.)

  124. Me on voting No Award: “It’s a valid measure. You may disagree with its appropriateness, but it is a completely valid and legitimate metric.”

    John C Wright: “You statement is blatantly and obviously untrue.”

    Apologies, but you are incorrect. Nowhere in the rules of the Hugo Awards are the worthiness criteria limited to the text itself, but to the choice and judgment of the individual voter.

    A voter is free to rank a nominee below No Award for any reason, not just limited to the text/work alone.

    Again, it may not be appropriate *to you*, but it is completely legitimate and valid.

  125. Orgell: I’ll try and remember that.

    It’s funny, but one of the earliest anime I ever saw back when I was a young’un was Saber Rider and the Star Sheriffs which was also a space Western but somewhat less . . . sophisticated.

  126. There were two versions of Saber Rider; there was a Japanese one, and one made with the US audience in mind. They’re kind of different.

    One of the better non-anime animated space westerns I’ve seen is The Adventures of the Galaxy Rangers. I really liked that series, but only watched it while I lived in Germany.

  127. I’ve been pretty cold about most of the shows lately. Girls und Panzer was fun, as they essentially turned World of Tanks into a sports anime, but little else comes to mind lately. I find I’m more likely to drop a series because of worldbuilding issues (Attack on Titan and Sword Art Online, especially).

  128. Christopher M. Chupik Bebop is a very American Anime. (Not condemning it. It’s one of my favorites). You may want to try Trigun or one of the Full Metal Alchemist series next.

  129. Yeah, that was pretty standard back then, wasn’t it?

    I guess I could ask how he’s riding his cyberhorse in space, jumping off asteroids, but that’s probably an exercise in futility.

  130. A voter is free to rank a nominee below No Award for any reason, not just limited to the text/work alone.

    Mr. Wrights point remains: if voters feel free to judge the award on anything other than the merits of the work itself, the Hugo award cannot be representative of the best Science Fiction and Fantasy works. It may not be against the rules, but the results of the vote only have legitimacy if the voters are judging based on the merits of the work and not motivated by bias for or against the author.

    It may be well within the rules and therefor legitimate for a cookbook to be nominated and win the award for best novel. That doesn’t make it the best sci-fi and fantasy novel for the previous year; it doesn’t even make it a sci-fi and fantasy work. If enough voters are going into the awards with anything in mind other than to choose the best work to award to change the results, the award has no meaning, and we may as well nominate cookbooks.

  131. “If enough voters are going into the awards with anything in mind other than to choose the best work to award to change the results, the award has no meaning, and we may as well nominate cookbooks.”

    Given the quality of cookbooks, such as Sean Brock’s “Heritage”, and the decay in quality shown by the Hugo nominees of the recent past, I would not be opposed to that.

  132. And it ties into the discussion that crops up here once in a while about the Japanese taking cultural influences and reinterpreting them. I mean, a space Western with a jazz soundtrack? Took me totally off guard.

    I could argue that some of the more recent anime has been amongst the best sci-fi produced in recent years. Certainly it’s hard to talk about present Cyberpunk without including Ghost in the Shell (specifically, the more recent Stand Alone Complex), and the series definitely combines style and entertainment with a lot of the big idea theorizing about the impact of technological development.

    I tend to prefer the less serious series, so my other recommendations are more to be taken with a grain of salt.

  133. Christopher,

    Here’s the movie dubbed, and in 720p; it really calls out for the 1080p version if you can, um, ‘acquire’ it:

  134. The anime supply is limited at my local library, but I keep my eyes open.

  135. Cowboy Bebop is one of my favorite animes of all time. The music wasn’t just jazz, they played metal, rock, some blues. Yoko Kanno and her band made a masterpiece. There are 3 or 4 soundtracks of original music available from CB. The music really made the show.

  136. If enough voters are going into the awards with anything in mind other than to choose the best work to award to change the results, the award has no meaning, and we may as well nominate cookbooks.

    Let me try to rewrite this sentence in a way that makes sense: if you have so many voters voting for something other than the best sci-fi that the award doesn’t go to the best sci-fi, then the award is no longer for the best sci-fi. If you have so many voters voting for the best cookbook in the best sci-fi novel award that the award goes to the best cookbook, then the award isn’t for the best sci-fi novel, and it may as well be for the best cookbook.

    Given the quality of cookbooks, such as Sean Brock’s “Heritage”, and the decay in quality shown by the Hugo nominees of the recent past, I would not be opposed to that.

    If it’s legitimate for voters to not even consider Vox Day because he’s Vox Day, it’s legitimate for voters to not consider Progressive works, or works that aren’t cookbooks. While I want to see the Hugos mean something, and I want all works to be considered, if the award ceases to have meaning for people, then people will start playing these sorts of games.

  137. Can’t watch it all now, but damn, really cool animation.

    I saw this a while back (NSFW):

    Sadly, the moral applies to lots of fandoms, I’m afraid.

  138. Gamergater here, thought I could provide a bit of background on our role (or lack thereof) in this.. I’m a big science fiction reader as well as a agmer, so I knew more about it than most of my felows, but the first time most of us ever heard of the Sad Puppies was when we noticed that a bunch of really nasty people were inexplicably accusing us of ruining something called the “Hugo Awards,” At which point we noticed that many of the Sad Puppies concerns regarding science fiction mirrored our own in video games, that you had largely the same enemies, and that you were being slandered and vilified in much the same terms we were. So a lot of us were sympathetic, naturally.

    Basically, SJW’s relentless dishonesty and abuse got so obnoxious that the terrifying unholy alliance they claimed was attacking them escaped from their propaganda and got loose in the real world 😀

  139. Civilis

    What you and Wright are talking about is Hugo voting customs, not what is allowed or forbidden.

    If you feel I’m incorrect, please let me know where this is stated in terms of the WSFS Constitution or the Hugo rules.

    Should you wish to vote against a work because it is progressive, or amoral, or espouses a worldview you dislike, that is your choice as a Hugo voter.

    Similarly, for voters to rank works that were on a slate below No Award is perfectly legal and valid. It may be inappropriate or go against some “custom”, but that’s all.

  140. Feminists are more upset about a fictional rape scene than they are about the atmosphere they created which enabled rape hoaxes at the U of Virginia and Columbia U fueled by fake rape statistics and bullshit “rape culture” and “#JustListen.”

    Swimming in a world of unreality with their usual idiotic trigger warning, the ditzy Jill Pantozzi at the feminist shithole The Mary Sue writes “After the episode ended, I was gutted. I felt sick to my stomach. And then I was angry.”

    As we have predicted all along, sooner or later GRR Martin will be made to understand who and what put the “man” in the “straight white man” and that he is all of those. First they came for Larry Correia, dude. hahahahaha. The more you give this cult the more encouraged they get. No one on their side ever says “no” to them, no matter how nuts they act. How long before they have “feminist jazz hands” at the Nebulas and WorldCon?

    More and more you’re going to see fiction self-censoring itself out of fear of being swarmed by this feminist cult which views the world through the same sort of eyes as a religious inquisition. They’re all over Mad Max and Age of Ultron with microscopes, giving either approving or disapproving nods while holding their cult’s stamp of approval.

    “Really think about that before shouting ‘creative freedom’ in our direction, please” Pantozzi adds elsewhere in her piece. You damn well better believe men will do exactly that. Men in SFF who’ve already bent the knee and put their nuts in a Horcrux and hidden them away need not worry… not for awhile at least. No probs having one’s fingers flayed or head chopped off – just don’t violate the Feminist Code Authority.

    The stupidest irony above all is it’s this cult which pretends to be the legitimate descendants of the of the movement which introduced increased sex and violence into film and books in the ’60s but which in fact mimics the Comics Code Authority. Why are we surprised at the schizophrenia where they nominate stories for awards with underage sex and cry at Game of Thrones?

    Something tells me there’s going to suddenly be an increased number of “Men’s Rights Activists” and “wingnuts” scurrying around to prove they’re not. You can confess or be damned, because feminists aren’t big on tolerance. Just as The Mary Sue will partially review-censor Game of Thrones, Lightspeed and TorDotCom allow the review-censoring of whites and men for the crime of being whites and men.

  141. Nathan (and Christopher) – agreed on Samurai Champloo. The spouse is on I don’t know how many times she’s watched it (three hours a night, every night – and the full series on a day off… No, she’s not mildly obsessive…)

    I still bounce out of the office to watch the Three Peasant Rappers – cracks me up every single time. The baseball game, too.

    Thx for reminding me of CB – I’ve bookmarked it to watch again after I’ve finished up the Eureka 7 I’m going through right now.

    Oh, and Nathan – what is your problem with the world-building on SAO? I would agree it is pretty shallow, but does hold together – what’s your take?

    Another recommended anime (if you can take something rather depressing at many points) – NHK.

  142. @kamas716 and Dave W.

    I’m new to the convention scene. I went to AggieCon two years ago and just got back from the World Horror Convention this year. I was planning on going to LonCon last year, but had to cancel for health reasons (long, boring story). I vaguely recall seeing a few panels on things like increasing the LGBT presence in horror and building strong female heroines, and I suppose there may be a lot of straight white man bashing at those, but I didn’t go to any of them, so I really don’t know. I certainly didn’t sense any hostility toward anyone in the hallways or at any of the book signings I was at. Is this mainly a WorldCon thing? The media explosion over Sad Puppies 3 and Rabid Puppies was the first I’d heard of any of it. I’m on the fence about whether or not to go to Sasquan this year (again, health reasons), and would prefer not to go if everyone is just going to be screaming at each other. On the other hand, if this is something that’s mostly confined to blogs and Twitter, with most people having a live-and-let-live attitude, then it sounds like it’ll be a fun trip.

  143. Cowboy Bebop is amazing. My favorite though has to be Full Metal Alchemist. (specifically FMA: Brotherhood, as there are in fact two versions of the show, with radically different plots after a certain point)

    Heck, I’d put FMA up there with anything else that has won a Hugo in the last decade or two, and I do not mean that as an insult to anything, it is that good.

  144. Snowcrash, the problem is, if you are right suddenly the argument that the Hugos represent the best of SFF goes right out the window.

    There are plenty of people on ‘your’ side of the fence that will argue until they are blue in the fact that you are flat out wrong, that they’ve only ever been decided by merit.

    So the question becomes then, are they really the most prestigious award or not? If they are (and they remain a voted award) everyone should be welcome and the merit of the work should be the only measuring stick.

    If they are not, if they are actually just the World Con crowd’s thing, then the voting can be based on whatever criteria they want, BUT you can’t have both at the same time.

    Else what will you do next year when Vox gets his fans to nominate Ancillary Sequel or whatever favorite of the traditional voter seems to be rising to the top?

    Do you really think he wouldn’t do just that to prove his point?

  145. @Jared: IIRC, the creator of the FMA manga asked the animation studio to make some changes to the first anime, since her manga series was still running and she had some surprises in store for it. Then when she finished the manga, FMAB was made based on the manga series.

  146. Just so – when the first anime was produced they were maybe halfway through the manga.

    The alternate plot and story is still good, but it is radically different, and of the two I think Brotherhood is the superior.

  147. “Retweeted by Aliette de Bodard Cheryl Morgan ‏@CherylMorgan Mar 6 That @clarkesworld reader poll top five? Four women of color, one white man. So proud.”

    “rachel r. ‏@bloodredrache 3h #SoWeary of my need to reevaluate the SFF authors I handsell. But there are plenty of POC/women authors I can sell over Rothfuss & Gaiman.”

    “Farah Mendlesohn ‏@effjayem Mar 5 Just read Afrofuturism by Ytasha L Womack. Not sure it’s a good book but it is an important one. On my #HugoList it goes.”

    “Renay ‏@renay May 16 @heatherosejones I’ll take badly written women over no women these days. Even if they’re badly written, I can love them and give them value.”

    “Retweeted by A. Dally MacFarlane ☣ JY Yang ‏@MizHalle Mar 5 (Love the fact that 4/5 of the top results in that CW poll are by non-white authors– who says diversity doesn’t sell in SF/F!)”

    “Abigail Nussbaum ‏@NussbaumAbigail Mar 9 @shaunduke @niallharrison @jdiddyesquire I need a manifesto for it to be clear that I want women, PoCs and progressive themes on the ballot?”

    Who do you think these people were voting for even before Sad Puppies? Literature?

  148. @Jared

    Again,neither of those are particularly relevant to my point, which is quite simply that voting No Award over works can be done for almost any reason, and doesn’t have to be limited to the work itself.

    I agree completely that it may not be appropriate, but it is completely within bounds. There is nothing forbidding it, or rendering that beyond the pale.

    Re: Day – he will do what he does, as always. I don’t really plan my day by asking WWVDD?

    An aside, no love for Robotech in this *entire* thread? C’mon, it may be cobbled together, but in many parts of the world, that’s the earliest English animated work with serious elements

  149. I haven’t been to a con in decades, and that was a very small one. From what I hear, most cons are fun times. Personally, I love to attend Libertycon because they seem like my kind of folks. And I would stay away from Wiscon simply because they are really pushing racial and sexual segregation.

  150. …I WOULD love to attend Libertycon…

    really need an edit button. The con I attended was much smaller and located in ND, not TN.

  151. Pingback: Unfisk / refisk / fisk² | Spacefaring, Extradimensional Happy Kittens

  152. Ahhh that makes sense. BraveStarr then? What about Silverhawks (the pilot had a cowboy hat!)

  153. *snaps fingers* That’s the name of the cartoon! (BraveStarr), thank you! I enjoyed that show, but didn’t get to see much of it, alas. Ditto Silverhawks.

    The episode of BraveStarr I remember the best was about fallen heroes. I thought that was particularly well done.

  154. The sad thing is, for many of them at least I don’t think they think they’re lying. They just trust the narrative they’ve been given, and are too narcissistic to think of entertaining thoughts from people they wouldn’t normally read. I think narcissism seems to be on the rise in some groups (that frankly, I think, have always been susceptible, i.e. students) since people who are concocting these threat narratives are indulging those who are prone to it. I’m glad a backlash seems to be in progress with this and GamerGate. 🙂

  155. A backlash was inevitable. We’re talking about people who have completely different standards for different races and sexes. An accidental racial or sexual demographic becomes racism and sexism. Persistent insulting comments about those racial and sexual demographics become nothing, or “social justice.” People aren’t going to abide that sort of thing, no matter how many excuses SJWs make when they get called out. It’s like having a speed limit for one group and none for the other. Explain away about privilege and punching up theory. We’re not having it. It’s obvious where the racist and sexist comments are coming from and 10 white guys accidentally in one place isn’t a racist and sexist quote, no matter how many crazy feminists say so.

    Gamergate was able to hit ’em where it hurt: in the pocket book. That’s what got the ethics policies put in place and two of the worst “journalists” “reassigned.”

    There’s nothing like that in SFF. The worst of them all have full-time jobs or the spouse is working and the webzines often beg for money on the internet and a few authors have started Patreon accounts. There’s no way to put economic pressure on them. They have nothing to lose, so they can light up potential customers as racists all day to feed their weird obsession white men are out to get them, keep them out of books and movies, shoot them, drag them behind trucks and punch them in imaginary restaurants. It’s interesting how J. K. Rowling is starting to go that way. She wouldn’t have dared years ago – it would’ve been the end of her career before it started.

  156. Again,neither of those are particularly relevant to my point, which is quite simply that voting No Award over works can be done for almost any reason, and doesn’t have to be limited to the work itself.

    We’re talking about the difference between what is legally permitted under the rules and what is true to the spirit of the award. You’re right, there’s nothing in the rules against voting No Award because you don’t like the authors sex, or race, or politics, or because they didn’t write a cookbook. It’s also the case that if one or two people do so it won’t really affect the award too much; it’s only if it’s significant numbers enough to affect the outcome of the award (which is, however, a surprisingly low number). I don’t think anyone is challenging you on the rules, but on the more fundamental question of what the Hugo Awards are supposed to award.

    An aside, no love for Robotech in this *entire* thread? C’mon, it may be cobbled together, but in many parts of the world, that’s the earliest English animated work with serious elements

    I’m enough of an anime fan to realize in hindsight how much damage the horrible licensing contract that created Robotech did, and that will forever color my childhood awe at a ‘kids’ show that took its audience seriously. There are some great series that will never be available in English specifically because of that abomination (the contract, not Robotech). Macross Plus, which is worthy in and of itself, made it through the licensing gamut alone (it’s also another great audio performance by Yoko Kanno. Now that I think of it, she also did work on Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex.)

  157. On an anime-related note, I’m wondering when an anime, manga, or light novel will win a Hugo award. The only nomination I can find is for Spirited Away back in 2003, which won an Oscar. For the current awards, Edge of Tomorrow is adapted from a light novel, but it’s a big-budget live action Hollywood movie, so I don’t know if that counts beyond indicating that the original works probably have enough quality to be nominated. I suppose there may be some questions about publication date when comparing the original works and the English translations; I don’t think anything is going to get through the nomination process without a well done English translation, but those are happening quickly enough these days that there shouldn’t be too much of a lag. Spirited Away had the advantage that its American release was handled by Disney.

    My guess would be the most likely to make it through the nomination process would be one of the more serious, harder sci-fi with a definite spin towards those series that tend to look at ideas instead of those that just have sci-fi as a setting. Episodes from a series like Ghost in the Shell, Steins;Gate or Psycho-Pass I think would qualify for Short Form Dramatic Presentation (I haven’t seen the latter two myself; merely going by reputation), or a movie like The Girl Who Lept Through Time or Summer Wars for Long Form Dramatic Presentation. Much as I liked and enjoyed the Lego Movie, I would consider these as much more award-worthy sci-fi.

    Much as I think Studio Ghibli deserves its Oscar award for Spirited Away (and its three other nominations), and I think they deserve more than the one Hugo award nomination they received (the only anime Hugo nomination I can find), I don’t think they’re the best sci-fi production studio out there.

  158. @RO,

    I can see killer immersive MMO happening once. Not four times without government intervention or widespread pressure destroying the genre. (Yes, not all of them were as killer as the first one, but all had nefarious purposes.) I can’t scrape up enough suspension of disbelief to pay the BS tax required to swallow that. Unfortunately, that’s typical of many of the shows created from light novels.

  159. I know this is boring for some of you, but for those of you genuinely interested in the nuttiness behind all this feminist stuff in SFF, read this Fall 2014 PDF titled “Androgyny and the Uncanny in Ursula Le Guin’s The Left Hand of Darkness and Ann Leckie’s Ancillary Justice”

    Take note of two Tor columns in the footnotes by Alex (binary girl) MacFarlane.

    lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/4939947/file/4939972.pdf

    For anyone who thinks Ancillary Justice had an unprecedented awards sweep because it was just that good, think again. All the usual suspects were buzzing like bees about this book the instant it came out, and for a very specific reason; they badly wanted it promoted. This gender feminist bullshit and that book are the darlings of the flak catching radical chic in SFF, and those ladies don’t like men. Throw in their stupid word “diversity – which in real terms means anyone not a straight white male, even if it’s an entire anthology – and there’s your cult.

    Their obsessive and daily remarks about men and whites are 100% negative and they are the most influential figures in the core SFF community. Let Eric Flint wave it away all he wants, he’s embarrassing himself jumping through hoops to deny his eyes. You can’t fisk and annotate a thousand quotes; it’s impossible. These people say what they mean and they mean what they say. You can’t wave away the exile of Jonathan Ross or Malzberg and Reznick or Jean Rabe leaving that job in the SFWA’s magazine. You can’t wave away the whining about Age of Ultron and Game of Thrones.

    Look at Maroney’s Twitter feed. “Nuff said.

  160. I think it’s actually instructive to view the nominees and winners of the past Hugos for Dramatic Presentation. The long form awards certainly seem to be a lot more populist than the literary awards. While probably not works I would have nominated, the list appears to be a reasonable selection of popular movies that can be qualified as Science Fiction or Fantasy.

    The short form awards are interesting in that of the awards that have been given out since 2006, 6 of the 9 winners and 27 of the 48 nominees have been Dr. Who or Dr. Who related. The 2015 nominees are the first since 2006 where there has not been at least 2 Dr. Who episodes nominated. One must ask whether Dr. Who is such a good series as to completely dominate the awards.

  161. Civilis:

    I don’t think anyone is challenging you on the rules, but on the more fundamental question of what the Hugo Awards are supposed to award.

    I would disagree with the “not challenging me on the rules part”, given the responses I’ve received.

    On the topic of the rules of the Hugo vs the spirit and meaning of it….I think I’ve said my piece thus far. Voting slates strike me as a potentially more egregious breach of Hugo custom, but as John Wright says, they were a Gentlemen’s Agreement/ Honour System sort of a thing. Custom, not rules.

    A violation of custom requires a response based on custom, and one that needs to be within the rules as well. I would venture to speculate that No Award on block voting may actually be well within the spirit of the Hugo’s, assuming my understanding of what happened when the CoS tried to block vote one of Hubbard’s books onto the ballot. It may not, but perhaps someone with a better grasp of what happened can provide the details.

    On Robotech – that was more Harmony Gold, I still have a very sacred place in my heart for it, as it was my first exposure to what could be done with animation.

    Yoko Kanno is a living goddess, and while I agree that her work on GitS:SAC set the standard for anime music, my personal favourite of hers was the often unloved child of the Gundam franchise, Turn-A Gundam – probably the only Gundam series to have actual emotional depth.

    For Hugo awards, there was an interesting point made by Kevin Standlee somewhere, that in a recent Japanese Worldcon, there were not significantly higher numbers of Japanese works on the ballot. He postulated that that may have been due to the perception that the Hugo is a primarily English-speaking award.

  162. Well, not only was the anime discussion fun, it was a nice tactic for dealing with You-Know-Who. Not merely ignoring him, but actively ignoring him. 🙂

  163. I would disagree with the “not challenging me on the rules part”, given the responses I’ve received.

    There’s a difference between “you can’t do this in a contest because it’s against the rules” and “you shouldn’t do this in a contest even though it’s allowable under the rules because of the long term consequences.”

    A violation of custom requires a response based on custom, and one that needs to be within the rules as well. I would venture to speculate that No Award on block voting may actually be well within the spirit of the Hugo’s, assuming my understanding of what happened when the CoS tried to block vote one of Hubbard’s books onto the ballot.

    Which brings us back to the spirit of the Hugos. I think the fundamental question, if you accept that the spirit of the Hugos is to recognize the best sci-fi and fantasy works, is whether the works on the slate were there because the nominators though they were the best. If the people that voted on Brad’s nomination recommendation did so because they thought the works were the best and are approaching the final voting with the spirit that they will vote for a non-slate winner if it is better than a slate work, then it’s within the spirit of the Hugo. That call is a judgement call, and I see how it can go either way. You can’t read the minds of the voters. If a slate work can’t be the best sci-fi, I can paradoxically remove a work from contention by publishing a slate with it on it.

    For Hugo awards, there was an interesting point made by Kevin Standlee somewhere, that in a recent Japanese Worldcon, there were not significantly higher numbers of Japanese works on the ballot. He postulated that that may have been due to the perception that the Hugo is a primarily English-speaking award.

    That was why I said that I thought for a Japanese (or other foreign) original work to be in contention for a Hugo nomination, it had to have a near-contemporary English translation and release. I don’t know the precise timing involved, but I suspect that the Hugos couldn’t ignore Spirited Away due to it’s Oscar nomination.

  164. @ Snowcrash and Civilis:IIRC, it would have to be a work whose date of English publication falls in the valid year. (ergo, say, a translated Japanese light novel published in English this year would be eligibile for the 2016 Hugo nomination/win.) I might be wrong; please feel free to correct me on this.

    So, for example (assuming I got it right), Sword Art Online: Fairy Dance 1 the novel would be valid for the 2016 Hugo noms as it was released this year April. (It would also fall, oddly enough, under sci-fi, not fantasy.)

    The main obstacle to such making it to the Hugo nominations is how different their narration and dialogue flow goes. I’m used to it; but it’s probably a bit stilted-seeming or a touch awkward seeming to folks who haven’t read them before. That’s just my two cents; I take great pleasure in reading translated light novels and hope someone else will pick up Slayers and redo them.

  165. The main obstacle to such making it to the Hugo nominations is how different their narration and dialogue flow goes. I’m used to it; but it’s probably a bit stilted-seeming or a touch awkward seeming to folks who haven’t read them before. That’s just my two cents; I take great pleasure in reading translated light novels and hope someone else will pick up Slayers and redo them.

    I’ve only had the pleasure of reading one or two officially translated Light Novels. They didn’t strike me as particularly great; it was more a matter of picking them because I liked a series they were connected with.

    Thanks for the feedback on when the publication would be valid.

  166. Civilis

    That call is a judgement call, and I see how it can go either way. You can’t read the minds of the voters.

    I agree, and would go on to say that the Hugo place a high premium on a voters judgement.

    The Hugo is a genre award that doesn’t even bother to define it’s genre – look at some of the nominees – Scalzi’s Hate Mail book from way back when, Swirsky’s short story last year, Williamson’s collection this year. If you think it’s SF – nominate it. If it get’s on and you don’t think it’s SF – leave it off the ballot, or below No Award.

    In much the same way as you mention above, voting No Award is also a judgement call. Do you think this work is worthy? Rank appropriately. Do you think the work is not worthy? Rank appropriately as well, by either leaving it off your ballot, or placing it below No Award. How do you judge worthiness? It’s left *entirely* up to the individual.

    Spirited Away’s nomination – I suspect that both of those (Hugo and Oscar noms) were effects, rather than one caused by the other. The actual cause would probably have been the Disney marketing juggernaut.

    But hey, that it was a fantastic piece of work didn’t hurt either.

  167. ” Nowhere in the rules of the Hugo Awards are the worthiness criteria limited to the text itself, but to the choice and judgment of the individual voter. ”

    Another untruth. You did not say “voting No Award based on skin color is legal.” That point is not in dispute. You said “voting No Award based on skin color is valid” by which you mean morally valid. Obviously it is not. It is the very definition of unfairness. In effect, you are arguing that unfairness is fair.

    Sir, I am skilled in rhetoric and dialectic and trained in law. Please do not attempt such a simple rhetorical trick as the logical fallacy of ambiguity on me. At least try to make a good showing.

  168. Happy Kittens are fisking the fisking now. Also, they’re reviewing the SP3 Hugo nominees and shock, they hate them. Every single one. What are the chances?

    Me, that Michael Flynn story he just dissed sounds interesting.

  169. In much the same way as you mention above, voting No Award is also a judgement call. Do you think this work is worthy? Rank appropriately. Do you think the work is not worthy? Rank appropriately as well, by either leaving it off your ballot, or placing it below No Award. How do you judge worthiness? It’s left *entirely* up to the individual.

    Then the fundamental problem is people voting without setting aside their biases, or being so biased as to not even read the work in question. If you can’t set aside your bias (against minorities, whites, men, women, conservatives, liberals, cookbooks, etc.) before voting, you shouldn’t be voting. If you’re ‘No Awarding’ a work you haven’t even tried to read, something is wrong, but that’s just a symptom of a larger issue.

    It’s one thing to say “How to Serve Man was horrible! There’s no plot, no characters, and I have no idea where I would get those ingredients! I’m going to place it below No Award!” and another to say “I didn’t even try to read this book, but the author’s biography says he’s a member of the local NAACP, and if he’s a member of a group that has Colored People in the name, he’s obviously a racist, so I’m going to No Award his book.” If they’re not even trying to judge how worthy a work is, then what’s the point? I will agree that you have to let people judge worthiness for themselves, but at the same time you have to trust that they care enough about worthiness that that’s what they’re judging on.

    Furthermore, encouraging people to judge on any reason other than the worthiness of the work just makes the situation worse. “I think that new and different voices are more worthy of an award, so people should give extra consideration to the diversity of the author’s background” is better than “Women won too much last year, so people shouldn’t consider any female author this year.”

  170. I wonder what their reviews would be if they had no idea who had nominated what work? I expect the results would be surprising, especially to these reviewers.

  171. Retweeted by A. Dally MacFarlane ☣ JY Yang ‏@MizHalle Mar 5 (Love the fact that 4/5 of the top results in that CW poll are by non-white authors– who says diversity doesn’t sell in SF/F!)

    I have to chuckle at this one, only because it’s a small-fish-small-fishbowl comment. Clarkesworld is very much an “inside” e-mag edited toward and tailored to the small end of the SF/F market that is literary-minded, and literary-conscious. When we talk about “sell” there are sales, and then there are sales. What is the readership of Clarkesworld compared to, say, Jim Butcher? Or Larry Correia? I know Analog remains the most widely-circulated English-language SF pub, but this is largely because Analog’s readership is not necessarily “inside” to the same degree as other magazines. Ergo, Analog is not read by “inside” readers only. There are plenty of small-f fans who read Analog and remain loyal to the magazine, while being largely oblivious to the SF/F “conversation” that’s being carried on in earnest right now.

    Of course, to take the quote tweet another way: is it a “win” that 4 out of 5 are non-white, because they are non-white, or is it a “win” because the stories are extraordinary and they just happen to be by non-white authors?

    Progressives (who are stuck on their interpretation of diversity) seem entirely too trapped in a “wrapping paper” world, where the only objective is to get as many pretty packages as you can, stuffed into the room. The contents or character of those packages? Practically meaningless.

  172. Yeah, love Yoko Kanno’s work, great stuff. Very sad that Origa passed away this year. I can’t watch a GITS:SAC episode without choking up a little.

  173. I’ve watched the first six sessions of Cowboy Bebop now. Just a few things are slightly bothering me. Like the fact that it takes place in 2071, but humans have already mastered hyperspace and colonized the solar system in 50 years. Minor, I know, but if they’d bumped it ahead a century it would probably work better.

  174. Actually, I want to echo the other question.

    Who _does_ say diversity doesn’t sell in SFF?

    It certainly sells fine with me, providing the story itself is worthwhile. Sure there are authors I buy based on the name recognition, but in every case this is because I’ve read their other stuff and found it good enough consistently enough that I know I’ll be getting more good story for my buck.

    The incidentals of their genetic makeup or the vagaries of their personal life matter not one whit to me, nor do they to most of the readers I know.

    Even those dreaded creatures, the male child, I serve in the library don’t care who wrote the books I recommend to them. They care if the story is good, that’s it.

    Now granted, if you show them a book with a pink cover and a unicorn on it _that_ will make them leery, but only because they have been taught that such stories are not aimed at their interests. The author still doesn’t come into it.

    So, please, enlighten me, who actually says diversity doesn’t sell in SFF?

  175. I could say the same thing about Firefly in regards to easy terraforming. They must have the Genesis Device in the ‘Verse.

    And yes, there are similarities between Firefly and Cowboy Bebop, but they are very different shows.

  176. Been chewing through the packet since last night. Some looks good, some not so much. The worst was the “graphic novels”. But I have higher standards.

  177. I will give you points for persistence, Clamps. Not for anything else, other than being a sad waste of flesh, but I guess everyone needs a hobby.

  178. Personally I’m having trouble with the fan artist cateogory – it’d be useful for me to see some of what has won in the past to really get a feel for it.

  179. I’ve watched the first six sessions of Cowboy Bebop now. Just a few things are slightly bothering me. Like the fact that it takes place in 2071, but humans have already mastered hyperspace and colonized the solar system in 50 years. Minor, I know, but if they’d bumped it ahead a century it would probably work better.

    If you’re looking for really hard sci-fi, Cowboy Bebop isn’t likely your best bet. if you’re looking for entertainment, style, and so forth, it’s a great watch.

  180. Oh trust me, Hard SF outside of literature is a rare creature indeed. I can be very forgiving, though.

  181. “Personally I’m having trouble with the fan artist cateogory – it’d be useful for me to see some of what has won in the past to really get a feel for it.”

    Brianna Wu’s husband Frank has won 4 Hugos for fan artist. Seriously.

  182. John C Wright

    ” Nowhere in the rules of the Hugo Awards are the worthiness criteria limited to the text itself, but to the choice and judgment of the individual voter. ”

    Another untruth.

    No, it’s not. If it is, I’ll thank you to show me where such a requirement is stated, and I’ll gladly stand corrected of my misapprehension.

    You did not say “voting No Award based on skin color is legal.” That point is not in dispute. You said “voting No Award based on skin color is valid” by which you mean morally valid.

    1. Actually, I didn’t say both of those things. The only place those words appear in are in your comment here. 2. My actual quote, which you correctly quoted in your previous post is as follows: “It’s a valid measure. You may disagree with its appropriateness, but it is a completely valid and legitimate metric.” 3. I assumed that my usage of the terms ‘legitimate’ and ‘appropriateness’ in my posts made the distinction clear. In any event, I will clarify that I did not mean morally valid.

    Obviously it is not. It is the very definition of unfairness. In effect, you are arguing that unfairness is fair.

    Only if you are grossly misunderstanding the point I was trying to make – which, again quite simply is this: For voters to rank works that were on a slate below No Award is perfectly legal and valid. It may be inappropriate or go against some “custom”, but that’s all.

    I’ve had a few other posts in this thread where I make my points, I would suggest that you take a look at them, in the hopes that it will further clarify my point.

    Civilis

    Then the fundamental problem is people voting without setting aside their biases, or being so biased as to not even read the work in question. … Furthermore, encouraging people to judge on any reason other than the worthiness of the work just makes the situation worse.

    I think there is a confusion here between poor judgement, and different judgements (in terms of different standards). The first is unfortunate, while the second is a result of human nature – different people, different standards. But there is really no objective way to distinguish the two, so both are legitimate grounds, but one may clearly be inappropriate.

    Bias is also a funny thing. I’m biased against zombies – I find them lame and uninteresting. Tried Walking Dead, lost interest. Couldn’t bring myself to read the zombie novel last year, so left it off my ballot. Should I be required to set aside my zombie bias to have read it? Even if I did, given that I dislike zombies, just how worthwhile would my opinion have been?

  183. He’s a talented artist.

    What I find interesting is his post about refusing further nominations and the reasons why. It’ reads as if it was written just a year ago, not six…

  184. “*thoughtful expression* Would you count Serial Experiments Lain as hard SF?”

    Good question. It’s been many years since I’ve seen it, but I remember it as some very dark, almost surreal cyberpunk.

  185. I’d consider Lain influenced heavily by secret history, but then, with the exception of the opening, I haven’t rewatched it in years.

  186. Alternate Snowcrash, there is a difference between saying, “Meh, this story was about something I have no interest in, so I am voting it down.” and “I don’t like the topic of the story, but the writing was fantastic.” The former is bullshit (if you are voting for an award based on quality), the latter what most would expect to see.

    I can’t stand Mariah Carey or Whitney Houston (or most country music), but I can appreciate the talent the artists have and recognize they have it.

  187. I’ve Joked that Lain is what would happen if you locked William Gibson and Philip K. Dick in a motel room with some Sailor Moon DVDs over a holiday weekend.

    Soul Hunter is if you asked Hammer House to make an anime.

  188. “I remember there was a chunk of Lain devoted to a theory, so it might be both cyberpunk and sci-fi?”

    That could work. It was a show that required deep thought.

    “And I didn’t know Origa had DIED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Noooo!”

    Yeah, lung cancer, back in January. 😦

  189. I thought of a better way to explain what I was saying in my last comment. Suppose we had an exhibition with an award for the best painting of a dog.

    One entry is, in fact, a painting of a cookbook; the rules state the painting must have a “dog” on it, and the cookbook is How to Serve Dog. Another painting is a magnificently done painting of a Corgi. Unfortunately, having just watched Cowboy Bebop, one voter can’t take Corgis seriously as dogs, and therefore he keeps laughing every time he tries to look at it (I have the same reaction after watching the episode Mushroom Samba).

    If we have dozens of paintings and hundreds of judges, the one voter doesn’t matter much in the big scheme of things, but this is a really small contest and our one voter is either the deciding vote from among the small number of judges or perhaps the only judge. The ethics of his decision shouldn’t matter how many judges there are or how many entries there are.

    I don’t think many people would have a problem with our judge deciding that voting No Award is reasonable if the only painting he had was the cookbook painting. It doesn’t meet the stated criteria even if it is eligible under the rules. I don’t think many people would have a problem with him deciding that the painting of a Corgi isn’t as good as the painting of a Beagle; it’s a subjective decision. The issue comes when he says that the painting of the Corgi is so silly as to render it incapable of being the best painting of a dog and votes it under No Award, even when the only paintings he has to judge are the Corgi and the cookbook.

    We expect that judges are there to judge fairly, whether it be in a court of law or for a trivial award. While perfection may be impossible, treating knowingly flawed standards as acceptable leads to an overall decrease in the quality of the judging over time. We would not treat as acceptable a juror that said “I don’t like the defense attorney; I’m not listening to his case. The kid gets the chair.” Even though the stakes are lower in this case, we should not treat the standards any lower.

  190. @Wolfmanjim –
    I’ve Joked that Lain is what would happen if you locked William Gibson and Philip K. Dick in a motel room with some Sailor Moon DVDs over a holiday weekend.

    Hah!
    And if one would consider Elfen Lied sci-fi-ish, who would you attribute it as the twisted brainchild of? =3

  191. Bias is also a funny thing. I’m biased against zombies – I find them lame and uninteresting. Tried Walking Dead, lost interest. Couldn’t bring myself to read the zombie novel last year, so left it off my ballot. Should I be required to set aside my zombie bias to have read it? Even if I did, given that I dislike zombies, just how worthwhile would my opinion have been?

    I too hate zombies, as a matter of fact. I certainly can’t judge whether a zombie story is good or bad. If asked, I say that I’m not a good person to give a review because I don’t like zombies and my opinion is biased. Likewise, if asked to review Girls und Panzer, I say, I loved it, but I like tanks, so take my enthusiasm with a grain of salt. What I will not do is say that any zombie story is automatically so bad that it does not deserve to win an award.

    I think our differences are in the way we view the No Award option. For me, voting for No Award means ‘this work is so bad, I’d rather have no one win. Awarding this award to this nominee is so bad as to bring discredit on the award.’

    It’s like choosing an ice cream flavor. If someone asks “what’s your favorite: strawberry, chocolate, or vanilla?”, my true favorite may be peanut butter cup cookie dough ice cream, but that’s not one of the choices here. Better to have one of the three than no ice cream at all.

    I couldn’t find a good way to include a cookbook reference.

  192. @Shadowdancer Duskstar / Cutelildrow

    I could only watch the first two eps of EL. I thought I was immune to being creeped out.

    Maybe the guys behind ‘Saw.’

    For a gentler one ‘Trigun’ is the John Ford Anime. ‘Gungrave’ is the Martin Scorcese anime.

  193. Yeah, the guys behind Saw / Hostel would be a good bet; but actually more intelligent. (The whole thing ends tragically, but oddly positively too, both anime and the manga – the latter being WORSE than the anime by an order of magnitude.)

  194. If you’re looking for excellent, story-driven SF anime, I’d go with Legend of the Galactic Heroes (Yes, the title is bombastic as all get out, but that’s OK.). Big political entities colliding, massive space battles, and classical music. The semi-prequel movie (My Conquest is the Sea of Stars) features a mass-docking sequence set to Swan Lake – and the final battle (of the movie) is set to Bolero. It’s older, and 90-odd episodes, so you may have to find an online source.

    It’s literally Space Opera:

  195. I miss those old 80s anime space operas. I haven’t found anything in writing similar. “In Conquest Born” is the closest, but needs more space ships and space battles.

  196. Obstinate Snowjob: “Bias is also a funny thing. I’m biased against zombies – I find them lame and uninteresting. Tried Walking Dead, lost interest.”

    Well, since The Walking Dead isn’t really about zombies, you clearly aren’t very perceptive.

    As the creator of The Walking Dead has said, the comic & the show are about what happens to people when the veneer of civilization is removed and people face grave threats. Zombies were just a plot device to create that condition.

    Maybe you aren’t curious about human nature? (Clearly you don’t understand much of it now.) Or maybe you just like to portray yourself as uninterested in popular things to seem more sophisticated? (If so, it isn’t working).

  197. As the creator of The Walking Dead has said, the comic & the show are about what happens to people when the veneer of civilization is removed and people face grave threats. Zombies were just a plot device to create that condition.

    Zombie plots are clearly an attempt to create a viable man-vs-nature story in a setting uncomfortably familiar to the modern audience. I’m not particularly fond of the post-apocalypse setting to begin with, but I find that Man-vs-Nature stories are nowhere near as interesting as Man-vs-Man/Society stories. I like my antagonists to be as human-level as the protagonist. (I also prefer Man-vs-Man to Man-vs-God/Fate stories). I can understand why certain people find those other types of stories interesting; each type has a unique resonance in storytelling and a type of story it can be used to tell.

    I will refrain from trying to psychoanalyze you based on your choice of stories.

  198. It’s two weeks old. Didn’t see that. Someone was promoting it on Twitter. But it’s still a good post.

  199. “I will refrain from trying to psychoanalyze you based on your choice of stories.”

    Who said it was my choice?

    I just described it, and referenced the author’s views. Never actually said that I liked it, or that it was awesome. LOL

  200. I just described it, and referenced the author’s views. Never actually said that I liked it, or that it was awesome. LOL

    I usually don’t go out looking up what an author says about their stories to defend the works when I don’t care about them. Alternate Snowcrash, while seemingly obtuse to the logic of the points used to argue against him, is debating reasonably and doesn’t deserve insults based on his taste in fiction. While I disagree with him and likely agree with you about Sad Puppies and the Hugos, my tastes in this case are similar to his.

    Stories vary differently along the lines of setting, theme, and plot. One can be curious about aspects of human nature (themes) and not particularly be engaged by certain settings or plots. I tend to find that I can have a good knowledge of a friends tastes and interest and have a story which I think meets those tastes which will interest him and still have them not be interested at least 20% of the time. Some stories, while being generally regarded as good, don’t click with some people. Part of the reason I’m trying to debate with him is I believe that people should be willing to accept that a work that is not be acceptable to their particular tastes might still be a worthy work.

  201. “Panzergroup Asshole”

    Certainly didn’t take Kevin long to Godwin himself out of the discussion…

  202. One of the links in the comments was to glyer’s post about Brad contacting Juliette Wade. I got to the part where Wade finally made an appearance and stated she wasn’t aware of what Brad was doing because she had been avoiding his blog and FB page for the last two years and I just had to stop. I was going to scratch a hole in my head trying to figure out how someone gets that ignorant of their chosen field.

  203. Orgell – word on LoGH. Awesome anime, in scope and storytelling. Would also strongly recommend Planetes, which is probably the only memorable hard SF anime I’ve seen. Garbage disposal IN SPACE!

    Civilis – I’d agree that we not only see No Award different, but that we see the criteria to vote for it differently as well.

    For me, I would say that the Hugo nominees should aspire to be more than merely adequate or workmanlike, and if a particular piece doesn’t reach those heights, I would not hesitate to rank it below No Award. I also wouldn’t hesitate if I felt that a nominee got there inappropriately (which to me, includes voting slates generally, and Rabid Puppy particularly – I have different issues with SP3.). I feel we would obviously disagree there, so I’ll leave it at that.

    I have no issues with the idea that just because something isn’t to my taste, that it cannot be worthy. Different people different standards different preferences. Heck, the Swirsky last year was not something I would have looked for in a million years, but I thought it was ridiculously well written. I’m not a fan of zombies, but one of the best shorts I watched last year was this: http://geektyrant.com/news/2013/4/8/heartbreaking-zombie-film-about-a-dad-trying-to-save-his-bab.html

    For me to go outside my comfort zone, I would need some guidance – maybe a positive review from a reviewer that I respect, or it got onto the Hugo shortlist could be some examples.

  204. Just watched the seventh session of CB. How the heck do they stay in business if they never claim a bounty?

  205. That’s one of the running themes: they’re always out of money. They spend one entire episode drifting to the next planet on momentum because they’re out of fuel.

  206. The panzer comment is an example of how SJWs try and make comparisons – in this case a racial supremacist group – and fail, usually describing themselves instead.

    Which side objects to heroes (“saviors”) based on race? Which side promotes the idea of listening according to race? Which side has anthologies of actual racial revenge fantasies which point out race in the blurbs? Which side has actual racially segregated spaces? Which side continually openly racially insults the other? Which side says they won’t read as many stories with a certain race in it? Which side asks to not read books written by a race for a year? Which side cracks racial jokes? Which side won’t review a race? Which side objects to a Hugo host on racial grounds and then claims the other side will object to a host on racial grounds? Which side peers into the racial identity of a marriage? Which side asks to crowdsource help to de-racialize their library? Which side boycotts convention panels all of one race? Which side calls a race a “monoculture”? Which side promotes the idea of racial privilege, but only one race in the entire world? I could go on and on and on.

    When do you run out of coincidences and realize you’re run up against a group of racial supremacists and their useful idiot allies who buy all their excuse notes from teacher about how they’re actually forced to do that by a race because that race has it in for them? Which side lies about statistics, literary and global history, skews murder headlines, turns Latinos into whites, whites into blacks (but only the right whites), in order to get to that place? The only evidence SFF is anything like a Jim Crow is from the side making panzer cracks.

  207. Christopher M. Chupik says:
    Happy Kittens are fisking the fisking now. Also, they’re reviewing the SP3 Hugo nominees and shock, they hate them. Every single one. What are the chances?

    Me, that Michael Flynn story he just dissed sounds interesting.

    So the people who don’t read the stories are doing it wrong, and the same goes for everyone who reads them but is not impressed? Oh man, you’re hard to please.

    “Totaled” was pretty ok and I expect I’ll like the Lego Movie as well. There’s still a lot of Puppy fiction to read, so you still have a chance to impress me, but I don’t have high hopes now that an insane share of it is written by John C. Wright or consists of separately published novel chapters (what were you thinking there, honestly?).

    I think the Flynn story was very disappointing, and if I remember correctly, the author wrote in his blog that he himself didn’t think that the novelette is his best work. You may like it, of course, and you can vote for it, but I won’t.

    Granted, none of us can escape our own biases. I assume you cannot provide a link to your own favorable reviews of Kameron Hurley’s work to prove me how objectively you are able to read fiction. 😀

  208. “I assume you cannot provide a link to your own favorable reviews of Kameron Hurley’s work to prove me how objectively you are able to read fiction.”

    The only thing of Hurley’s apart from her Hugo-winning essay and tweets that I’ve read is her attempted satire of GamerGate and Sad Puppies from a few weeks ago. I wasn’t impressed.

  209. “In any event, I will clarify that I did not mean morally valid.”
    In that case, shut your mouth. Obviously the written rules allow people to vote unfairly, based on their bigotry, hatred, and ignorance. That point is not in dispute and you are wasting your time and mine pretending to dispute it. Yes, you can shut off your conscience, commit the petty yet unethical act, and get away with it, with no one but you and heaven any the wiser.

    Why any sane man would want and yearn to do an immoral thing even in so petty a matter, and then defend the same in public to a group of strangers, is passing strange.

  210. I enjoyed the fiction Hurley wrote to win two Hugos. Usually you have to visit the circus to arrive to that level of sheer clownishness. I give it thumbs up for lack of self-awareness and Pokemon girly supremacy theory. I imagine she’s drawing up plans to make a diversity pie-chart of the nearest Vet’s Hospital and fiercely occupy a draft office even as we speak. It was a stroke of genius for her to illustrate her factual historic piece with paintings cuz photography wasn’t invented until after men erased women from military history.

  211. “Would also strongly recommend Planetes, which is probably the only memorable hard SF anime I’ve seen. Garbage disposal IN SPACE! ”
    Hear, hear. PLANETES is one of the best Hard SF things I have seen in years, print or film.

  212. Just watched the Planetes trailer on Youtube. Looks very promising.

  213. John C Wright

    In that case, shut your mouth. Obviously the written rules allow people to vote unfairly, based on their bigotry, hatred, and ignorance. That point is not in dispute and you are wasting your time and mine pretending to dispute it.

    The only person disputing it’s legality was you, John. If it wasn’t in dispute, why did you accuse me of lying in your immediately previous post ?

    Also, note that I merely said ”Nowhere in the rules of the Hugo Awards are the worthiness criteria limited to the text itself, but to the choice and judgement of the individual voter.” Once again, the only person to make a leap from that statement to bigotry/ hatred has been you.

    I have been commenting on the legality of voting No Award as a protest to nomination/ voting slates. You have not only repeatedly misconstrued my words as an appeal to morality and/or fairness, you’ve accused me of lying when I said it was legal as per the Hugo rules. To borrow (and modify!) a recent phrase that I read:

    My crime is that I have defended a Hugo voting method which is legal. It was all aboveboard, scrupulously honest, legal, cricket, and according to Hoyle.

    I suspect that you will still feel the need to comment on the morality and/or fairness of it. I certainly can’t stop you, so please feel free to do so, but I will likely not respond to it, as it is not, and has never been an area that I was discussing. I merely hope that you will try do so politely, and without hurling any further false accusations of lying in my direction.

  214. Remember a few short weeks ago when the other side was touting GRRM’s absolute moral authority?

    Neither do they.

  215. I recall someone on Twitter calling it the whitest of all First World problems imaginable.

  216. They’re all over Mad Max and Age of Ultron with microscopes, giving either approving or disapproving nods while holding their cult’s stamp of approval.

    The Age of Ultron objections made absolutely no sense. Since when do feminists object to seeing a woman mourn opportunities that were stolen from her by men?

  217. @Orgell

    If there’s anyone out there who is capable of defending himself, it’s GRRM. His response to this week’s criticism of the show has been to simply ignore it. He’s said that the show is the show and the books are the books, and that’s all there is to it. If there’s something that you don’t like about either the books or the show, he’ll direct you to a bunch of blogs that are devoted to what’s happening in the books or the show. He basically doesn’t give a crap about what people think about the show, and he’s only mildly interested in what people have to say about the books.

    He’s also had a civil (though spirited) back and forth with Mr Correia about SP3, and at this point, I think they’re both saying the same thing: Vote for everything based on what YOU think its merit is. I’m pretty sure GRRM has said he will oppose any rules changes if he makes it to the con, too. GRRM’s problem is with slates. He doesn’t like them, and that’s been his main gripe about SP3. Now that the noms are in, he’s reading all of the nominated works, just like everyone else. He’s been staunchly opposed to the No Award “nuclear option”. I would say he’s pretty much “middle of the road” when it comes to the Hugos right now.

  218. The SJW contingent can split all the voting protocol hairs they please. And fence-sitters can pointlessly debate the 10% of SJW utterances that aren’t hypocritical insanity if they are fond of wasting their time.

    No matter how the Hugo awards resolve themselves this year, the aftermath will not be to the SJW’s liking. They played checkers with a troika of motivated chess grandmasters, and failed to notice that the games were different. Now they think they can knock over the boards and salvage a win.

    Pop some popcorn, folks. It’s going to be entertaining.

  219. “What are the Hugo Awards?

    The Hugo Awards, to give them their full title, are awards for excellence in the field of science fiction or fantasy.”

    First two sentences of the Hugo Awards FAQ, on the official Hugo Awards website.

    To vote based upon any other criteria besides “excellence in the field of science fiction or fantasy” thus is inappropriate.

    Voting “No Award” over a work that one thinks has been “nominated inappropriately” is really a vote against the process of nomination, and should take place in a different venue, at the WorldCon business meetings where the Hugo rules can be discussed for possible change.

    Voting “No Award” over another work based on your perception of the ideological views of the author is a stand that you should make with your pocketbook, or your own internet pulpit, and not by subverting the Hugo process for your own preferred social or political purposes.

    Voting “No Award” over a work because it doesn’t contain the requisite number of women/gays/minorities portrayed in the politically correct fashion of the week actually does superficially start to bear on the idea of the merit of the work. However, only someone who has lost all sense of the real purpose of art could believe the idea that the faddish political checklists of the day have anything to do with “excellence in the field of science fiction or fantasy.” Excellence in the field of social and political propaganda is quite a different category entirely, one with which historically prominent figures named Adolph and Josef were very familiar, back in my grandparents’ day. Many of us are tired of being told that “science fiction” which scores highly on that particular metric is the best that the field has to offer today — especially when it only tangentially seems to be science fiction at all. As has been noted elsewhere many times, political art is to art as military intelligence is to intelligence. In deference to our host, I’ll say that I suspect that comparison may be somewhat unfair to military intelligence.

    If you think the field can do better than John C. Wright, Jim Butcher, Brad Torgerson and Vox Day, then prove it next year by working towards getting your preferred works nominated. Any other response betrays someone not really concerned about the Hugo Awards as such, but only about making sure that the “right” people/works win, and it dooms the Hugos to continue their 10+ year slide into irrelevance.

    Of course, within the frame of the publicly-stated underlying purpose of Sad Puppies, the Hugos are already irrelevant. Evidence has proven the hypothesis. Experiment concluded. Case closed.

  220. Don’t worry, some knight who keeps his nuts in a Horcrux buried in his feminist wife’s fist will write a feminist dog-collar titled The Reins of Castatrate.

    Why are we surprised a bunch of goofy mentally challenged feminists are triggered.

    “OH NO! Sansa is constantly in sexual peril and is only finally raped when she attains a modicum of agency. I predicted! I predicted! Men! Men! White male gaze power fantasies again! Let us hashtag solidarity!”

    #NotAllMen #KillAllMen #JustListen #JazzHands #JustKillAllMen #ILovePfizer

    “Cecily Kane @Cecily_Kane · May 19 Sansa achieves agency = it’s no longer just a threat. She’s punished for getting too uppity. The depth of misogyny on display here…”

    The woman up for a Nebula for her short story where a young girl kills all the male members of her family writes about Sansa vicariously because she was already too triggered to actually watch the show but followed it from her Twitter diving bell at the bottom of the Marianas Trench:

    “And I didn’t even watch it because similar problems rendered me unable to watch that show long ago… Ramsey Snow brutally raped Sansa Stark… while the camera focused on Theon Greyjoy’s manpain about it. I wrote a post a while back about a few of the terrible ways that epic fantasy… portrays violence against women, and how rape is used as a narrative device within to punish female characters for having too much agency.”

    https://manicpixiedreamworlds.wordpress.com/2015/05/19/sexual-violence-in-epic-fantasy-follow-up-linkspam-sansa-stark/

    What a fuckin’ crew. And people think we’re talking about Abraham Lincoln when we say “SJW”? I’m pretty sure he didn’t live in a nuthouse because he was triggered by falling leaves. How many diving bells one inside the other do you have to live in to not see this insane cult of lady-worship and man-hatred?

    “AAHHHHHHHH! HE MIGHT MAKE A FAT JOKE! AAAIIIIIEEEEEEEEEEE! CHTHULHU!!!”

  221. Snowcrash:

    “you’ve accused me of lying when I said it was legal as per the Hugo rules”

    That is a lie and you are a liar.

    You know, lying doesn’t work nearly as well in a forum where everyone’s original words are still there for all to read.

    spacefaringkittten:

    “I assume you cannot provide a link to your own favorable reviews of Kameron Hurley’s work”

    She’s the one who believes (or pretends to believe) that there’s been a millennia-long conspiracy of the Evil Males to hide the accomplishments of the Strong and Wise Warrior Women, yes?

  222. @MattK

    One of the things I’m afraid of is that next year we’re going to see not only SP4 and RP2, but a bunch of slates from a bunch of other groups. This is all within the rules, but as a fan, I don’t want to watch an arms race of different slates for the nominations process.

  223. LadyTrigger@LadyPfizer At @SFWA’s #NebulaAwards, only one award went to a sane person and that wasn’t one of the ones voted on by the membership.#InsanityinSFF

    KKKSF@LadyRacist It is no coincidence that my book review column features no white male authors.#WorkMakesYouFree

    LadyAmbien@WoodpeckerAluminiumFoil deic888roc87eikc9c!!??dicyyya#KillMen

    Bookburners@IEatRocks GRRM Rape Culture Mansplaining Pig #LetsRapeRapeOhWait

    ShawnDavidDuke@JoannaRussPencilBox Yup I am so done with the show cuz Gamergate Panzer monkeys #WeDeliverMeds24/7

    UnionBusterGrant@ALincoln Our marginalized have them on the run! #PickettsWomenCharge

    ILiveUnderMyBed@ILiveUnderMyBedToo Is is safe to come out now? I can see the TV from here. #FearIsNoble

    CatsupAddict@StayTheFuckOut Why can’t I come to the PoC dinner? #SegregationIsDiversity

  224. When Ancillary Justice first came out, I was so confident this insane cult of gender abolition and man-hatred was baked into SFF’s core institutions from top to bottom, I publicly predicted it would be nominated for both the Hugo and Nebula before I’d even read it, based on nothing more than gushing reviews about gender pronouns by 3 of SFF’s daffiest feminists.

    Leckie responded on Twitter to my comment by saying she only wished it were that easy.

    Well… turns out it is exactly that easy.

    Meanwhile, outside of core SFF’s femme gender abolition diving bell where normal people live, Andy Weir’s the Martian wins first place in the Goodreads competition with 30,000 votes to 12th place Leckie’s 3,000 votes. Let me remind you AJ won an unprecedented number of SFF’s core awards. There’s a reason for that.

    Accurately predicting SFF’s feminist mad-hatter ideology doesn’t make me a Men’s Rights Activist, a right winger or Limbaugh fan. It just means I can accurately parse quotes from across the spectrum of SFF rather than pretending they meant something else. The 100% inaccurate and public prediction of my own politics speaks to ignorance and stupidity, not knowledge.

    I don’t run around calling union organizers “union-busters” but instead take people at their word. For dull-witted morons like Damien Walter and Paul Weimer openly speculating about my mental health, I’ve never taken meds in my life, so check your own medicine cabinet and obsessive hysteria and paranoia about misogyny and patriarchy before you check mine. I’m as nuts as the SPLC, GLAAD and Anti-Defamation League, so call them and express your concern for their mental state and then call your own fucking doc and tell them to increase your dosage.

    I am no crusader and don’t give two shits about the GOP, the Dem Party, Rush Limbaugh or Men’s Rights. Unless you want to be called a “union-buster” who reads The Daily Kos to his dog and lights candles to Lenin and Marx, accept the fact I am astonished at the sheer amount of hate speech that has been mainstreamed into core SFF these last 3 years as “social justice” by racists and their naive “allies.” Accept the fact that hate speech exists in quotes which outnumber what I can leave in a comments section by an order of magnitude… at least.

    I am doing something really simple: I am reading actual words by real people, not lighting up millions of people at a time based on their race and sex and the most absurd and childish paranoia. Just look at the Jonathan Ross episode and this Game of Thrones thing and tell me I’m making this up. Multiply it by a thousand. These are the craziest and most arrogant, ignorant, hateful fucking people who’ve ever entered core SFF and laying down covering fire for them makes one look like a pompous and out of touch windbag.

  225. Pingback: From the Pen of Matt K | John C. Wright's Journal

  226. “The only person disputing it’s legality was you, John.”
    Another lie. No one was disputing the legality, only the ethics.
    Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the opposing legal counsel cannot stop lying, and has begun to stoop to the same, tired tactic of the Morlocks everywhere, accusing me of being motivated by hatred and bigotry.
    I leave the matter to your discretion. By way of evidence, I would like to introduce all the comments by the opposing counsel as exhibits. Let his own words hang him.

  227. “That, actually, explains why I use names like Alauda or Clamps.”

    Not that it helps any, since we identified you with your first post (as usual), Andy. You’ve been stalking for far too long. You’re predictable.

  228. Pingback: From the Pen of Matt K | Neoreactive

  229. Matt K

    Voting “No Award” over a work that one thinks has been “nominated inappropriately” is really a vote against the process of nomination, and should take place in a different venue, at the WorldCon business meetings where the Hugo rules can be discussed for possible change.

    I would disagree. The business meeting (which I believe traditionally gets held after the award ceremony) does not address the nominated works. *Fixing* the nomination process is something that is to be proposed and ratified at the business meetings. That is addressing the root cause.

    If an “inappropriately nominated” work is already on the ballot for that year, then it’s to be addressed in the voting process itself. That would be rectifying the current state.

    As previously stated, I would venture to speculate that No Award on block voting may actually be well within the spirit of the Hugo’s, assuming my understanding of what happened when the Church of Scientology tried to block vote one of Hubbard’s books onto the ballot back in the 80s. It ended up below No Award.

    If you think the field can do better than John C. Wright, Jim Butcher, Brad Torgerson and Vox Day, then prove it next year by working towards getting your preferred works nominated.

    I do, and no doubt I will. But I would very much prefer that the Hugo nominations do not devolve onto a slate vs slate process in coming years.

  230. @James May

    I know next to nothing about Ancillary Justice or Ancillary Sword. I was expecting to see The Martian as the front-runner this year, but it turns out that it was ineligible, because it had previously been published in installments online. I thought that that kind of sucked for Andy Weir, but I’m guessing he can console himself by rolling around in money. The book sold well, and he’s probably going to make another round of cash when the movie comes out. I think a Hugo Award (and a Nebula, if we’re talking about Leckie) is nice, but I’d rather have a pile of money than a bunch of awards.

  231. To vote based upon any other criteria besides “excellence in the field of science fiction or fantasy” thus is inappropriate.

    Very well said.

    Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the opposing legal counsel cannot stop lying,

    I don’t think it’s persuasive to attribute to lying what can be explained by a failure to understand. His insistence about arguing about what is permissible under the rules when we were talking about the ethical standards necessary for the Hugos to survive as an award suggests a failure to comprehend that someone could think it important to consider the ethics as more important than the rules, not a deliberate attempt to misrepresent our positions.

  232. Figures that The Martian, one of the best SF novels in recent memory, is excluded from the Hugos by outmoded rules.

    Also, I have Ghost in the Shell on hold from the library. Can it possibly live up to the hype? Let’s find out.

  233. I just tried slugging through the beginning of Ancillary Sword; it may be because I didn’t read Ancillary Justice, but it felt disjointed, almost ‘lurchy’ – like a locomotive trying to start up and the cars randomly switching on their brakes. Made it about 20 pages in before acute indifference set in and I closed the .pdf. I’ve already read a lot of Butcher – maybe I’ll clear the palate with him before moving on.

  234. I do, and no doubt I will. But I would very much prefer that the Hugo nominations do not devolve onto a slate vs slate process in coming years.

    Ok, but nothing you’ve done stops the slate process, it just means the winning slates are the low profile ones.

    As previously stated, I would venture to speculate that No Award on block voting may actually be well within the spirit of the Hugo’s, assuming my understanding of what happened when the Church of Scientology tried to block vote one of Hubbard’s books onto the ballot back in the 80s. It ended up below No Award.

    Ok, but that’s one rather extreme case. What percentage of a works support needs to come from non-slate voters to be acceptable? Presumably, if I list 5 works I think people should vote for on my (non-existent) Facebook page, and one person says ‘I’ll vote for that without reading it because I love cookbooks and think one deserves to win this year!’ and the books have also gotten a lot of other buzz, and somehow it ends up nominated with 1000 votes, in that case it’s not fair to hold the fact that it was on my slate against it.

  235. Chupik: my wife and I like Ghost in the Shell a lot. There are some plot issues, but then, when I watch anime, I tend to expect a different kind of storytelling than I might get with a purely American product. Half or more of it (for me) is the visual spectacle, which Ghost in the Shell has aplenty. I am also tempted to say that the sequel is even better than the first film? Though I can’t speak to the television series.

  236. At one of the Sansa-complaining links the Nebula-nominated Alyssa Wong lists, we have this:

    “I actually haven’t read a book by a white male author in more than two years. There came a point in my reading career where I refused to spend my entertainment time in the fantasy worlds of white men.”

    http://blacknerdproblems.com/site/game-of-thrones-doesnt-care-about-female-fans/

    Gee, what a surprise there. I never saw that coming. Or her mentioning “the white male gaze.” Another rarely seen thing.

    I would predict Wong would win the Nebula but the other 6 nominees are indistinguishable from Wong’s own goofy racial and sexual supremacist ideology. Another shocking surprise.

  237. I own Appleseed: Ex Machina, which I like quite a bit. I also have Ghost In the Shell 2: Innocence and that’s lot’s of fun. I also like the film before that called Stand Alone Complex.

  238. The only Appleseed I’ve seen was the original, 80’s release. From the newer crop, Knights of Sidonia is surprisingly good; the anime does leave a few gaps that are better filled in in the manga. Does a good job twisting the occasional trope, too.

  239. @Frank Probst

    One of the things I’m afraid of is that next year we’re going to see not only SP4 and RP2, but a bunch of slates from a bunch of other groups. This is all within the rules, but as a fan, I don’t want to watch an arms race of different slates for the nominations process.

    The internet makes this inevitable. There is next thing to no investment required to publicize anything you want on the internet. However, this isn’t necessarily the tragedy you envision it to be. Everyone seems to think that the publishing of a slate somehow mysteriously forces a certain number of weak-minded robots to nominate or vote for everything on that slate. Maybe some people nominated straight SP or straight RP, but I think the real effect of SP and RP has simply been to publicize the fact that anyone can vote and nominate with a supporting membership, and suddenly there are a lot of voters who prefer actual entertaining big-idea science fiction and fantasy (or even just entertaining pulp sf/f) to the pseudo-literary politically correct flavor of the week. We’re not going to vote Butcher and Wright and Day and Torgerson because Vox or Brad “told us to” – we’re going to do it because it’s what saves sf/f from continuing to ghettoize itself in one little PC corner that the vast majority of fans have no interest in visiting.

  240. @James May

    There are a lot of things wrong with season 5 of GoT, but the rape of Sansa isn’t one of them. There’s now a backlash to the backlash on most of the mainstream websites about this. Anyone who doesn’t think this was a pivotal event in the show is simply not paying attention. It’s obviously going to impact several character arcs. And right now, the most interesting thing going on in the show is the power play between Cersei and Olenna. Cersei won Round 1, but Cersei is playing checkers, and Olenna is playing I-can-whack-you-in-broad-daylight-and-pin-it-on-someone-else.

  241. I don’t think it’s persuasive to attribute to lying what can be explained by a failure to understand.
    So you’re saying – Don’t attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by incompetence.

    It’s so hard to tell, though, which ones are genuinely confused, and which ones are doing it on purpose. And there comes a point in the conflict where continuing to be confused about the issues and the cultural stakes has to be evaluated as a willful ignorance.

  242. I own Appleseed: Ex Machina, which I like quite a bit. I also have Ghost In the Shell 2: Innocence and that’s lot’s of fun. I also like the film before that called Stand Alone Complex.

    If you’re looking to arrange things, Ghost in the Shell: Innocence is a direct sequel to the original movie. The Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex (GitS:SAC) series is a separate continuity consisting of two series (the second is GitS:SAC 2nd Gig) and a movie (GitS:SAC Solid State Society). I believe Ghost in the Shell: Arise is a prequel series to the Stand Alone Complex series.

    The two cover similar themes, and there’s a lot of references from the newer stuff to the original, but the original movie continuity is heavily based on the original manga, which is a product of the 80s; the setting is based on extrapolating the politics and tech forward, so the world is more industrial and the geopolitics still has the Soviets off-camera. Stand Alone Complex, coming after the fall of the Soviets and 9/11, tends to feature more corruption and terrorism as the settings backstory.

  243. @Alternate If an “inappropriately nominated” work is already on the ballot for that year, then it’s to be addressed in the voting process itself. That would be rectifying the current state.

    If we are to be convinced by your argument that because voting “No Award” on some arbitrary criteria other than the excellence of the work is not against the rules, it must therefore be acceptable, then you, in order to be logically consistent, cannot object to any of the nominated works which were duly nominated by a process which occurred within the scope of the rules. Thus, slates or no, alleged “block voting” or no, none of the existing nominees can have been “nominated inappropriately” because the entire nomination process happened within the rules.

    In fact, the only works which could legitimately be considered “inappropriately nominated” are the works which “moved up” when certain authors withdrew their nominations because of SJW bullying.

  244. Argh. That was @ Alternate Snowcrash.

    Also, unbeknownst to me, I seem to have two different WordPress comment accounts. God only knows how my laptop decides which to sign in with at any given time.

    mknecht01 == MattK

  245. “Inappropriately nominated”. That could be a slippery slope. What’s inappropriate? The way it was nominated, or who did it? For the anti-Puppies, they claim the former, but mean the latter.

  246. Civilis

    His insistence about arguing about what is permissible under the rules when we were talking about the ethical standards necessary for the Hugos to survive as an award suggests a failure to comprehend that someone could think it important to consider the ethics as more important than the rules, not a deliberate attempt to misrepresent our positions.

    I would say that you are seeing my lack of interest and/or desire as a failure to compehend.

    I understand why people may be keen on the ethics portion, but thats a discussion they will need to engage with others. On my part I see no way of discussing it without at least bringing up the ethics of voting slates in the Hugos, and that’s another discussion I have no interest in having here. I merely prefer the somewhat more objective standard of that which is legal against that which isn’t.

    Ok, but nothing you’ve done stops the slate process, it just means the winning slates are the low profile ones.

    which is already better. Without getting I to the topic of low profile slates, slates succeed when the word gets out and more people participate. If they have to do it quietly, that already significantly breaks their effectiveness. I think it also helps by decreasing the number of candidates who will willingly participate. It also helps by showing the slate organisers that getting nominees onto an entire category is not a guarantee of a win, and can backfire.

    And look, it’s not an absolute by any means. This year, even with 2 obvious niomination slates, most No Award proponents are leaving out the Best Dramatic Presentation-long form category, as let’s face it, most of those would have gotten on regardless. So I don’t think it’s an absolute Slate=No Award sort of thing.

    There are certainly circumstances that it does not mitigate, and there are no doubt side effects to it as well. But to me the above covers some of why I see No Awarding as a potential mitigant in the interim of changing the voting system.

  247. Oh, I was briefly in a Twitter discussion with anti-Puppy Martin Wisse, and he was hellbent on No-Awarding *everything* the Puppies chose, even if it was something that had broader support, like Guardians of the Galaxy, or Interstellar.

  248. which is already better

    So, the political donations that you *don’t* find out about are somehow better than the ones that are transparent, where you know who is giving money to which candidates. It’s better not to know!

    “Low profile slates” AKA “whisper campaigns” – definitely not “already better.” That’s how we got the propaganda art that’s been winning Hugos for ten or fifteen years now.

    The internet makes the publishing of slates inevitable. People will publish their suggestions. Barriers to entry are minor for most people in the Western world. Some of those people have large followings. It is, frankly, insulting that you seem to take it as a given that everyone who reads Brad and Vox immediately slavishly paid WorldCon $40 so they could copy and paste the SP or RP slates into their nomination forms. If you actually knew anything about the commenters at Vox Popoli, you would find that as laughable as I.

    I would be willing to bet that you don’t find it objectionable that some measurably significant percentage of the sales of Scalzi’s Old Man’s War were surely driven by the multiple positive mentions the novel gleaned from Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit.com to his hundreds of thousands of readers. If Glenn Reynolds were to publish a “slate” of Hugo nomination suggestions, would you be decrying the “Instapundit slate” as well?

    Because surely his hundreds of thousands of readers all followed the subliminal programming streaming through their computer monitors and immediately voted the Instapundit slate as one block of robot zombies…

  249. Re: Ghost in the Shell. What, no Tachikomatic Days? 😉

    @Chupik: So, Wisse is saying he’s an a-hole and 100% a dick?

    Pity.

  250. MattK, Chupik

    And this is why I’m disinterested in the whole ethics / appropriateness debate. I have no desire to go around having to defend someone else’s view or approach, nor do I feel the need to defend mine.

    Some people will No Award everything on a slate

    Some people will treat all candidates as business as usual

    I disagree with both approaches, but that’s me doing as my conscience dictates, and far be it for me to tell someone else what they should be voting based on. The Hugo Award places great confidence on personal judgment after all.

  251. Because surely his hundreds of thousands of readers all followed the subliminal programming streaming through their computer monitors and immediately voted the Instapundit slate as one block of robot zombies…

    …while saying “Heh”?

    Though I guess you could be sure they’d read the whole thing…

    😀

  252. Some people will No Award everything on a slate

    Some people will treat all candidates as business as usual

    I disagree with both approaches,

    …but then, for the people voting, no matter what they do then, in your opinion, they’re in the wrong. That makes no sense.

  253. @Christopher M. Chupik

    I actually put No Award at #5 and Interstellar at #6 on my ballot. I think the Honest Trailers for Interstellar are dead on. It started out as a fairly hard sci-fi story with mind-blowing visual effects. The middle of the movie was fantastic, and the first two planets they got to ended up yielding some fantastic story-telling. But the ending just completely lost me. Basically, the main character falls into a black hole, and instead of being crushed by gravity, he ends up in a magical happy place where he can go back in time and leave clues for his daughter about what she should do to save the world. I’m sorry, but that’s some of the laziest story-telling ever, especially for a movie that was doing hard sic-fi so well up until that point.

  254. Future humans fixed it so he could go back and save humanity (that’s what “We sent ourselves” meant.) Geez… if you’re going to “no award” Interstellar for that… what in the heck are you planning to put at #1-4?

  255. Shadowdancer, doing something differently to what I would do doesn’t make a person wrong.

    There are also multiple different ways than the 2 I described to vote obvs.

    FYI, I just realised I have the same issue as MattK – snowcrash and Alternate Snowcrash are both me, my phone signs in differently for some reason

  256. Worrying about competing “slates” is idiotic. (not to put too fine a point on it) Science fiction fans herd like cats. There’s too much produced for anyone to be aware of it all, much less read a reasonable amount of it. There’s only a year, not enough time for something obscure to be “discovered” (or translated, or…) Multiples of parties collecting suggestions of what is best and putting out their list maximizes the opportunity to develop a system that TRULY can attempt to sift and sort through the work that is produced. Few if any of the *highly motivated* Puppies voted straight “slate” because they lacked time to read them all, or had their own favorites to take the place of others. Cats, herds thereof. We could expect that people from particular fan communities would focus on the lists from sources they think trustworthy, given limited time, but more input and more suggestions means that there is a greater chance to discover the remarkable stories amongst the popular or workmanlike.

    This is SCIENCE FICTION and we’re afraid of crowd-sourcing? WTF is up with that?

  257. Julie,

    The Unwashed Masses (I know they mean me; and possibly thee, but you won’t hear that from *me*…) can’t be trusted to select _worthy_ tracts. They’re likely to choose with gay abandon (or straight abandon; not sure what the correct terminology should be) whatever catches their eye, instead of what they _need_ to read. The poor, benighted dears need to be gently led to knowledge (and hopefully, self-discomfort, if not outright self-loathing) for their own good.

  258. @julieapascal

    #1 Edge of Tomorrow–Pulpy military sci-fi, but GOOD pulpy military sci-fi. Yes, it was a sci-fi version of Groundhog Day, but it was so well executed that I thought it was the most exciting thing I saw last year.

    #2 The LEGO Movie–I didn’t want to watch it at all, and ONLY watched it because of the Hugo nom, because I was afraid it was going to be a movie-length commercial. Which it was. But the script was sharp (Seriously, have you ever seen a movie seen that pokes fun of Abe Lincoln, Shakespeare, Green Lantern, Albus Dumbledore, and Gandalf all in the same scene?), the visual effects were amazing, and the twist at the end gave the whole thing heart.

    #3 Captain America: The Winter Soldier–Yes, we’ve been beaten over the head with Marvel movies and TV shows, but this one was actually good. The action scenes were well done, and the movie had an interesting take on the hazards of a government surveillance state.

    #4 Guardians of of the Galaxy–ANOTHER Marvel movie, but again, this one was really well done.

    None of these movies pretended to be anything more than what they were. I thought Interstellar was ultimately preachy and pretentious, and the gimmicky ending was enough to make me walk out of the theater shaking my head. I had the same reaction to the end of Battlestar Galactica. I spent 4 seasons watching a fantastic hard sci-fi show, only to have it end with a ghost, or magic, or something. I’m still not sure what the hell happened at the end. But I know it was a cop-out, and I was annoyed that I’d invested 4 seasons into the show.

  259. I know it, Orgell. Just trying to shame the short-sighted and snobbish. But also, on the surface it might seem like a bad development if everyone and his dog put out competing lists, but only because of the assumption that science fiction fans are *followers*. It’s not an assumption with substance. Science fiction fans… us, them, those others, the elite, the snobs, the rabble… We’re not any of us good followers. And pretending that, well, *my* friends are independent free-thinkers while, oh, Correia’s fans are lock-step troglodytes (“take my money!” is not a pledge followed with “and my sacred honor!”) is nothing but baseless and opportunistic prejudice. That’s all fine and good when we’re doing a combo of cage-fighting and mud-wrestling (with maybe some roller derby thrown in) but *entertainment* isn’t the same thing as Truth.

    And the TRUTH is… we, all of us, herd like cats.

  260. Pingback: That Hell-Hound Train 5/20 | File 770

  261. Wisse is a walking Dutch Oven. He’s another member of the Race Gender Party. If there’s an anti-white diversity racist in SFF, they’ll eventually pop up on his feed. Wisse repeats that same lie you so often hear from SJWs based on no evidence that Sad Puppies are “a certain demographic not always having its way anymore,” as if SP represents some racial paranoia plus KKK. Wisse even parrots Damien Walter and says of Walter “he indicates that the Puppies are a symptom of the general displacement of white men as ‘ruling caste’ of everything. I’m not surprised people allege Walter is a serial liar. When does he ever come up with quotes for any of his silly assertions that constantly lead him and his to retweet junk like “6 Black Female Sci Fi Authors You Should Be Reading Right Now” featuring the photo of a woman who never shuts up about white people. I don’t need innuendoes for that “certain demographic.” One is never short of quotes when it comes to those racial tools.

    Who in the fuck does Wisse and Walter think is going to push back the most against a veritable political party that is anti-white, anti-male as its main platform. Do these morons ever read their own words? Where’s the quotes to back all this up? And yet when I offer quotes SJWs will them away. And they wonder why we think they are such liars. Is there even one of these morons that doesn’t retweet Anita Sarkeesian?

    Here’s a clue: have you ever seen a person admit to cognitive dissonance? Nope. Everyone thinks they’re right. That’s why civilization has rules and principles, a thing SJWs notably lack and why they embrace doublethink with both buttocks. Right now Scalzi’s telling people to vote with their conscience? When have you ever seen Scalzi show a sign of that? What he really means is his dissonant anti-racist racist cult called “social justice.” In last place comes art, behind genderqueers, the disabled, PoC and other diversity hires and affirmative action initiatives which brings us back to the innate racism of whites and misogyny of men and SJW dissonance about the fact that’s the same group defamation SJWs claim to be against and which is typically found in the KKK and neo-Nazis. In fact all SJW fiction is always about their so-called “conscience,” which is why their award-winners suck.

    SJWs have no principles – none. That’s why they can’t take the measure of a single thing in this world and why they’re a silly anti-KKK KKK.

  262. The NBA is 78% black in a country 13% black. By SJW reasoning, people – even themselves (keep dreaming) – should be Tweeting “6 White NBA Players You Should Be Following Right Now.”

    We all know the uproar which would follow that. That’s the obvious con game these children are trying to sell us and why SJWs lie as often as they breathe. They go nuts if the in-group is raped but out-group deaths on Game of Thrones don’t matter.

    We all know what a man would be called who said he was sick of seeing blacks score the winning basket and touchdown – a “black savior.” Yet that’s more of the lies SJW’s racists sell even as they obsessively write about “white saviors.” No one’s actually writing about “black saviors.” When is obvious actually obvious and when does one run out of amazing coincidences about who is targeted in all this “logic”? Look where the quotes are and where they are not.

    SJWs have the minds of children.

  263. I would say that you are seeing my lack of interest and/or desire as a failure to compehend.

    I understand why people may be keen on the ethics portion, but thats a discussion they will need to engage with others. On my part I see no way of discussing it without at least bringing up the ethics of voting slates in the Hugos, and that’s another discussion I have no interest in having here. I merely prefer the somewhat more objective standard of that which is legal against that which isn’t.

    Then at least explicitly acknowledge that you’re talking about a different subject, lest people think you’re arguing in bad faith or being dishonest.

    Shadowdancer, doing something differently to what I would do doesn’t make a person wrong.

    The problem is that there are things which are perfectly within the rules, which if done by a small number of people will cause no problem, but which if done by a significant portion of the people will cause the whole system to break down. I play board games, and I used to play some at a tournament level. Unlike chess, there’s no rule about how long someone can spend taking their turn. It’s understandable that some people take longer than others. I’ve seen some people deliberately draw out taking their turn to frustrate the opponent. If most of the players did that, the game would be unplayable. You may be one of the cases where you are not taking a longer turn to frustrate me but because you seriously need more time, and it’s not wrong for you to take your time. Still, it’s in the best interests of the tournament to encourage people to play quickly and gently pressure people taking longer than usual to hurry up.

    One of the tests of the spirit of the award would be to see how many categories get no awarded, especially the categories with relatively few voters. If the categories that don’t see many voters get No Awarded, then the spirit of the award is “I don’t recognize these nominees, so no one gets the award.” It would also be instructive to count the number of nominee voters for the major categories (such as Best Novel) for which none of their nominees made it on to the ballot, and see if they decide to No Award.

    Re: Ghost in the Shell. What, no Tachikomatic Days?

    It’s worth watching Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex for the Tachikoma story itself. It’s a fascinating and completely different look at AI. It’s also worth it just for the use of storytelling in the use of ‘Stand Alone’ and ‘Complex’ episodes. While the characters and their development are presented consistently throughout the series, the presentation of the larger story arc is so well done by being intertwined in with the other episodes.

    Tachikomatic Days is good, but Full Metal Panic:Fumoffu is BEST

    It’s certainly the funniest take on an already ridiculously cracked premise. The final episode had me falling out of my chair in laughter.

  264. One of these days I’ll actually sit down and watch all of Ghost in the Shell AND Tachikomatic Days. The series came out while I was utterly swamped with working and didn’t have time to watch much of anything. It was go to office, work overtime a lot, and go home to collapse to sleep, rinse repeat.

  265. The problem is that there are things which are perfectly within the rules, which if done by a small number of people will cause no problem, but which if done by a significant portion of the people will cause the whole system to break down…..

    Well, yeah sure. I happen to think that about voting slates, though. Consequently, given a choice between treating all nominees as business as usual, or No Awarding SP3/ RP nominees, I’m significantly in favour of the latter. As previously stated, I believe this works as a measure to discourage the future usage of slates and to reduce their effectiveness.

    Presumably, this is something (voting slates and higher frequency of No Awards) that the Hugo’s are gonna have to put up with for the next couple of years, assuming that a more robust voting system is voted and ratified in the next couple of business meetings.

  266. @julieapascal

    I worry about competing slates, because I don’t agree with your assertion that herding fans is like herding cats. The Rabid Puppies slate ran the table in a bunch of the short fiction categories. That was entirely within the rules. If the Official John Scalzi Slate runs the table in a bunch of categories next year, that’ll be within the rules, too, but I don’t want to see that happen. And I’m happy to bet that a lot of people will be willing to line up behind the Official John Scalzi Slate.

  267. @snowcrash

    I’m not a big fan of slates, but I’m even less of a fan of No Awarding everything that was on a particular slate. In this case, that would lead to a bunch of No Awards for several categories. An awards ceremony that gives out no award in half of its categories is really going to suck for the fans. It’s going to be worse for the writers. I’m assuming most of the nominees will be in Spokane. Can you imagine how awful you’d feel if the audience basically told you that not only did YOUR story suck, but so did everyone else’s, so we’re not even giving a trophy out for your category?

  268. “@Chupik: So, Wisse is saying he’s an a-hole and 100% a dick?”

    YES! 😀

  269. I left this at Glyer’s for smug asshats who think they can lecture me about “hurt and confused men with Very Important Things To Explain, usually to women.” If any of these fucks ever debated me about their own crazy, racist and sadistic ideology they’d end up having to eat mansplain sandwiches directly from my paws.

    I recommend the following partial list: Les Guérillères, Monique Wittig; A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century by Donna Haraway; The Second Sex by Simone de Beauvoir; Sexual Politics, Kate Millet; “Post-Binary Gender in SF: Ancillary Justice by Ann Leckie” by Alex Dally MacFarlane; “Post-Binary Gender in SF: Introduction” by Alex Dally MacFarlane; “Sexuality, Pornography, and Method: ‘Pleasure under Patriarchy by Catherine A. MacKinnon; “Androgyny and the Uncanny in Ursula Le Guin’s The Left Hand of Darkness and Ann Leckie’s Ancillary Justice” by Kevin Palm; Against Our Will by Susan Brownmiller; Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity by Judith Butler; The Furies Lesbian/Feminist Monthly, Vol 1, 1972; Demarginalizing the Intersection ofRace and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory, and Antiracist Politics by Kimberle Crenshaw; Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color by Kimberle Crenshaw; “SEX, SOCIETY, AND THE FEMALE DILEMMA: A Dialogue between Simone de Beauvoir and Betty Friedan,” Time Magazine, June 14, 1975; Intercourse by Andrea Dworkin; Woman Hating by Andrea Dworkin; Virginia Wolfe’s Essays: Sketching the Past by Elena Gualtieri; Judith Butler: Sexual politics, social change and the power of the performative by Gill Jagger; I Am Your Sister: COLLECTED AND UNPUBLISHED WRITINGS OF AUDRE LORDE Edited by RUDOLPH P. BYRD JOHNNETTA BETSCH COLE BEVERLY GUY-SHEFTALL; “The Master’s Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master’s House” by Audre Lorde; Heterophobia: Sexual Harassment and the Future of Feminism by Daphne Patai; The Orwell Mystique: A Study in Male Ideology by Daphne Patai; RADICAL FEMINISM, WRITING, AND CRITICAL AGENCY: From Manifesto to Modem by Jacqueline Rhodes; Ancillary Justice by Ann Leckie; Key Concepts in Feminist Theory and Research by Christina Hughes; Yes Means Yes Visions of Female Sexual Power and a World Without Rape by Jaclyn Friedman and Jessica Valenti; The Dialectic of Sex by Shulamith Firestone; No Turning Back: The History of Feminism and the Future of Women by Estelle Freedman; The Essential Feminist Reader by Estelle Freedman; The Female Man by Joanna Russ; Of Woman Born: Motherhood As Experience and Institution by Adrienne Rich; “It’s not a real heart, it’s a real artificial heart” by Ann Leckie; Friend Island by Francis Stevens; “‘We Have Always Fought’: Challenging the ‘Women, Cattle and Slaves’ Narrative” by Kameron Hurley; “Lucy: Why I’m Tired of Seeing White People on the Big Screen” by Olivia Cole; “When Will White People Stop Making Movies Like ‘Avatar’?” by Annlee Newitz; “A Much-Needed Primer on Cultural Appropriation” by Katie J. M. Baker; “So That Was Readercon” by John Chu; Patriarch’s Day – Part IV” by Laura Mixon; “Women Without Men: A Constantly Undermined Trope” by Alex Dally MacFarlane; “Mary Anne Mohanraj Gets You Up to Speed” Parts 1 and 2; “Straight White Male: The Lowest Difficulty Setting There Is” by John Scalzi; “Jim Hines, Recruiter of PoC” by Jim Hines; “The Diverse Editors List: a post-production essay” by Bogi Takács; “TERRAFORM, Erasure, and (how to break) Community Norms” by Sarah Wanenchak; “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack” by Peggy McIntosh; Women Destroy Science Fiction/Lightspeed Magazine; “Set Truth on Stun: Reimagining an Anti-Oppressive SF/F” by Daniel Jose Older; “It’s time to take the white savior out of slavery narratives” by Daniel Jose Older; “Is ‘Game of Thrones’ Too White?” by Saladin Ahmed; Hild by Nicola Griffith; “Science fiction needs to reflect that the future is queer” by Damien Walter; How to Suppress Women’s Writing by Joanna Russ; The Battle of the Sexes in Science Fiction by Justine Larbalestier; “Sultana’s Dream” by Rokheya Shekhawat; “If You Were A Dinosaur, My Love” by Rachel Swirsky; “Good Lesbian Science Fiction Novels” by Nicola Griffith; “The Most Mind-Expanding Lesbian Science Fiction Books” by Charlie Jane Anders

  270. @Frank

    I see where you’re coming from, but right now I truly do believe that we’re left with a whole host of less-than-ideal options. Treat the nominees as valid, and look forward to multiple slates next year? I certainly prefer the No Award option to that.

    Without making the voting system more robust, what would you suggest to diminish the unfair leveraging that a voting slate confers? Increased participation is obvious, but beyond that?

  271. @snowcrash
    The thing is, and this is what I don’t get: essentially people who say they’re against a ‘voting slate’ are saying that people who put together any kind of list like we SP did for our recommendation list are ‘doing so against the spirit of the Hugos.’ It smacks strongly of being told that we aren’t allowed to say publicly what books we think are worthy or eligible for the Hugos because ‘that’s campaigning and unfair.’

    That’s why I said what you were saying earlier made no sense. Pretty much the ‘only’ options at this point is either to vote fairly for the current nominations, or as you will do, ‘no award’ everything, regardless of how meritorious the work is. You basically think that it is ‘unfair’ that we outnumbered the other side because we were encouraged to put down our own money to vote fairly for works we ourselves suggested to the Sad Puppy recommendation list and voted for. You’re cheerfully ignoring the reality that Sad Puppies was NOT a ‘vote for this list only’ list, but a list of works those who participated in SP3 read, enjoyed, and suggested as worthy, and the most number of suggestions made it to the list.

    If your main complaint is Vox Day’s Rabid Puppies, why are you here? Vox Day’s blog is over at Blogspot.

    If it isn’t, why are you angry at us for liking what we liked ENOUGH to nominate what we felt were Hugo worthy?

    If it’s simply because you do not feel that any of the works we suggested are worthy, then you are penalizing authors for a difference of opinions and tastes between fans.

    Also, No Awarding works is essentially telling those authors they are being punished because ‘they have the wrong kinds of fans and are not disavowing them as you feel should be done, because how dare they like that work so much they put them on a list.

  272. A question worth asking then is *will voting no award actually have the effect you think it will?*

    Obviously you think so, or you wouldn’t be advocating it.

    Personally I think that it will make a lot of people very angry, and not just the ‘puppies.’

    I am quite confident the majority of the voters and fans are neither puppies or anti–puppies. For them this is all a bunch of silly irrelevancies.

    To them slate voting is irrelevant. Whether Brad is right or not is irrelevant. They’re here for the books and nothing else, not even the authors. Most of them have no idea that any of this is going on.

    Hearing about or sitting through an awards ceremony where no awards are given out won’t send them any message about slate voting. If I had to guess I’d bet that most of them would simply come to the conclusion that the Hugos are no longer worth bothering about at all.

    And that doesn’t even answer the question of how successful no award will be at changing the puppies behavior. Somehow the phrase “not much” comes to mind.

  273. Yeah, a lot of the people complaining about Vox and Rabid Puppies come *here* to complain. That’s a bit like going to the Pope to complain about the Baptists.

  274. I’d recommend, Snowcrash, you get people to put push behind their own favorites. Not necessarily as groups but get people recommending stories, get people involved. Get the word out about what’s out there TO read, encourage people to talk about the books they’ve read and how AWESOME they are not ‘This book is a significant work, especially as it reflects the dystopic myopias of our times. It does not fall into the trap of attributing nobility to anyone but starkly addresses the layers of ambiguity that are the curse of morality’. You need people going ‘You HAVE to read this book. It’s amazing. It’s not just another ‘the world looks perfect but is really broken’ book. The characters are great and some, well There was one guy I wasn’t sure was going to pull through but… oh, I don’t want to spoil it for you you just HAVE to read it for it to make sense. But that character had me on the edge of my seat worrying which way he’d jump the whole time. Yeah, I have a spare copy here! (Or, ‘sure I can loan it to you on your kindle. I’ll re-read it when it comes back)’. The ONLY way to combat your boogie man is to make sure there are so many voices that none dominate. Be warned: You won’t come out on top most of the time, statistics are against that for anyone, but in a healthy systems there will be variety in the winners not just depressing tales of a doomed future or thinly disguised sermons. It should be a huge pile of a little bit of this, a little bit of that. Some years something will be more prominent. Some years other things will be. Rather than the grey goopy constant we currently have with the occasional ‘oo shiny!’ blip on the radar.

    For me, I want the Hugos to be a sign that the books are worth reading, and this year has come closer than any other in at least two decades. The Hugo has been a WARNING LABEL for me. Warning me to steer clear of any new work with that plastered on it because the story won’t be worth reading.

  275. @Shadowdancer

    As previously stated, I’d really like to not get into the ethics of slate voting etc. I will say that I disagree that SP3 was a recommendation list. It’s currently my view that it was a voting slate, albeit one that did not have the strong straight-line voting adherence of RP. Presumably in August once the results are out and nomination numbers are released, we can see whether this is true.

    Pretty much the ‘only’ options at this point is either to vote fairly for the current nominations, or as you will do, ‘no award’ everything, regardless of how meritorious the work is.

    Those are not the only options, and I have no intention of No Awarding everything. There are various other methods. Scalzi mentions one in his latest Hugo neepery post (comparing the works against his least preferred nomination as a baseline for NA).

    You’re cheerfully ignoring the reality that Sad Puppies was NOT a ‘vote for this list only’ list, but a list of works those who participated in SP3 read, enjoyed, and suggested as worthy, and the most number of suggestions made it to the list.

    I disagree with this as well. Works that were never even nominated or recommended by *anyone* in the open thread (ie, Juliette Wade’s, and the KJA novel) made it onto SP3. Works with the highest number of recommendations (Domo, by Joshua M Young, which had as many recommendations as Interstellar) didn’t make it onto the slate. I’m basing this on the original recommendation thread: https://bradrtorgersen.wordpress.com/2015/01/07/announcing-sad-puppies-3/

    And this summary:
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1KsUUULAR4McYiosUfFT1lr9IRnJgYabSuX6qgSEs19s/edit?usp=sharing )

    If your main complaint is Vox Day’s Rabid Puppies, why are you here?

    From what I could tell, there was much better taste in animation here. :p

  276. ^^ this. It’s the only way to handle the reality of how modern infotech impacts the ability to influence opinion. Get all the opinions out there. Let individual voters make up their own minds. If ten or 25 or 100 people are posting all year long about the really excellent new books they’ve read that ought to win a Hugo, then it’s just publicity, not a slate. The horses have already escaped from the barn – from here, WorldCon only gets more and more voters as more and more fans realize they just have to pay $40 for the supporting membership. Either all of fandom gets to have that voice… or only the “special” fans do, and then the Hugos are not really the Hugos of old any more.

  277. @Jared – that’s entirely possible, but like I said, we’re left with a bunch of least worst options at this point, and I’m going with my conscience on it.

    @wyrdbard – True. I think increasing participation in both nominations and voting is key, but we have to keep in mind that a sufficiently rigorous straight line voting slate (ie, a small number of people strictly voting a straight line ticket) will have a distorting effect. One good thing out of this whole kerfuffle is that greater participation seems to be happening. Is it sustainable? Time will tell.

  278. @Snowcrash – would you consider posting a list of eligible works being a slate?

    Would you consider someone posting a list of works they’ve read that are eligible to be nominated for the Hugos to be a slate?

    Also, IIRC, Brad got people emailing him their recommendations; and from what I am aware of, the other regulars also gathered recommendations given to them directly and passed them on. This was not limited to Brad’s blog alone.

  279. Just finished the tenth session of Bebop. Ed finally showed up and they finally collected some bounties.

  280. The problem to me is pretty clear: the core community used to act as custodians of their art. They promoted and taught art appreciation and acted as curators. The Hugo Winners and SF Hall of Fame anthologies operated much like a museum. People said “This is what we think is good” and they made a case for it. They understood the evolution of their genre. Now Jack Vance dies and they say “Who was that?” They’ve never heard of Lord Dunsany.

    Today that same community has replaced a curatorship with judging work by its value as a medium to achieve social justice. People are publicly stating they care more about who’s in the books than if they’re any good. Many more are openly promoting work merely by the identity of the authors. On top of that, at the same time they’re hanging “Not Welcome” signs to other identities. They’re on a crusade and with a lot of flat out racial and sexual hate speech to boot. Too many books are being laid open to whether they benefit this weird feminist ideology. They’re even attempting to mass boycott Game of Thrones.

    Throw all that into any other arena, whether it’s engine design, architecture, whatever. It will be destroyed.

    However you felt about it, comics in the ’50s and movies in the ’60s were critiqued from a standpoint of a shared American cultural failing. Today supremacist feminists in SFF and also like Anita Sarkeesian and Brianna Wu are critiquing whites and men instead. You just can’t do that to art. The next Vance or Bradbury can’t emerge from that sort of system. Not only are they not being cultivated they’re being actively discriminated against. SJWs openly sneer at the idea of a meritocracy, a common thing for failure. Look for failure, cultivate it, and that’s what you get.

  281. @snowcrash: There will always be distorting effects. The more involvement the more localized they are. You will never achieve a perfect system, and trying tends to wind up backfiring. The question is ‘what creates the most robust system’. I, for one, have no issue with Sad Puppies. I’ve been following the relevant blogs and my rough estimate is about 1/3-1/2 of the people who commented on the grouping as such, said they were voting for ‘most of these but X instead of Y because it’s awesome’ to varying degrees. Most of the rest of the comments were about voting for specific ones with no comment for or against the rest of the grouping. I saw only one who said he was voting for the whole thing as is. This tends to support the ‘herding cats’ motif. Since the number of people not following the crowd is always larger in private than in public. I saw nothing that threw any flags for anything more than shared tastes.

    A side note on hugo worthiness. I’m currently working my way through Kevin J. Anderson’s novel (working my way because I haven’t gotten it onto my e-reader yet and can only read in bits and snatches until the weekend.) From what I’ve read so far, I would say this one is definitely worthy of the hugo nomination and far more than what I’ve read of last year’s winner (which is a similar amount at this juncture). I think you might want to step back and take a look at how much the word ‘slate’ has poisoned your perception of the works. They seem far more worthy than many nominated in the recent past.

  282. Sorry – my last comment was in reference to wyrdbard’s comment beginning “I’d recommend, Snowcrash…” but it took 5 minutes to post and others snuck in there in between.

    @snowcrash – “a distorting effect” – Voting is voting. On Tuesday in my area we had primary elections. In the fall it will be the general election, where some people will vote a straight Democrat ticket. Others will vote a straight Republican ticket. Others will vote based on their analysis of the merits of each particular candidate regardless of party, or taking party into account as one factor among others. Whoever gets the most votes gets elected. There will be massive amounts of money spent on advertising in various media – most of which will be fundamentally dishonest in one way or another – in order to sway the opinions of the voters.

    The bottom line is: you either trust ultimately in the concept of government by the people, i.e. individuals being ultimately responsible for their own votes, and accept the aggregate result, or else you don’t buy into that concept – and then you are in the unenviable position of deciding who gets to vote, based on what criteria, and who doesn’t. And now you’ve got poll taxes and Jim Crow.

    The simplest (and only fair) way to eliminate the “problem” of gaming the shortlist/nomination process is to eliminate the shortlist. Here’s a list of all the works published this year in each category. Ready-Set-Vote. Pretty much all of the other proposals I’ve seen have been analogous to gerrymandering – let’s change the rules so our people keep winning and we shut the other team out! Because *that* is an outstanding example of democratic thought. If you don’t want to be democratic, hey, that’s fine… but then the Hugos can no longer bill themselves as THE fan-selected award for excellence… because we only allow CERTAIN fans to vote. And now we’re back to the TruFan/WrongFan debate as well.

  283. Correction to mine: the ‘voting for’ in my last applies to nominations. Most people have been going ‘oo books now to read and see which ones I vote for.’ thus far.

  284. Get all the opinions out there. Let individual voters make up their own minds. If ten or 25 or 100 people are posting all year long about the really excellent new books they’ve read that ought to win a Hugo, then it’s just publicity, not a slate. The horses have already escaped from the barn – from here, WorldCon only gets more and more voters as more and more fans realize they just have to pay $40 for the supporting membership. Either all of fandom gets to have that voice… or only the “special” fans do, and then the Hugos are not really the Hugos of old any more.

    This is the underlying point. We want to have new and good sci-fi brought to our attention. The Hugo awards are one way to do that, but anything that says ‘these books are worth your attention’ is good. If people honestly read, recommend, nominate and vote for books they think are worthy, the award will go to a worthy work regardless. If people don’t, by refusing to read, by putting in negative reviews without reading, and by No Awarding books they haven’t read merely to spike any chances the book has of winning, then the award is meaningless even if there are no slates. Right now, one side in this debate is refusing to read, is resorting to negative reviews without having read, and is threatening to No Award books they haven’t read because of bias against the authors or even people that recommend the author.

  285. You folks do realize the SJWs are almost 100% on the same page with this Game of Thrones thing. How do you think you can reason with that? They’re not going to allow anyone to interrupt their crusade no matter what. You dammed their social justice river this year. They’ll take whatever steps they need to in order to get it flowing again, including changing the rules. They are not going to allow work that’s merely entertaining or well crafted no matter what you do and they’ve been pretty up front about it. Who needs to be told to vote with your “conscience”? SJWs didn’t want a good or funny host last year, they wanted ones with a “conscience.” They got exactly what they wanted by simply ignoring the committee and swarming them. They’re not against swarming, just when others do it. SJWs don’t want fun reads, they want work that appeals to one’s “conscience” and social consciousness, including class, race, sex and geographic locale. Art comes in last place, just like fun. Despite what some are saying about this not being baked into the culture from top to bottom, I just don’t see how Ancillary Justice sweeps almost every award unless that’s the case. If that book was judged purely on merit you barely would’ve heard of it let alone seen it win awards. Let’s be honest: it was the one true cross last year.

  286. Shadowdancer – I’d say no to both. Does it have more candidates than available nomination slots (which sounds right to both your examples)? Then it’s unlikely to be a voting slate. Does it specifically target a particular vote or election, with the aim of getting candidates on? Then it’s more likely to be a slate. Not definitive or objective, but little is.

    wyrdbard/ MAttK – I agree that there is no “perfect” solution, but I certainly believe that a more robust voting system can & should be looked into, and if fit for purpose, should be voted on at the Business Meeting.

    On KJA – I lost interest in the beginning, which doesn’t really surprise me given that 1. I never read the original series, and 2. I’m fairly unforgiving of him since he started desecrating the body of Frank Herbert(‘s work).

  287. The voting system is fine. The voting population, however, is unhealthily small, allowing for black swans like the Puppies to have a disparate impact. That said, I’d favor widening the pool of nominees to seven, as long as the voters still get five choices to nominate. Gerrib’s 4/6 choice is punitive towards all Worldcon voters and easily gameable. I’d also favor the proposal to drop the supporting membership price to $5.

  288. Alright.

    What if say, I posted a list of books I’d read, saying “These are valid candidates for the 2016 Hugos.”? Or “These are the books I’ve read that are eligible for the next year’s Hugo Awards”.

    What if, I posted a list that gave the categories of the Hugos, and just listed the ones I’d read that are eligible?

    What if I posted a list that gave the categories of the Hugos, listed the ones I had read and said ‘These are works I think deserve a nomination’?

    what if I said “These are the works in these categories that I am nominating for the Hugos.”?

    For the two examples above this paragraph, I don’t have fixed numbers for each of them; some of the categories might be blank (I don’t really listen to podcasts) some might have an entry or two, some might have more; some of them might have just the five by coincidence (such as, I found only five examples that I felt worth nominating, or was exposed to only five) while others might have more than five.

    Each of these are a different ‘what if’, and I’d appreciate it if you kindly took the time to reply to each example.

    The last one to me is what is closest, in my opinion to a ‘slate’ – but it’s MY slate, and me simply saying ‘this is what I’m going to nominate.’

    If I ended that with a reminder for my readers to go do their own nominating of their own chosen works, is that campaigning for the slate, or campaigning to get more voters interested in nominating / voting?

    I ask this for clarity because its’ starting to get blurred a bit in the arguments.

  289. @Shadowdancer Duskstar / Cutelildrow

    The Locus Recommended Reading List would be something that I would consider a list of recommendations rather than a slate:

    http://www.locusmag.com/Magazine/2015/02/2014-locus-recommended-reading-list/

    It leans toward Tor books, but it clearly has more works on it that you could ever nominate for an award.

    As for why I call Sad Puppies 3 a slate, well, um, that’s what Brad Torgersen called it when he posted it:

    https://bradrtorgersen.wordpress.com/2015/02/01/sad-puppies-3-the-2015-hugo-slate/

    Maybe Mr Torgersen didn’t mean for the word “slate” to be taken the way it’s usually taken when we talk about, say, politics, but I think that train has already left the station. It is a list of suggested nominations published by a group (as opposed to just an individual telling you what they liked and thought should be nominated) with the specific intent of getting those works on the ballot.

    The reason people talk about Rabid Puppies here is probably because the RP slate appears to be largely based on the SP3 slate, so it’s relevant to the discussion. I’ve posted comments on George R R Martin’s site, Larry Correia’s site, and this site about the two different slates, mainly because I’m convinced that all three authors are sincere in their beliefs and are having a heated but civil debate about the whole thing.

    I’ve avoided Vox Day’s site, because I can’t find much independent information about him, and I’m not convinced that he’s always being sincere. I have the impression that he often says outrageous things just to get a rise out of people, and I’m more interested in an honest exchange of ideas. I also have the impression that you can’t really understand Vox Day without understanding GamerGate, and the handful of articles I’ve read about GamerGate don’t make any sense. Since gaming isn’t my scene, I’ve decided that it’s really not worth any more of my time to learn more about GamerGate. So that’s why I’m here (and at monsterhunternation.com and georgerrmartin.com) and not there.

  290. I’ve actually found that Vox will respond to someone in the way he is treated; and most people are not able to debate with him. That said, I rarely comment in his discussions because I don’t think I’m as informed as I feel I should be about the topics they discuss but do think they have interesting and lively discussions and often disagreements. I did have to comment there to establish my genuine bonafides before my longtime stalker and harasser tried to pass himself off as me; and that stalker tried anyway.

  291. @Shadowdancer Duskstar / Cutelildrow

    If Vox is what I call a you-get-what-you-give kind of person, then I suspect we’d get along fine. I lived in NYC for 3 years and never had a problem with anyone, probably because I would say, “Please,” “Thank you,” and “I’m sorry” when it was appropriate. I would even be willing to not attempt to try to find his Secret Evil Fortress in Italy or Finland (Opinions seem to differ on the location.), but I’m already getting enough honest debate on the three sites I mentioned, and I really just don’t want to go anywhere near GamerGate.

  292. I may give it a try if George R R Martin gets arrested for raping Sansa Stark. I have this mental image of him being dragged away in handcuffs screaming, “She’s not a real person!”

  293. Can we at least agree that presenting a slate and voting the slate are not the same thing? Also, it’s irrational to insist that fewer suggestions or a greater number of suggestions make a list of suggestions or recommendations different, somehow. Locus, for example, has a long list presented as unbiased but has been shown to be so even while resting on a reputation for representing the industry as a whole in a faithful manner. A long list is in some ways more exclusionary than a short one. Why look beyond it when it’s already too much to read?

  294. Frank,

    The GamerGate kerfluffle (thanks for giving me the opportunity to use ‘kerfluffle’, by the way) is, in many ways, the same Puppy/CHORF fight, only turned up to 11, with Polonium/Anthrax frosting. It’s Internet based, so the OODA loops are really tight, the SJWs control a lot of the media narrative at the moment, so the GG MO is to be calm and reasonable in the face of some rather brutal attacks. The benefit – and weakness – in the GG fight is that it’s wrapped around twitter tags that anyone on both sides can use. It’s a benefit where ‘real’ people are less likely to get attacked, but it’s a liability where the legal pressures that can be brought against libel – as was used by Puppies – can’t really be used to defend a hashtag.

    The tighter OODA loops and heavier ‘net integration also allows the SJW narrative to be broken easier, as well – there are faster responses to broad media attacks, it’s easier to highlight hypocrisy, lies, and such. There are cracks starting to form in the SJW narrative; more people are starting to actually question people and events, instead of the ‘Listen and Believe’ which was the earlier, default setting.

    I don’t blame you for wanting to avoid it; it’s not pretty. But, as you’ve seen with Puppies/CHORFs, it may not be willing to avoid you.

  295. @Julie Pascal

    “Can we at least agree that presenting a slate and voting the slate are not the same thing?”

    Absolutely. But you obviously present a slate in the hopes that people will vote for it. What happened next was that the Rabid Puppies piggy-backed off of the Sad Puppies 3 slate, and the two slates (which overlapped substantially) managed to get a number of their suggestions onto the ballot. Then the whole thing exploded into a controversy that was so loud that it was (mis)covered by the mainstream media. Mr Correia and Mr Torgersen were branded as racist misogynists. It was bad enough that Annie Bellet and Marko Kloos declined their Hugo nominations (which Larry Correia covered in a post titled, “Well, this sucks.”), and Black Gate and one of the editors followed suit. SP3 was obviously very successful in getting things nominated, but I don’t think anyone ever expected people to start declining Hugo nominations because of slate voting. And now some people are threatening to No Award all of the Puppy nominees (which would also suck).

    No one broke any rules here (except for the MSM articles that attacked Correia and Torgersen), but there were a LOT of unintended consequences, and it may get even worse once the awards are announced. I’ve also said repeatedly that I think the most likely scenario next year is dueling slates, which I also really don’t want to see. SP4 versus RP2 versus SJW1 sounds like a pay-per-view event, not a selection of the best sci-fi and fantasy of the year.

  296. Orgell, thanks for that reply; it’s a good summary I think. My own awareness of GG is closer to the #NotYourShield awareness, and as a gamer who happens to be female, I didn’t particularly like being accused of ‘internalized misogyny/racism/etc’ simply for disagreeing with the SJW narratives. I already vehemently dislike the Tumblr/3rd wave feminist idiocy, and GG strikes me as having grown from that in part.

  297. @Shadowdancer Duskstar / Cutelildrow

    RE: My lame GRRM joke (which should’ve had a spoiler alert). Go with ignorance on this one. And don’t click on anything related to Game of Thrones this week. You don’t even want to know how ridiculous it is. Actually, maybe you do: It’s so ridiculous that a US Senator tweeted about it.

  298. …and I missed that bit about a US Senator. (it’s 5:40am over here in ‘straya)

    I’m entirely unsure of how to take that. Should one be grateful they’re occupying themselves with something idiotic and not messing up the US, or think they have much better things to do with their time?

  299. @Frank – a friend …enlightened me about this new kerfuffle re: GoT.

    …I’m not sure what they’ve been watching and reading, but I think they have been watching a totally imaginary version of GoT if they’re enraged over that. Or did they completely miss the whole thing with the Wildlings, first with the daughter-wives of that crazed lunatic beyond the wall, because, freaking RAPE INCEST, and then those poor women being attacked and used as sex slaves by the Watch deserters, then the Wildling army heavily implied to have raped and slaughtered the women in that brothel near the Wall…?

    I’d go on but SJW outrage never made sense to begin with so why bother trying? ~_~;;;;;

  300. @Shadowdancer Duskstar / Cutelildrow

    It’s a rich white woman (you know, like so many of the SJW’s squeakiest wheels are), so it’s DIFFERENT now, as opposed to when Plebs get assaulted…

  301. The quickest version of GG, stripping away as much bias as I can (I’m a GGer).

    GGers, because of many instance of journalistic evangelising, collusion, and corruption, want ethics in gaming journalism that fall in line with what can be expected in more public journalism fields.
    Anti-GGers, because gamers don’t shy away from harsh language when expressing an opinion, are concerned with harrassment.
    Third parties just want the drama, and many instances of harrassment blamed on GG have been instead proven to be people who get their kicks out of perpetuating the fires. And, in some cases, like at least one threat against Anita Sarkeesian, have been made by journalists who wanted to profit off of the resulting story.

    And, yes, it has coalesced into an awful tribal mess as people talk past each other and oppose each other because of associations. And, given the overlap in between fandoms and convention crowds, there tends to be overlap in the anti-GG crowd and the anti-Puppies.

  302. And it should be added the main con of the anti-GG crowd is they portray anyone against goofy feminist manphobic “critiques” of gaming like Anita Sarkeesian and Brianna Wu as being the “misogynist” woman hating guys who were there all along. Feminist gender abolitionist John Scalzi has been selling that bullshit from day one, and still cracks jokes about “It’s all about ethics in…” even with new ethics policies in place and gaming “journalists” Leigh Alexander and Ben Kuchera banished for attacking men. Randi Harper is begging for money on the internet.

    “Christina H. Sommers retweeted Claire Lehmann @clairlemon · Oct 21 Critiquing the methodologies of contemporary feminism is not the same thing as being misogynist or even sexist. Far from it. #GamerGate”

    Certainly Scalzi abolished his gender a long time ago. He’s the A. Lincoln of gender SFF.

    And it never occurred to anti-GG Shanks the Punter Chris Kluwe that he was debating a Latina pro-GG woman who he then ethnically insulted with “nacho shield.” The idea porn star Mercedes Carrera is a “misogynist” is routine for SJWs.

    SJWs are routinely clueless people who find themselves fighting for what they think they are fighting against. If anti-GG were looking for a racist misogynist they found one in Shanks, not Carrera.

  303. What I love about SJWs is they’ve taken a massive beating in the last year and still haven’t backed off one inch. They are completely immune to facts or their own lies and madness. If crazy women on Twitter murmuring against men all day every day is “social justice” then neo-Nazis are fighting for social justice. How do you side with women crying on Twitter about comedians and ads with a bikini, cursing out inappropriate shirts scientists wear and now a mass boycott of the guy providing covering fire for them – GRRM. The amount of treading water guys like Scalzi and Hines need to do just to keep their heads above water with “the gals” is amazing to watch. It wouldn’t surprise me one bit if each has a feminist go over their books for badwords and badthink, just like the Mad Max movie hired “The Vagina Monologues” twit Eve Ensler to go over the film. The funny thing there is non-white intersectionalist feminists hate Ensler and are constantly swarming her.

    SJWs are they own explanation in all things, especially their greatest skill: mainstreaming hate speech without a hint of awareness. The only thing intersectional feminists have proven in the social arena is that they are too societally feral and primitive to be anything more than a drag on a modern civilization with a Constitution. Think of some of their arguments and then think of them on a jury. What are the Skiffy and Fanty’s of SFF going to do with actual evidence other than ignore it cuz patriarchy? A quote by one guy is taken completely at face value. Quotes they don’t like become another thing entirely.

  304. @Nathan

    Thank you. That actually make some sense. It also makes me even less interested in following it. Again, just not my scene.

  305. I just pulled it up on two PCs, my tablet and my phone. Works on all of them. Not sure what to tell you. Make sure you don’t have cbssports.com blocked somehow? If you plug “chris kluwe doyel” into Google, it’s the first link that comes up.

  306. @Orgell

    In fairness, I think it was because it happened to a major character that many viewers were emotionally invested in. But I agree with Shadowdancer Duskstar / Cutelildrow that if you thought Sansa was going to live happily ever after, you’re really watching the wrong show.

    Sansa is, paradoxically, one of my favorite characters, because she believes so strongly in the happily-ever-after myth that she almost never misses a chance to make a bad decision. She may not have known Ramsay Bolton was a sexual sadist, but she sure as hell knew he was the son of the man who killed her brother and engineered the death of her mother and people from just about every other Northern family. Littlefinger gave her a chance to back out on the marriage, and she let him talk her into it anyway. Then her chambermaid told her if she was ever in trouble, she should light a candle at the top of the Broken Tower. After the dinner from hell, which included an appearance by Reek/Theon (who she thinks killed her OTHER two brothers), she should have gone running to the top of the Broken Tower with a torch in each hand and waved them until she dropped from exhaustion. Instead, she mocked Myranda for being a low-born woman who’s in love with Ramsay, the man she’s going to marry. Hell, this is the girl who lied for Joffrey in Season 1 and got her own dire wolf (and her sister’s best friend) killed as a result. The only reason she’s still alive at all is because she makes a good hostage for various groups.

  307. Well, Mr. Probst, the problem there is this weird cult is already subtly and not so subtly altering the landscape of film, TV and literature in ways that will bring it back the sanitized sit-coms of the ’60s, minus the humor. But there’s a ton of stuff that predates this infestation and I think the vast majority of SFF writers outside this bubble ignore SJWs anyway. How long they can do that is the question, even with self-pub, because the more popular they are the more they expose themselves. The self-promotion necessary with Twitter nowadays is a double-edged sword, because it acts as a portal these people use to swarm folks.

    My own interest has to do with an overseas project examining the mainstreaming of hate speech into the public arena; a project that is now thankfully over. When it comes to sheer obsessive and mentally unstable hatreds, I can honestly say I learned more about that from researching the mental cases of the core SFF community than I did documenting the Egyptian Revolution.

  308. @Nathan and @shadow

    FWIW – I’m only related to GG in a ancillary way, as I’m not a hard core video gamer

    BUT…..

    What is often not reported is the degree to which Anti-GG accusations are projection. Anita Sarkeesian’s BS cancellation over the bomb threat (aforementioned reporter being the real villain) also mentioned at Larry’s site. People claiming to have “left home” out of fear for their safety when they’re filming from the same room with equipment turned around. “Threatening posts from gamergaters” where the person “receiving” the threat is not only still logged into the “offending” account sending them threats, but screen capping them before remembering to hit “post”….

    Jokes about shoveling GG’ers into ovens. Attacks on men, women, and homosexuals of many races for being “_______ Traitors”, sock puppets, etc.(So much for anita S and “just listen to women”). Syringes mailed to Milo Yiannopoulos (incidentally, a gay man).

    And the “stars” of the pro side? Take Anita S, who takes “pissing on your leg and telling you it’s raining” to the further level of going out of her way to show you she’s pissing on your leg, and still calling it rain (namely, SHOWING a person being penalized for killing innocents and strippers in one of the “Hit Man” games, while telling you the game encourages you to kill and mistreat women… ignore all the dead male bodies piling up…)

  309. Shadowdancer

    To me, the 2nd last one (What if I posted a list that gave the categories of the Hugos, listed the ones I had read and said ‘These are works I think deserve a nomination’?) comes closest to my idea of a slate.

    I ask this for clarity because its’ starting to get blurred a bit in the arguments.

    I agree. But then again, these are blurred lines anyway – if someone comes up with an objective hard definition, someone else will come up with a way to skirt or avoid those stipulations.

  310. The usefulness of a thing like the Hugos is as a conservatorship. It is supposedly an elite with a heightened artistic appreciation of their genre. Numbers don’t matter per se; a museum may have one curator for a section but if they’re trained properly they will embrace as many different views as possible. That curatorship with the Hugos has been severely eroded.

    It started with the textualization of art last century, where the art become more of a conveyance for something else which may have had nothing to do with the art rather than the art itself. That’s what you have here. You have a genre that has been hijacked and the priorities of GLAAD, NOW and the NAACP inserted in place of art.

    SJWs present strawman arguments they always win, in this case that all SF is political in some fashion. But no one’s saying it’s not. What SP is saying is off-topic propaganda is not the same as worldbuilding within the context of the genre’s legitimate interests. SF fans love speculative politics about larger humanity. What they don’t love is provincial niche propaganda forcefed along with a dose of intolerance. Jim Crow and Andrea Dworkin in the 25th century may seem perfectly natural to obsessive morons but to normal people it seems too odd even for SF. Ancillary Justice may as well have been titled Huffington’s Planet. Only unsophisticated and unprincipled SF fans are going to push that stuff. Our best so-called “literary” SF has disguised cultural markers in order to bypass bias and arrive at the fundamental principle behind an argument, not put the Daily Kos in outer space. It’s no surprise SJWs essentially ostracize one guy for “racism” while giving others awards for the exact same “racism” – in principle. That’s the big blind spot of SJWs and what makes them such goofy rednecks and seem as if they lie at every turn.

  311. I find this idea of a “civil debate” interesting. Some people (predictably SJWs) are claiming Larry and Brad don’t do enough to monitor their comments and run a tight ship. Then they point at SJW sites where the comments are civil. The comments there aren’t civil – they’re censored. There’s a reason they’re censored and it’s always the exact same one: racial and sexual defamation is being passed off as “critique.” “White privilege” theory isn’t a “critique,” it’s a dehumanization of 1 billion people invented by racists to do precisely that and carried onwards by useful idiots.

    And that’s where the insanity enters. SJWs themselves claim all their social justice initiatives are anti-dehumanization of groups, but then they have these rules only some groups benefit by while others are supposed to sit still for bullshit about the “white male gaze” and “white saviors.” Fuck that. You’re damn right you’re going to have to censor that comment section and you’re damn right Brianna Wu and Anita Sarkeesian are going to have to watch their six when they insult millions of people at a single go; you are for sure going to find the wackos simply by sheer numbers insulted.

    What charm school etiquette do Jews owe neo-Nazis? None. What rules of politeness do black folks owe to the KKK? None. What civility do straight white men owe to an intersectional gender feminism that is pathetically anti-white and anti-male? None.

    Kevin Standlee lets the mask slip with his “mansplaining” remark, as if I needed that. Call the guy an idiot and he’ll personally visit a comments section. Ask him to address mentally addled hate speech daily aimed at whites and men and it’s crickets. Standlee’s one of those “punching up” characters, and just one more reason the Hugo could be hectored out of existence and I would consider it a boon. He’ll change the rules to protect the wimmenfolk.

  312. @Shadowdancer

    The reason I like Sansa so much is because she DOESN’T learn. I think Martin intentionally writes her as a sort of Disney princess who’s thrown into Westeros: She keeps doing all of the things that she thinks she needs to do in order to get swept off her feet, marry a prince, and live happily ever after. Her basic worldview doesn’t change, even when it leads to (1) the killing of her dire wolf, (2) the beheading of her father, (3) being stripped and beaten by Meryn Trant in the throne room, (4) being married off to Tyrion, (5) being treated kindly by Tyrion, who refuses to rape her (He’s not a beautiful Disney prince. He’s just the only person left in King’s Landing who WASN’T treating her like crap, and then he CONTINUES to not treat her like crap even after they’re forced into marriage. And she screws THAT up by telling all of her handmaidens that they’re not having sex, so Tywin finds out about it.), (6) being rescued by Dontos, only to be handed over to Littlefinger, who promptly kills Dontos right in front of her and then treats her like he’s WAY beyond creepy, (7) watching Littlefinger kill her aunt (I give her a pass on this one, because Lysa was nutso, but if she had ratted out Littlefinger, she could’ve been safe in the Eyrie with people who would have protected her.), (8) being handed off to the man who killed her brother and mother, and (9) finding out that she’s ALSO sharing the castle with the man she believes killed her other two brothers. Then she marries the son of the man who killed her brother, who also acted like a total psycho at dinner a few nights ago. Ramsay acts so blatantly psycho that even his father thinks he’s over the line. The end of the last episode was EXACTLY what you’d expect from Ramsay, up to and including the fact that he made Reek/Theon watch it all. I expect that Sansa will be raped several more times, and then she’ll start to hope that Theon (the prince with no penis who she thinks killed two of her brothers) rescues her, and they get married and live happily ever after.

  313. @dgarsys

    I’m not familiar with any of these people, so I don’t know the details of each case. My first question for anyone who claims they’ve received a death threat is: Did you call the police? If the answer is yes, then I’ll keep listening to you. If it’s no, then you obviously didn’t take it very seriously.

  314. Martin Wisse is still angry Robert Dutch Oven-ed Cersei in S1, Ep. 4 of Game of Thrones – “The Smells of Castamere,” also known as the “Cersei’s Tears” episode. It uncomfortably reminds him of the time his smallclothes were atomic-wedgied by a windmill and his father beat him with a wooden shoe.

  315. @James May

    I think George R R Martin has had a fairly civil debate with Larry Correia. I first joined WorldCon last year (Game of Thrones is really what got me reading SF/F again, after about a 20 year break where I didn’t read much at all.), so I have no idea who most of these other people are. I think there still exists prejudice (though not as much as before) against gays, women, and non-white people, so I understand the continued existence of GLAAD, NOW (which I’m assuming still exists, even though I haven’t heard much about them in the news for a while), and the NAACP (ditto). I know GLAAD gives awards for various kinds of media. (As far as I know, they give awards for positive representations but not negative ones, so I’m not aware of any “shaming” that they do.) I didn’t know that NOW or the NAACP did. My favorite story about GLAAD comes from Neil Gaiman from about 15 or 20 years ago, when he won an award for, as he put it, writing “a nice story about lesbians”. This was before Gaiman was very well known outside of the comic world, and the person who presented the award fumbled a little and asked him if it was pronounced “GAY-man” or “GUY-man”, and he got a round of applause for saying it was pronounced “GAY-man”. He got a good laugh from telling this story, to which he just shrugged and said, “It’s not a political statement. That’s just the way it’s pronounced.”

    I haven’t read any of the newer stuff that’s out there, so I can’t really comment on “message fiction” but I have to say that I don’t mind political messages in science fiction or fantasy as long as they’re secondary to telling a good story. I guess my best example of this would be the original Star Trek series, which aired from 1966-1969 and received several Hugo noms and wins. The racial diversity on the show was quite intentional but was never remarked upon on the show. There was only one woman in the core cast, Nichelle Nichols, who resigned after the first season. Then she went to the NAACP annual meeting, where she was introduced to one of her biggest fans, who happened to be Martin Luther King Jr. When she told him she had quit, he convinced her to change her mind, and Gene Roddenberry immediately took her back on the show.

    As for the changes that have happened politically over the last several decades, I can tell you that I grew up as an army brat in the 70s and 80s, and the army was pretty well integrated by then, so when I was going to army schools in (what was then West) Germany, my classes were all very racially mixed. My mother, by contrast, went to segregated schools for a good part of her life, so I’m fairly cognizant about how much things have changed between my generation and hers.

    I’ve only had 3 long-term bosses in my life, and all of them have been women. That being said, for two of the three I’ve been told by their male colleagues that my bosses are the exception, not the rule. And they both had to bust their asses harder than a man would have to get where they were.

    That leaves gays as the only group I haven’t talked about. I think the issue of gay rights has evolved so quickly in just the last 5 years that it’s been hard to keep up. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of gay marriage this summer, I think the issue is pretty much done. There will still be arguments over “religious exemptions”, but after the hit that Indiana took earlier this year (which was driven not just by gay rights groups but also by big business, which is something I never thought I’d see), there are going to be fewer and fewer of those. I live in a big city (Houston), so I don’t really understand the big deal there. If someone doesn’t want to make your wedding cake, you can just go to a different cake maker. People from rural areas argue with me about this, because there may only be one wedding cake maker in town. I’m really not convinced. I have yet to see a case where someone couldn’t just take their business elsewhere. Even Wal-Mart opposes discrimination against gays now.

    Apologies to all–that was far more than my 2 cents on things.

  316. On an utterly unrelated note: If Sansa does something that stupid in the upcoming book I may very well leave the series, especially if it turns out that Jon Snow is actually dead.

  317. SF has always been a probing, principled and self-aware literature that addressed human failure and success on a human level. Only a hateful and obsessed person is going to take “The Machine Stops,” by E. M. Forster, Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury and 1984 by George Orwell and declare them broken by virtue of transforming the author’s demography into a racial and sexual supremacy and ideology. SF’s warning literature in fact acts to educate one in precisely the opposite direction. In short, we should know better.

    It is not artists like Forster, Bradbury and Orwell who pushed the idea of variety and morality being locked in a race but today’s SJWs who maintain there will be nothing new or diverse in an all-white Table of Contents (Landon), convention panel (Green) or even declare all of Europe a “monoculture” (Stross) even while obsessively daily pointing out how wrong it is to do that to East Asia (de Bodard) or Africa (Jemisin). That silly double standard will produce no principled or humanistic literature – quite the opposite – it will produce a garbage, racist literature where morality and variety will be segregated like a room and art gutted like a fish.

    Any look at Gutenberg.org will show enough sophistication and variety to last a hundred people a lifetime. There is no reason to pretend otherwise, or to imagine that literature and historic interest defaults to some entirely different race of humans if love stories are medieval Iranian or late Mughal India. The story of doomed lovers ironically separated by clan-race-religion looks much the same there as it does with Romeo as it does with A Patch of Blue. These are humanistic arguments about the eternal sameness of love, not identity-arguments. At the end of the day Kuno, Montag and Smith are searching for their humanity, not some stupid and even mentally insane gender studies view of their whiteness and maleness. I despise this sick ideology that has gripped SFF and everything that ideology stands for.

  318. @60guilders

    As of the end of A Dance with Dragons, I think Sansa had more or less agreed to Littlefinger’s plan to marry her off to “Hoster the Heir”, with Littlefinger noting that Hoster will become Lord of the Vale if Sweetrobin dies before leaving an heir. (Wink, wink, nudge, nudge.) Littlefinger has all but said he’s going to have Sweetrobin killed as soon as it’s expedient for him to do so. Sansa is either so clueless that’s she’s missed this (which is possible, given that it’s Sansa, even though she’s already seen Littlefinger kill Dontos and Lysa), or she’s tacitly agreeing to the murder of a young boy so that she can be the Lady of the Vale. So she’s either being extremely stupid or extremely ruthless in order to get what she wants now, but her end goal hasn’t changed.

  319. Has anyone noticed that if Sansa is now in the North then she is also there in the books eventually. That’s unless you believe the TV show will completely diverge from the plot of the books. So we probably have a glimpse into a future story arc where Sansa is crucial to future events. Will she evolve into a tough character like her mother and fend off the ice-zombies and end up ruling the North? Given their nature, will the dragons be crucial in defeating the ice-zombies and then Dany and Sansa rule two kingdoms in peace as allies?

    It seems to me the Lannisters will be destroyed in detail with the possible exception of Tyrion happy enough ruling Lannisport in fealty to Dany.

  320. @James May

    I disagree. I don’t think Sansa ever needs to return to Winterfell in the books. Don’t forget about how much Davos’s storyline has been changed. He’s with Stannis in the show. He’s off looking for Rickon in the books. I think the show can end with Sansa in Winterfell, while the books can end with Rickon (and his dire wolf) there. Martin writes a lot about imposters in the books, which you really can’t do in the show. Nobody in the books seems to have noticed that Jeyne Poole has been substituted for Arya. It wouldn’t work on TV, because the viewers simply wouldn’t believe it. So MAYBE Sansa ends up in Winterfell in the books, but my money’s on Rickon. Nobody in the show kept saying “There must always be a Stark in Winterfell,” but it was a big saying in the books. There hasn’t been a Stark there for a while now, but I think Rickon is going to be the one who ends up there.

  321. @Shadowdancer

    He HATES that question, because it’s often described as “pulling a Jordan”, and he and Robert Jordan were friends. I think he’s explicitly said that if he dies before the books are finished, there won’t be any more books.

  322. “Damien Walter retweeted Fred Kiesche @FredKiesche · May 21 Fred Kiesche retweeted Pulp Librarian Meanwhile, Vox, Brad, Larry and the rest of the Puppies BATTLE ON against the SJW LESBIAN FEMINIST CABAL!”

    Remember, this is the moron who – along with John Scalzi – asked us to “Google ‘intersectional’.” So when I do that it says this at Wiki: “The concept of intersectionality came to the forefront of sociological circles in the late 1960s and early 1970s in conjunction with the multiracial feminist movement. It came as part of a critique of radical feminism that had developed in the late 1960s…”

    So I click on “radical feminism” and I get the names of a bunch of lesbians along with “Radical feminism is a perspective within feminism that calls for a radical reordering of society in which male supremacy is eliminated in all social and economic contexts. Radical feminists seek to abolish patriarchy by challenging existing social norms and institutions, rather than through a purely political process. This includes challenging traditional gender roles…”

    So, it turns out that’s exactly the lesbian ideology attacking us. So do you want us to ignore you, or forget what we read, Walter? Which is it, cuz your dumb fuck satire doesn’t quite work if all we’re doing is reading what you asked us to read you fucking clown.

    *

    Damien PowderMonkey @ Fred Pfizerstone – huh kuh – kuh – huh buh – buh buh – huh kuh – swuh kuh – huh buh

    Kid Klonopin Walter @ Shanks the Punter – huh kuh patriarchy sexism gamergate gamergate – huh – kuh guh – kuh buh buh – cisnormative snort

  323. Pingback: From the Pen of James May | John C. Wright's Journal

  324. Pingback: From the Pen of James May | Neoreactive

  325. Personally, this Foz Meadows quote from a little earlier in her stream sums my feelings about her up perfectly.

    “Foz Meadows @fozmeadows
    · 13h 13 hours ago
    I am a waste of mind.”

    I can’t argue with that statement.

  326. In the comments over at James Nicoll’s site, the idea came up for a Razzie-style awards for the worst SF, with the obvious aim of using them to punish the Puppies and our favorite works.

    But what, may I ask ,Mr. Nicoll, is keeping the Puppies from getting involved in your hypothetical award? 😉

  327. “In the comments over at James Nicoll’s site, the idea came up for a Razzie-style awards for the worst SF, with the obvious aim of using them to punish the Puppies and our favorite works.

    But what, may I ask ,Mr. Nicoll, is keeping the Puppies from getting involved in your hypothetical award? ;-)”

    The Anti-Puppies are clearly unaware of the old saying, “Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it!” 😀

  328. “And the nominees for the Worst SF Writer of 2015 are . . . ” (long uncomfortable pause) “Uhhh . . . let’s try another category . . . the Worst SF Novel of the year is . . . ” (eyes narrow) “Screw you, Puppies.”

  329. I don’t know what the exact details of the proposal are, but if it was a juried shortlist (ie either anyone can propose and a jury shortlists from amongst the nominees, and subsequently the items got for a vote) , wouldn’t that avoid the issues of people nominating in bad faith (ie nominating stuff by authors they disliked, instead of works that they found to be bad?)

  330. The Razzies are pretty much open to anyone who pays the membership fee. The best year was when Sandra Bullock won for Worst Actress, and she actually showed up to accept the award, pulling a wagon full of her DVDs that she gave away. She won the Oscar for Best Actress the next night.

  331. @Shadowdancer

    I think the show will definitely finish in seven seasons (maybe eight, seeing as how EVERY finale seems to be split in two these days). GRRM has said that he’s told the show runners the broad strokes of how the series will end, so unless the whole group somehow gets killed at once, we’ll find out what Martin’s overall plan for the ending is.

    But unlike just about everyone else, I find myself fascinated with the characters in the books that seem to be secondary to the core plot. Jojen Reed is my favorite, and he’s already dead on the show. Did he already die in the books? (See the Jojen Paste theory.) I hope not, because I think he’s a singularly interesting character. Because of his ability to see glimpses of the future, he’s a teenage boy who now knows that he’s accomplished the most important thing he’s ever going to do in his life. Which means it’s all downhill from here. How does someone cope with knowing something like that at such a young age? The only real-world equivalent I can think of is someone like Michael Phelps, and Phelps keeps either going back to swimming or totally screwing up his life.

    Everyone complained about what a slog A Dance With Dragons was, but I loved it. Jon Connington is obviously the real deal, but is Griff? Is Connington even sure himself? And Connington now knows he’s dying, which is also something that can be explored. Wyman Manderly is playing the fat fool in Winterfell, but he’s obviously much smarter than everyone around him thinks, and I think he’s still so furious about the Red Wedding (and the death of his son) that he’ll be happy to sacrifice his own life to take out a few (more) Freys, not to mention Roose Bolton. Mance and the washer women are also still in the mix. Ramsay says Mance is caught and the washer women are all dead, but why is Ramsay sending out messages instead of Roose? Did Wyman kill him already? Did Mance? And did Ramsay really get all of the washer women? We know two are probably dead, but Squirrel could easily have climbed to safety, and we really don’t know where the other three were when all hell broke loose. Victarion has picked up his own Red Priest, which I love. And I doubt Euron would really let his brother sail to Daenerys without him. It’s more likely that he’s hiding in the fleet somewhere. Hell, I even like Tytos Blackwood and Hoster the Hostage.

    So I’m going to be looking forward to the last book even if it comes out five years after the show ends.

  332. @Shadowdancer

    RE: The Razzies for SF. If they did that, they’d REALLY look childish and stupid. And really, who outside of that core group would care?

  333. Last year’s Hugos and Nebulas weren’t a worst-of but could certainly qualify for most hideously bloated, puffed and blimped up and overrated due to social justice content combined with lack of SF or F.

    Then there’s the “Best Racial/Sexual Revenge Fantasy,” a new up and coming sub-genre currently en vogue in the field of anti-whiteness and patriarchy.

    How about best use of scare quotes and innuendoes to falsely turn men and whites into women-hating racists? I sense a Guardian win there.

    Then there’s there’s the best slavish faith in quotes to convict one man while ignoring 100 quotes by other people as out of context fantasies which really meant something else.

    We could go with most days in a row with at least 20 Tweets reminding us of what shits whites and men are. The competition there would be stiff but tough to track since the winner would almost certainly be 365.

    My favorite would be the most number of Tweets considered hate speech by the SPLC if the race and sex were reversed. Arch SJW Requires Hate would be tough to beat but again be hard to confirm due to sheer volume.

    Most perfect example of “social justice” and intersectional feminism in SFF. Again, Requires Hate probably gets the nod there.

    Most hysteric overreaction to nothing. Sansa Stark, Age of Ultron and the existence of men.

    Most unironic similarity to Orwell’s IngSoc: the entire SJW SFF community.

    Most censored blog. Tough to beat a guy who dotes on the idea so much he has a nickname for it.

    Blog that most reminds one of beepers from 1990: James Nicholls.

  334. Oh, crap. I just noticed that ALL of my SPOILER ALERTS have been deleted because I put less-than and greater-than signs around them. Folks, I’m REALLY sorry if anyone is reading my posts and inadvertently had GoT plot points revealed. I went out of my way to put SPOILER ALERTS on all of them, but because of the punctuation I used around them, they all got deleted. Totally my bad. And if you’re scrolling upward instead of downward, please don’t read anything by me if you aren’t up to date on both the books and the shows for GoT. I feel like a total dick right now.

  335. @Huffy

    Not sure if you’ve read the Hugo packet yet, but one of the nominees (I think it was Fan Writer, but I’m not sure.) was the woman who revealed the identity of (and subsequently shut down) Requires Hate. It’s definitely worth a read. GRRM talked a lot about Requires Hate during his back-and-forth with Larry Correia.

  336. She didn’t out RH but in fact supports RH’s exact gender feminism. Where they had the falling out is when Mixon perceived RH was going after women of color. Essentially this is the KKK arguing how high the hems of their robes should be. Read this, it’s an eye-opener, and don’t forget the comments, especially the first one with “misogyny as a toxic gas in the atmosphere we breathe.” She used to leave sympathetic comments at RH’s site when she made over the top comments about men.

    http://feralsapient.com/?p=470

    In a post RH wrote about “white man’s tears” about fantasy author R. Scott Bakker: the first commenter wrote “‘…what we have here are people so embedded in their privilege that pointing it out to them instantly strips away the progressive veneer and elicits poop-flinging that would make a baboon blush. Women and other Others are still furniture – and though furniture is useful and can be decorative, it’s not supposed to move, dammit!'”

    Mixon’s report is one-sided bullshit. She wanted a result and she got it by ignoring what she didn’t want.

  337. I miss a couple of days because of real life stuff going on and come back to 150+ new comments on a blog post that was already days old.

  338. I haven’t watched Interstellar yet, but your description reminds me of when I read Michael Crichton’s Sphere in high school. I got to the end, closed the book and said, “Well, that ending was stupid.”

  339. I understand Vox has said if No Award wins this year, he’ll encourage people to vote No Award in the future. He has enough fans to burn it down for the next decade or more. Trying to make a statement this year could very well lead to a bigger statement next year.

  340. @Shadowdancer

    RE: The Razzies for SF. If they did that, they’d REALLY look childish and stupid. And really, who outside of that core group would care?

    How do you think we got to this in the first place? I mean, did that Entertainment Weekly smear piece strike you as a particularly mature response? Theresa Nielsen Hayden freaking out a week before the nomination results were announced? Arthur Chu accusing Brad of “having planned this 20 years ago, so he married a black woman to use as a shield against being called racist” – yeah, great idiocy there. And that’s just Sad Puppies 3. We were aware of the screaming and libel heaved at Larry Correia during Sad Puppies 2. “Concerned” people contacting his wife and offering to help her ‘escape’ because these people believed the lies that she was a beaten, abused woman? That one STILL gets me angry, and that was last year.

    At this point, what makes you think that the core group of anti-Puppies care if they looked childish and stupid? For us on the Puppy side, we just wonder, ‘what new low are they going to sink to now? And what new lows will they sink to NEXT time?’

  341. @kamas716

    Apologies, but my SPOILER ALERT was probably deleted for Interstellar. The comparison to the novel Sphere is probably dead-on. The first 4/5 of the movie were phenomenal, but the ending was so horrible that it ruined the movie for me.

  342. @Shadowdancer

    The Entertainment Weekly piece just seemed like lazy journalism to me, and in fairness to them, they posted a formal correction to the article once they realized how wrong they had gotten the story. (I’ve been reading EW for over 20 years, and my opinion is that the magazine leans left, but it’s not nutty. They don’t really cover SF/F writing unless it’s fairly mainstream, like George R R Martin or David Mitchell, and their video game coverage is weak, so I suspect they had no idea about a lot of the backstory here.) I have no idea who Theresa Nielsen Hayden is (and don’t really want to know), and all I really know about Arthur Chu is that he was good at Jeopardy and then wrote a column for Salon. I know I’ve read a couple of his columns, but I couldn’t for the life of me tell you what any of them were about. As for all of the crazies on Twitter, all I can say is that it seems like there are a LOT of crazy people on Twitter. I have an account, but this whole mess has made me quite glad that I’ve never used it.

  343. Chu’s latest, Mad Max: Fury Road is about how men’s rights activists destroyed civilization.

    Mad Max Beyond Parody.

  344. No problems. I’m not that emotionally involved in the movie to care much. Plus, it’s been out awhile, so it’s pretty much a non-issue anyway. I feel anything over a year old, or that has already been through the Oscars is fair game.

  345. What I love about Chu, Scalzi, Hines and Walter is they keep asking us to “bone up” and “Google” this stuff. Then, when we do and disagree and start writing about what we found and in quotes, we’re all “right wing” “Men’s Rights Activists,” and misogynists who hang on every word Limbaugh and Fox News say. In other words we end up right where we started. There’s no way you’ll ever win with an SJW. It’s bend the knee to girl-worship or go fish.

    Scalzi, you magnificent bastard, I “boned up” on intersectionality and all I got was this t-shirt that said “I Heart Rush Limbaugh and Patriarchy.”

    “… to eliminate the incest taboo we would have to eliminate the family and sexuality as it is now structured. Not such a bad idea.” – Shulamith Firestone, The Dialetics of Sex, 1970, Pg. 56

  346. Okay, Mr. Scalzi and Mr. Walter I “boned up” on and “Googled” intersectionality. I read the PDF Scalzi linked us to and also gay Mary Ann Mohanraj’s piece Scalzi guest-posted where she writes “White privilege is a way of saying that in a racist society… being white gets you privilege.” Both quote gay black radical feminist Audre Lorde who in 1979 was writing the exact same shit I’m reading on SFF Twitter feeds today in the feuding between Requires Hate and Laura Mixon:

    “What is the theory behind racist feminism? Women of today are still being called upon to stretch across the gap of male ignorance and to educate men as to our existence and our needs. This is an old and primary tool of all oppressors to keep the oppressed occupied with the master’s concerns. Now we hear that it is the task of women of Color to educate white women—in the face of tremendous resistance—as to our existence, our differences, our relative roles in our joint survival. This is a diversion of energies and a tragic repetition of racist patriarchal thought.” – Audre Lorde, “The Master’s Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master’s House”, 1979

    In that same essay Lorde quotes Simone de Beauvoir, a woman who lost her teaching license for seducing a 17 year old girl.

    At SFWA’s own web site, Mary Ann Mohanraj lists her favorite authors as gay “Joanna Russ; Ursula K. Le Guin; Virginia Woolf; gay Audre Lorde; gay Judith Butler; James Tiptree Jr./Alice Sheldon; and gay Samuel Delany.”

    “To see where we are going we must understand where we have been. Woman Hating is a much needed and long overdue addition toward that understanding.” – Audre Lorde blurbing Woman Hating by Andre Dworkin

    “Children are fully capable of participating in community, and have every right to live out their own erotic impulses.” – Andrea Dworkin

    The “lesbian-centric” Feminist Wire these days mentions the “shamanic power” of Audre Lorde. When they write “Black Lesbian Feminist Mother Warrior Poet Audre Lorde/Gamba Adisa” that Onion material.

    We also get this today: “Study Finds Sexual Health Education Should Begin As Early As Age 10” – the lesbian Feminist Newswire, Feminist Majority Foundation Blog

    And in addition to the kiddie criminal booted from DragonCon and the Marion Zimmer Bradley scandal, we have a Nebula nominated story today which features underage sex written by a guy who recently did a reading with new SFWA grandmaster Samuel R. Delany.

    The Foz Meadows who wrote (and had to revise for inaccuracy) at the Huffington Post about the advantages of “three straight, white Anglophone men” who were Golden Age SF writers recently Tweeted “For serious, my online writers’ group just had to check a spreadsheet of 20-odd people to see if any of us is straight. Answer: one is” wrote about Ann Leckie’s Ancillary Justice that it “made a deliberate decision to use feminine nouns and pronouns as a neutral, genderless default, even in instances where a character’s biological gender is known to be male, the better to reflect the narrator’s language and culture” and “that the world of Ancillary Justice is populated largely by POC, with no evident taboo.”

    The unprecedented award-winning and first-time novelist Ann Leckie once put “white straight cis guy,” “white straight cis guys,” “non-white, non-cis, non-straight, non-guys,” “white straight cis guys,” “white straight cis guys,” “white, straight, cis dude” all in one blog post.

    Jim Hines (who has guest posted Rose Lemberg) has a post with words like “cis,” “cissexist,” “transphobic,” “racism,” “sexism,” “homophobia,” “cis gender,” “able-bodied neurotypical,” “privilege,” “colorblindness,” “genderblindness,” and folks are told to “examine” their “privilege” and a word like “diversity” is used in a sense it is interchangeable with “white racism,” all on one single page.

    A recent post by gay Rose Lemberg gives us these quotes “A white, cisgendered, heterosexual man,” “a white, cisgendered, heterosexual man,” “white, cisgendered, heterosexual men,” “white, male, and historically entrenched.”

    Instead of saying I don’t know what I’m talking about when I actually read what you ask me to read or saying I’m a right wing Limbaugh fan, why not show up and explain how I’ve got this all wrong. Tell me how this is all taken out of context and set me straight. Don’t kill the messenger for accurately reflecting your own daffy cult back at you, especially when you keep telling me to read up on it. I’m connecting all the dots – your dots – and I don’t like what I’m seeing. Come and explain all this to us. Make a case which shows me radical feminism isn’t baked into the length and breadth of SFF core institutions. Something more than “LOL wingnut” would be nice. I #JustListened Mr. Gould and I #JustRead and it all sounds like crazy shit. SJWs need to defend themselves with something more than “puppies piss” and “fedorable.” Glyer, like Flint, is being a useful idiot laying down covering fire for a cult that has a phobia of whites and men. SJWs daily promote this cult to the same extent they then claim it doesn’t even exist.

    Glyer has now twice tried to shame me and only made himself look like a fool by linking us to a woman who calls herself “redheadedfemme” because she’s not a gender feminist who clearly wasn’t familiar with the work I presented but insisted it was I who didn’t know what I was talking about. Men pretending to be women clearly have all the credibility in the world when it comes to sarcastically using terms like “manfeels” as an insult. As for “persecution,” ask Malzberg, Resnick, Ross and Rabe, all of who lost gigs because of insane gender feminists. When is obvious obvious? Does it ever become so in wacky SJW-land? I’ve read all the insane literature. Have you? Come out in the open and debate instead of using stupid factless insults and lies.

  347. Sorry everyone; I had to put the convo aside and focus on something that required a lot of attention to detail and is time consuming. I’ll probably have to drop convo till I finish this piece. I’ll try poke my head back in now and then though.

  348. @James May

    Okay, let me give you a new-comer’s view of what you just posted. First, all of those people sound like they’re completely off of their rockers. The only names I recognize (aside from Ursula Le Guin and Virginia Woolf, neither of whom I’ve ever thought of as “gay authors”) are Marion Zimmer Bradley, and I think MZB would probably have been arrested for her actions if they were known at the time (She’d definitely be arrested for them if they happened today.) and Anne Leckie. I haven’t read Ancillary Justice/Sword, but I think if you have narrator who refers to everyone as “she”, and you have a good reason for this, I don’t think I’d have a problem with it. It would probably take me about 50 pages to stop thinking of the narrator as a drag queen, but I think I’d get used to it. But I’d only keep going if I thought the story was good, and I wouldn’t follow her blog. I don’t recognize any of the other names as novelists, and I don’t read much short fiction, so if there is a cabal of novella-writing angry lesbian feminist people of color, I haven’t really been exposed to them. I wouldn’t follow their blogs, ether. (Right now I’m following GRRM, Larry Correia, and this one.)

    The sex-ed at age 10 article is probably misleading. I used to be a pediatrician, and I’ve seen some pretty nasty child abuse cases, so I would say that at about age 5, you need to start talking to kids about touching that is okay versus touching that is not okay. Any time I had to to a genital exam on a child, I would always say that it’s okay (1) only in a doctor’s office, (2) only with the doctor, and (3) only if mom and dad were there. I think most parents now tell their kids that if someone is touching them anywhere and telling them to keep it a secret, they need to tell mom or dad immediately. I think that would probably be considered “sex ed” these days. For girls, the age that menstruation begins has been dropping for a while, and we really don’t know why, but a 10 year-old that’s already menstruating wouldn’t be surprising to me. I think that most kids should have pretty thorough sex ed by the time they’re 12-14 years old, and if experts in the field said it should start a few years younger but be a bit more gradual, I wouldn’t be opposed to it. Looking back, I think I got some pretty graphic sex-ed in both sixth grade and seventh grade. I was an army brat, and I was at a Department of Defense school in (West) Germany, and we were told bluntly that the reason we were getting graphic sex ed was because seven 7th graders at another school got pregnant in one year. I have no idea if this was actually true, but I wouldn’t be overly surprised if it was. Neither the teachers nor the class seemed to enjoy it very much.

  349. I messed up that quote by forgetting parenthesis. It means Russ, Lorde, Butler, Delany are gay. The word “gay” is not in the original quote.

    As for the Feminist Newswire and given their ideology, you suddenly think they have some neutral take on that? They might be a broken clock right twice a day. The idea an ideology which routinely actively opposes motherhood and family are concerned with children is laughable.

    “The tyranny of the biological family would be broken.” – Shulamith Firestone

    “In my opinion, as long as the family and the myth of the family and the myth of maternity and the maternal instinct are not destroyed, women will still be oppressed.” – Simone de Beauvoir

    “We want to destroy patriarchal power at its source, the family” – Andrea Dworkin

    “… heterosexuality is crucial to maintaining male supremacy.” – Charlotte Bunch

    “the end of the oppression of the young ‘under the patriarchal proprietary family’; ‘bisex,’ or the end of normative heterosexuality.” – Jacqueline Rhodes quoting Kate Millet

    “The destruction of the incest taboo is essential to the development of cooperative human community based on the free-flow of natural androgynous eroticism. . .'” – Andrea Dworkin

    This is a sick ideology of weird zealots, bullshit artists and liars and there’s no two ways about it. It’s also obvious a lot of SJWs aren’t even aware of what they’re pushing with this “gender abolition.” To them it’s just some fad of the week. And these people have the nerve to say I hate all women if I object to that insanity?

    When you throw in the fact that of the 100-150 most activist SJW voices in core SFF, 30-40 self-identify as bi or lesbian women, that’s pretty amazing evidence of an influential ideology in a country where they otherwise clock out at 2%. That brings us back to the other amazing fact of how much these people loudly promote their ideology and then get all shy and make sarcastic remarks about a “cabal” when you point out their own quotes, influence and demography to them.

    I’ll say this again: this ideology swept the Nebulas last year and bragged about it. Yet they claim the reason they brag is because they are “oppressed” by an opposite ideology. The problem is you can’t find one 1912-75 (nor today) in SFF tied together by the same bizarre lingo and tenets as this weird intersectional gender feminism represented by just those 5 voices. That’s a mind-boggling delusion of denial, because now they claim they don’t even really exist. But they do – just go look at any SJW Twitter feed. They never stray far from “misogyny” and “patriarchy.” It’s a cult.

  350. Well…

    You may not recognize many of those names, but having looked through the gender studies book as well as paid attention to the “twelve rabid weasels”, lady editor” and other “conservatives suck” kerfuffles of the last few years, they are right at the center of it.

    Lorde, Dworkin, etc., despite being scoffed as “outliers” when quoted in other contexts are at the core of many GS texts, and a feminist movement that in 20 years has gone from the Vagina Monologues being sufficiently shockingly radical to having colleges (Holyoke used to be part of my stomping grounds as a nuke instructor in CT….) cancel it as “insufficiently inclusive”.

    On the SF side – Scalzi was the SFWA __PRESIDENT__, and wants us to study this inter sectionalist BS. Ditto Hines.

    MRK, while in some ways having far more class than her other contemporaries, nevertheless was right in the thick of decrying sexism over a f*cking chain mail bikini, and is close to Scalzi, the Tor editors, and has an influential podcast with Brandon Sanderson.

    Hines loves to paint himself as a women defender, and took Ms USA and Correia to task for even implying that women should learn to defend themselves….

  351. @dgarsys

    I doubt I’ll ever look through a gender studies book. I know little about Scalzi other than that he won a Hugo for Redshirts a few years ago. I’ve seen a number of quotes attributed to him that were, as near as I can tell, spoken or written right after he won, and assuming that they’re accurate, I would say it was probably the most ungracious victory I’ve seen in quite a while. I put him fairly high on my list of blogs I’ll probably never read, and I doubt I’ll ever buy any of his work.

    As for MRK (I’m not even going to bother looking up her full name–I’ll know it when I see it in the Hugo packet.), if she’s doing a podcast with Brandon Sanderson, I would have to assume that Sanderson may not agree with her but at least respects her. Brandon Sanderson is one of the few names so far that I’ve recognized. He’s a best-selling novelist whose political views I know nothing about. I know he’s a Mormon, so I would guess that he leans right of center, but I’m not aware of him being part of any major controversy.

  352. MRK = Mary Robinette Kowal. She’s not on the Hugo ballot this year. She does the Writing Excuses podcast with Brandon Sanderson, Howard Tayler and Dan Wells (I liked it a lot better before she joined. 15 minutes for 3 people to talk on a subject is one thing, for 4 is….. rushed, IMO.)

    She frequently likes to say that Vox threatened to dox her, but she neglects to mention that she was on the same SFWA directory page as the person that Vox was actually threatening to dox with it, convicted pedophile Ed Kramer. The conversation was out in the open on Twitter.

  353. And this goes right to Brad quoting Maroney:

    “This group, which I think of as Panzergroup Asshole, is reactionary, virulently anti-woman, and racist whenever it suits them.”

    That’s bullshit. This is all what happens when you confuse a demography with an ideology and then lie and say we hate women, gays and non-whites when we are in fact pushing back against an ideology with actual names, not entire ethnic and sexual groups. I am not against gay folks, women or non-whites. I do not light up millions of people at a time. I am against heterophobic, misandrist and racist ideologues who happen to be gay, women or non-white, a far different thing. This bullshit about us being “misogynists” or “Men’s Rights Activists” because we are opposed to racist gender abolition feminists with mental health issues is absurd.

    Maroney using such terms is as stupid as using “bourgeois,” “imperialist” or “paper tiger. It’s a fake morality test one must disprove. It uses false accusations and character assassination instead of facts. It enrolls one in a disapproved ideology one is not a member of. It is meant to make one defend oneself from nonsense instead of actually engaging in debate. Opposition to intersectionalism’s own pathologies and ideology is respun as my own pathology and ideology the same way a vintage Soviet might have done. It’s not possible to oppose Marxism unless you’re a running dog capitalist oppressor who hates the common man, just ask any puffed up “union organizer.”

    As Brad points out, if Maroney had any principles he’d be going after Jemisin, Chu, Older and their obsessed cult, not us. They are the one whose Twitter feeds are daily choked with manic anti-white rhetoric and theories. The reason Jemisin blocked is she has no comeback. Bahar Mustafa’s racially segregated meeting and #KillAllMen is precisely what we’re accused of and never do but common among SJWs. SJWs constantly try and shame Brad and Larry with unsourced innuendoes and libels.

    Despite SJW lies about never naming names, that’s all we do. I don’t take out entire ethnic or sexual groups that never amount to no less than 100 million people. Think about that – 100 million. What names do SJWs use? “White,” “cisnormative” and “male,” and always as an insult. Gee, why would Brianna Wu and Anita Sarkeesian get threats doing that?

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

    That’s 3.5 billion humans that guy posing as woman just took out and who bizarrely uses terms like “mansplaining.”

    “Mansplaining to women the decisions they should make and why is a blatant form of sexism. I do not need instructions on how to run my life.” – Brianna Wu

    Wha…?

    And let’s connect more dots: who does redheadedfemme dote on: black gay feminist Roxane Gay who recently was on a stage with Anita Sarkeesian where Sarkeesian admitted her feminism doesn’t “want equality within these oppressive systems” of patriarchy. But on the Colbert Show with a different audience Sarkeesian says “Do you believe that women should have equal rights to men? Great! Then you are a feminist.”

    And it’s funny about Holyhoke. Just like there, men posing as women recently got the 40 yr. old lesbian MichFest music festival shut down and now we have an anti-Puppie guy posing as a woman trying to satirize “manfeels” in a comic. These people are lunatic to their core. And let’s have the 10,000th joke about “It’s about ethics in…” cuz that’s what Oscar Wilde did.

    “N. K. Jemisin ‏@nkjemisin 10h10 hours ago Apparently Larry Correia was an asshole at Gencon? Panelist of color describes ugly interaction. #wc39 #INDG”

    “K Tempest Bradford @tinytempest · May 20 Coming to the ‘Cultural Literacy or Cultural Appropriation?’ panel @WisCon39?” says the moron appropriating a genre from me by their own weird definitions.

    “K Tempest Bradford retweeted StraightOuttaThedas @Naamenblog · May 22 @jhameia called for all the Asian ppl to gather in the POC dinner” as they made a segregated “safer-space” inside the segregated “safer-space.”

    “K Tempest Bradford retweeted Theo Nicole Lorenz @TheoNicole · May 22 ‘Aliens DID build the pyramids; they’re called black people.’ -@tinytempest #imaginarymisandry #wc39”

    “Mikki Kendall retweeted ArchCityDefenders @ArchCityDefense · 14h 14 hours ago Law profs, next time you teach the ‘reasonable man’ standard, flesh him out a bit. He’s a racist, sexist, homophobe middle class white man.”

    Gee, who will those people vote for awards and when did our awards and genre become a gender studies French Queer Theory intersectional critique on the morality of men and whites?

    Read this bit of smug arrogance about the “land of privilege” that looks down on the straight white male from Scalzi’s opposite gay, black and female, the 3 intersections of a supremacist cult:

    http://tempest.fluidartist.com/avoid-joss-whedon/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ktempest+%28K.+Tempest+Bradford%29&hootPostID=c369e8d5ab9c5f52a694081c5c626f65

    #EndHateSpeechInSFF

  354. Here’s another nail in the coffin: the name of wacky anti-male gender feminist Liz Bourke’s column “Sleeps with monsters” at Tor is taken from a quote by iconic wacky gender feminist Adrienne Rich.

    Here’s typical Bourke with a quote by Jemisin included:

    “‘Because the “fantasy” most EF (epic fantasy) delivers is of white male power & centrality, as much as dragons. That *is* conservatism, now.’ We can agree that conservative, here, is fundamentally concerned with not changing the present default cultural narratives of who gets to hold and use power, how, and why. For our genre, for our culture(s) in the US, UK, and Europe, that’s white (heterosexual) cisgendered men. Often persons who don’t fit these criteria who hold and use power anyway are portrayed as wrong, anomalous, wicked. (There are plenty of cultural narratives floating about concerning the moral and occasionally physical degeneracy of non-straight-white-men. Plenty.)”

    Gee, “white male” equals ideology equals conservatism. How’d that happen? Here’s more Bourke at Tor, who was by the way a sympathetic commenter at Requires Hate’s site of man and white-love:

    “Johansen sets her story in a colonised world, but one which the narrative holds to have been empty before the settlers came. In a fictional world where whiteness is the default—so the narrative informs us—it’s impossible not to see this worldbuilding choice as a reflection of uninterrogated imperialist assumptions about race and history. Johansen’s fantasy world is a white, straight, cisgender one…”

    Here’s Adrienne Rich from her 1980 essay “COMPULSORY HETEROSEXUALITY AND
    LESBIAN EXISTENCE”: “I have chosen to use the terms lesbian existence and lesbian continuum because the word lesbianism has a clinical and limiting ring. Lesbian existence suggests both the fact of the historical presence of lesbians and our continuing creation of the meaning of that existence. I mean the term lesbian continuum to include a range…”

    No man-loving “lesbian-centric” ideology in play there. Move along, move along. Gee, I wonder who Bourke votes for at awards time. Literature? Hahahahaha. Sure.

  355. Unsurprisingly, Bourke was crucial in pushing Ancillary Justice into awards nods, hysterically declaring at Tor in a fit of overblown bombast AJ to be one of the “best space opera novels ever.” And are we surprised Foz Meadows’ review of AJ ends with “if it doesn’t garner the author a Hugo nomination, I’ll be very much surprised.”

    I wasn’t, and said so at the time… and why. The short version is “white, male, and historically entrenched.”

    #EndHateSpeechInSFF

  356. In principle, SJWs say they hate Vox Day for what Bourke herself does, namely indulge in group defamation. The problem is Tor has review censored Day while continuing to give Bourke a voice. We have the same double standard across the spectrum of core SFF. It is that gaping double standard that has created the rift in core SFF and which created Sad Puppies. As long as there are separate rules there can be no game. Until the community honestly addresses this issue there will be war and the Hugos can look forward to being pranked until people grow bored of pranking them.

  357. @James May: So, the new SFWA President will be Cat Rambo. What does that portend? (She’s not the same Cat who’s been pestering folks on SP3 threads, right?)

  358. Tinker to Evers to Chance.

    “Heiresses of Russ 2014: The Year’s Best Lesbian Speculative Fiction by Melissa Scott, Steve Berman, Redfern Jon Barrett, Zoe Blade, Amanda Fitzwater, Sacchi Green, Claire Humphrey, Alex Jeffers, Meda Kahn, Layla Lawlor, Chanté McCoy, Cat Rambo, Tansy Rayner Roberts, Kenneth Schneyer, Benjanun Sriduangkaew, Penny Stirling, Robert E. Stutts, Tori Truslow, Lexy Wealleans, & Alberto Yáñez”

    https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/465847

  359. The fundamental core of radical feminism was created by lesbians for lesbians. The issues you see most talked about in the social justice movement in core SFF all derive from that core and not from equal rights feminism: rape culture, gender abolition, white privilege, male gaze, patriarchy, misogyny, intersectionalism, toxic masculinity, heterosexuality as oppression, trigger warnings, The Bechdel Test (Dykes to Watch Out For), heteronormativity, gender as “performance.”

    “Radical feminists locate the root cause of women’s oppression in patriarchal gender relations, as opposed to legal systems…” (Wiki)

    Like the equally nutty neo-Nazis, the KKK, the Nation of Islam and the New Black Panther Party, radical feminism is a supremacist ideology whose main business is group defamation.

    In the massive amount of research I’ve done, not once did I read a so-called “feminist” in SFF mention Betty Friedan, Gloria Steinham, Germaine Greer, or the National Organization of Women. Think about that when you think about equal rights feminism as opposed to this sordid brand laughingly trying to pass itself off as “equal rights.” There’s a simple reason for that: they mostly hate those women or consider them out of touch dinosaurs, or even “tools of the patriarchy.”

  360. Speaking of N K Jemisin:

    “N. K. Jemisin ‏@nkjemisin
    Apparently Larry Correia was an asshole at Gencon? Panelist of color describes ugly interaction. #wc39 #INDG”

    “N. K. Jemisin ‏@nkjemisin
    Wow, apparently a bunch of Larry Correia’s fans are pissed at me for mentioning something another person said. I’m hurt, ya’ll. Heartbroken.”

  361. And David Gerrold on Facebook:

    “Larry Correia and Brad Torgersen believed that the Hugo awards processes have been dominated by “social justice warriors” — ie. women, people of color, and LGBT individuals who have been practicing a genre version of affirmative action by voting for stories that are way too literary instead of the more popular Real Science Fiction.”

    Gerrold must be buying his straw wholesale.

  362. I would amend that to dominated by an ideology which hates me. Of the names I recognized on the “participants” list (whatever that is) 2/3 support this bizarre brand of anti-white, anti-male feminism. Outside of WorldCon, in normal America, that probably drops to statistical zero. Think about that when you think about the word “cult.”

    Most of them seem to be casual radical chic flak catchers, though there’s definitely some troubling names on that list. I’d be creeped out rubbing elbows with people who spend so much energy lighting me and 100 million other people up as white male oppressors just for waking up in the morning because science fiction.

    http://sasquan.org/program/participants/

    If that was a party in my old neighborhood there’d definitely be a brawl.

  363. I thought Connie Willis said she wasn’t going this year. Or maybe she just didn’t want to present but was still going?

  364. Let’s call this what it is: these people are stepping aside and refusing nominations out of fear, not principles… fear for their careers. The truth is you can indulge in the most blatant segregation, racism, genderphobia, sex-hatred and general group defamation to your heart’s content as long as it’s the right race and right sexual expression. That is the complete opposite of a principle – it is in violation of the concept. SJWs don’t debate – that was decided in advance by your position on the bizarre race-gender hierarchy of marginalized and vulnerable. This ideology is like Heinlein’s rolling roads when it comes to standards. It is an ever shifting landscape of goalposts straight white men can never quite catch up to.

    Libelous comments are called journalism. Accurate quotes are called stalking. If you like a quote it’s solid and racism. If you don’t it’s never quite solid or racism. Wishing people dead by fire is nothing. Quoting them is threatening. Quotes with links for context is misrepresentation. Pure bullshit is reality. This is cult of absurd double standards only matched by its paranoia and sheer stupidity.

  365. @James May

    “Let’s call this what it is: these people are stepping aside and refusing nominations out of fear, not principles… fear for their careers.”

    In some cases, maybe. (Annie Bellet’s statement was basically I don’t want to be in the middle of a controversy right now because I’m having other issues in my life and I just don’t need this.) In some cases, I don’t think so. Marko Kloos has been the bluntest of the four that have stepped aside, and I think it was pretty clear that he did so because of the Rabid Puppies and Vox Day. Kloos is published by amazon, so it’s not like he is going to lose out on his next book contract because of any of this–I doubt amazon really gives a crap about the Hugos. I suppose you could argue that if Kloos had kept the nomination, he would’ve been shut out of other SF/F venues, but his statement really reads like someone who is somewhere between sad and angry rather than someone who is afraid.

  366. iconic wacky gender feminist Adrienne Rich

    At least she wrote some good poems, which is a tangible achievement. You’d never catch her carrying a mattress around to get attention like the strident nonentities who call themselves feminists these days.

  367. I suppose you could argue that if Kloos had kept the nomination, he would’ve been shut out of other SF/F venues, but his statement really reads like someone who is somewhere between sad and angry rather than someone who is afraid.

    Nah. He’s just like any other appeaser. He fears the mob and hopes it will destroy him last.

  368. @Tarl

    Again, maybe, but I don’t think so. The only real threat that I’ve seen made toward people on the SP3 and RP slates is that the person making the threat is just saying that they won’t vote for them for this year’s Hugos. I suppose someone might be keeping a blacklist, but there doesn’t appear to be much drum-beating for it. And given the overlap between the SP3 and RP slates, you really do need to consider the issue of Vox Day. I knew nothing about him before the Hugos were announced (Again, I’m relatively new to the scene, and I know nothing about GamerGate except for what I’ve learned here.) and have had a difficult time finding accurate information about him (In other words, I’ve seen a lot of nasty quotes attributed to him, but I have no idea if they’re really things he’s said or written.), but Kloos went out of his way to disassociate himself from him, and both Mr Torgersen and Mr Correia have had to state the obvious fact that they aren’t him. All I can really draw from all of that is that a lot of people REALLY don’t like Vox Day.

  369. Rich would’ve fit right in with the Social Feminists Writers of America.

    If you were an ASEXUAL NEUTROIS LESBIAN, my love, then you would be a MIXED RACE NEUROATYPICAL CIS NORMATIVE LESBIAN. You’d be a small CHRISTO PAGAN LESBIAN, only five feet, ten inches, the same height as CIS LESBIAN-you. You’d be HEARING IMPAIRED, ADHD/AUTISM LESBIAN-boned and you’d walk with a CHRONICALLY ILL AGENDER/GENDERFLUID LESBIAN CONTINUUM a gait as you could manage on massive QUEER GENDERQUEER CIS LESBIAN talons. Your LESBIAN-CENTRIC QUEER eyes would gaze LESBIAN gently from beneath your bony POLYMOROUS NEURODIVERSE CHRONIC CONDITION.

    PLUS LESBIAN.

  370. My wager is that Ms. Bellet, whose story was excellent and certainly would have EARNED its award if she hadn’t withdrawn it, might not have necessarily been swayed by threats and such, but the offer of something nice. I’d be very interested to see the house that publishes her first/next novel.

  371. There’s an air of insanity about this feminist movement in SFF that’s so bizarre that even mentioning it startles people. The movement loves to promote itself and even has many acolytes who buy into its tenets in a more radical chic kinda way like 2 SFWA presidents who agree to ban chain-mail bikinis in the SFWA magazine on feminist principles. The wife of one of those presidents writes a “Patriarch’s Day” post so anti-male she has to assure us #NotAllMen.

    Those presidents each promote this stuff and ask us to look into it and even give us links written by lesbian feminists who quote lesbian icons. Then, when we do and write about it being “lesbian-centric,” people say “you must be nuts.” That happens in a post about the Hugos a year after a gay feminist is crucial in running a man out of a Hugo gig on feminist principles and started by the resignation of an intersectional feminist who retweets things like “White feminist privilege is just the feminist wing of white superiority.”

    They try and fail to parody you because they link you to a site run by a transgender and a lesbian who promotes lesbian academic literature the same week as the “lesbian-centric” WisCon convention and a lesbian is elected to the head of the SFWA without a hint of irony. That’s the same week this supremacist cult goes nuts over the rape of a woman on a TV show with many tortuous deaths of men. That’s like the police only investigating women who are murdered. There seems to be no parody, satire or irony in this world, or hint of self-awareness. As they say, you can’t make this stuff up. Quotes by Vox Day become ever so real and he’s multiplied into an army. Anti-male, anti-white quotes by intersectionalists are never quite real and an army melts away.

    In other words radical lesbian feminism is startled by itself as a wacky cult when seen though the eyes of others and so are those flak catchers, unaware they are vectors for the disease. Is there a name for a thing that’s so nuts people laugh at its mere existence even while they’re handing you pamphlets?

    Is this what “mainstreaming” means? Is this like the Star Trek episode where the Yangs say “E Plebneesta” without understanding it came from our Pledge of Allegiance? Is “white privilege” and “misogyny” the bastardization of our language where we forget where those terms came from? In the Wiki for that episode you have this:

    “When Kirk plots an escape, he uses the word ‘freedom.’ The Yang male objects to an ‘enemy’ using a ‘Yang worship word.'”

    Is that’s what’s happening here? Are we forbidden using radical feminism’s “worship words?” When we mention male gaze, rape culture, cisnormative, neuroatypical do we somehow become as nuts as them even while they say we’re privileged misogynists for quoting them? This is Alice in Wonderland stuff, straight up and down the line.

    It’s kinda like a teflon coated virus that prevents its own cure even while it guarantees its own transmission. The more it promotes itself the more it’s not even there.

  372. of the short stories I’ve read so far, her’s has been the most impressive in my opinion. It’s a shame she withdrew.

  373. I don’t think Vox is a bad as most people portray him. I don’t like a lot of his rhetoric, but it looks like all of the supposedly misogynist/racist/whatever evil comments that get trotted out have been either in response to a question posed to him or where he/others have been attacked and he’s responding in kind.

  374. The strangest thing about this SJW movement is that it appears to be based on the same concept as the Southern Poverty Law Center, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against DEFAMATION and the Jewish Anti-DEFAMATION League. Where the problem comes in is SJWs take that word “defamation” and use privilege/marginalization “punching up” theory to make racism appear where there is none and no racism where it is obvious. The comments at Glyer’s about Jemisin make it clear many of them think that woman can do no wrong no matter how in your face anti-white her comments are and Brad and Larry can do no right no matter how lacking in quotes their rhetoric is.

    Part of that weird disconnect lies in interpreting anti-affirmative action as racism, misogyny and homophobia. The problem there is the entire SJW culture from the SFWA presidents on down make their commitment to affirmative action where identity trumps the literature clear in comment after comment. They make no secret of that whatsoever and accuse us of racism for the mere act of reading those comments. Typically, SJWs want to have this argument both ways.

    “Historically, there haven’t been enough avenues for POC, women, disabled writers, and others to flourish… numerous people have been working on and promoting efforts to promote diverse voices in the field. Those efforts continue. I anticipate that this groundswell of efforts to boost the voices of the marginalized will continue and I have every intent to help promote those efforts wherever I can.” – SFF author Laura Mixon, wife of SFWA president Steven Gould

    “Farah Mendlesohn ‏@effjayem Mar 5 Just read Afrofuturism by Ytasha L Womack. Not sure it’s a good book but it is an important one. On my #HugoList it goes.”

    “Abigail Nussbaum ‏@NussbaumAbigail Mar 9 @shaunduke @niallharrison @jdiddyesquire I need a manifesto for it to be clear that I want women, PoCs and progressive themes on the ballot?”

    “Feminist FrequencyVerified account ‏@femfreq Really enjoyed the engaging mysteries set in compelling worlds full of people of colour found in Amanda Downum’s The Necromancer Chronicles.”

    What are we supposed to do with a hundreds of quotes like that from SFF’s core players – pretend we didn’t see them? Pretend we can’t imagine how they’ll vote? Pretend they don’t mean what they say?

  375. @kamas716

    Shadowdancer said the same thing about Vox Day. My impression of him is that he is someone who doesn’t shy away from a fight, and he gives at least as good as he gets. Beyond that, I really don’t have an informed opinion about him, and I’ve more or less decided that I just don’t have the time or energy that it would take to dig through all of the backstories about him to MAKE an informed opinion. I think that that would be an unfair thing to do if, say, I was interviewing him for a job, but I’m not. To me, he’s just some guy that a lot of people on blogs (and Twitter, I assume, but I ignore Twitter) are bitching about. Since the Hugo ballot is already set, I’ve decided to just ignore him. I probably won’t have time to make an informed decision in the editors categories, and if I do, I’ll just vote based on what’s in the packet.

  376. “… accusations of affirmative action and secret cabals that Brad & Larry have hurled at Worldcon. Accusations without any shred of evidence.”

    http://file770.com/?p=22740&cpage=1#comment-269178

    This is why 770 is worthless. The average commenter there is either so ill-informed, so biased or so stupid they can’t think. If they don’t know about it, it never happened… and they don’t. If it did, they’ll figure out a way to make racists into heros and normal people into racists. The evidence for AA is not only overwhelming, SJWs take pride in never shutting up about it and promoting it. Of course when your comments with quotes which argue a point are deleted, what’s left is an insulated bathyscape of idiocy where people endlessly argue for the simple reason they don’t know what the hell they’re talking about. Someone should give these people a prize for managing to argue everything in the world – complete with poems – except what actually has caused this divide. It takes a special talent to repeatedly throw rocks at a barn and miss. But then it takes a special talent to try and debunk a person’s point by linking people to a site which reinforces the point. That’s “satire” to an SJW. Satire to an SJW is more like an exclamation point because they are incapable of making even the simplest comparisons or analogies.

    And now they’re all happy cuz a guy who writes SF that makes Michael Crichton’s shallow ditties look like H.P. Lovecraft has been rewarded with a $3.4 million green light to write even more 12 yr. old fiction only a seething redneck could find any nuance or entertainment in. We’ve come a long way from “This Moment of the Storm” and “Soldier Ask Not”… down a storm sewer. Don’t be surprised if Scalzi co-writes a novel with Taylor Swift.

  377. To show you how much of a moral fog SJWs operate in when it comes to their judgments about racist misogynist men’s rights activists, let’s take a look at how corrupt their priorities are. Let’s talk like adults for a minute instead of 7 year olds full of excuses:

    Has any Puppy called for or instituted racially segregated rooms and dinners?

    Do Puppies review-censor non-whites or women?

    Have Puppies created webzines to promote the interests and demographic presence of men, white and straights?

    Have Puppies made lists of editors and authors who are white, straight and men?

    Has any Puppy publicly asked for help to de-black their library?

    Does any Puppy boycotted all-non-white or female convention panels?

    Has any Puppy called to go one year without reading women, gays or non-whites?

    Has any Puppy published a Men’s Right’s based all-male anthology of SFF?

    Has any Puppy published alt-history racial and sexual revenge anthologies of SFF which takes out historic Muslims, Queens, non-whites, etc.?

    Has any Puppy promoted or signal-boosted literature mentioning whether the author or characters were men, white and straights as a plus?

    Do any Puppies promote racially white #Eurofuturism hashtags or have a Eurofuturism art and literary movement including symposiums?

    Are there any white SFF societies or symposiums? Do Puppies celebrate the whiteness of old school SF authors in actual quotes?

    Do Puppies teach that non-whites and women have “culturally appropriated” SF?

    Do Puppies memory-hole any white institutions of slavery or colonialism in their historic dialogues?

    Have Puppies created or involved themselves in an academic ideology or theory which stipulates all women hate men?

    Are there any SF awards for men, whites or straights only or which heavily weight them in a mission statement?

    Do Puppies promote “black savior” theories because they are sick of blacks scoring the winning touchdown and bucket?

    Do Puppies create hashtags or write posts that claim any non-whites who mistake one white for another at a convention is a racist?

    Do Puppies have safe-space websites so whites and men can dialogue without the interference of non-whites and women?

    Do Puppies write about the innocent demography of romance fiction as an ideology exclusionary towards men?

    Do Puppies wish non-Puppies should die in a fire or mutter insults about non-whites and women on Twitter every single day?

    Do Puppies express race or sex-pride at lists of awards nominees?

    Do Puppies call for diversity in the NBA and middle-weight boxing?

    Have Puppies hysterically swarmed WorldCon’s Twitter feed demanding the removal of heterophobic racists who might make inappropriate remarks?

    SJWs have mitigations and excuse notes from teacher for every one of those, which is what makes them corrupt and reveals who and what it is which created their cult. It’s a moral shell game of stupid. Anyone who sells that con game can fuck off.

    SJWs not only multiply 2 guys into an army, they put them at the head of a line when by SJWs own standards they should be at the back of an army-sized line of institutional strength. I’m not providing covering fire for anyone, I’m just asking… compared to what? When is obvious obvious with this sick SJW cult?

  378. @Kamas: As to Vox, the thing about him is that you end up with a “the boy who cried wolf” situation. He gets misquoted and deliberately misunderstood enough that when he actually says something that is actually misogynist/racist/whateverist, almost no one pays attention except people who already want to hate the guy.
    That having been said, I agree with May. Vox is nowhere near as psycho as Jemison, or Buhlert, or Sriduangkew. If we could have a war between him and his crowd and her and her crowd, then have the rest of ELoE come in and sweep up the pieces, that would be the best of all possible worlds.

  379. @60guilders

    What I really don’t understand about Vox Day is the whole GamerGate thing. And as I’ve said before, I don’t really WANT to know about GamerGate, because it really isn’t my scene, but my impression is that Day is a leader of sorts in the GamerGate world, and everyone seems to agree that he has a lot of fans because of GamerGate. I don’t know what role (if any) these folks are going to end up playing in the Hugos. My instincts say “not much”–$40 is more than I would pay to vote in a contest that I really don’t care about, and I make pretty good money. But we’re seeing a large number of new Supporting Memberships, and there’s chatter that this is Day’s Private Army (commanded from his Secret Lair in either Finland or Italy) buying up votes. Again, I doubt it. But I think that what Vox Day does next will have an impact on the awards. If he says, “These are the people I’m voting for,” then his supporters are likely to throw their weight behind those people. The Anti-Puppies weren’t going to vote for them, anyway. So then what will the SP3 people and Everyone Else do? I think a lot of people in the Everyone Else category might decide to vote for other people. Again, just thinking out loud here. But there are a lot of different ways that this can play out, and a lot of them don’t lead to the best candidate winning the award.

  380. “And now they’re all happy cuz a guy who writes SF that makes Michael Crichton’s shallow ditties look like H.P. Lovecraft has been rewarded with a $3.4 million green light to write even more 12 yr. old fiction”

    I really don’t understand all the crowing over this. $3.4 million for 10 years/13 books, while certainly nothing to sneeze at, is small town dermatologist money, not James Patterson or Michael Crichton money. Patterson gets somewhere north of $10 million per book, and “writes” up to 15 books per year (being considerably smarter than Scalzi, he relies on unknown young writers to do the hard work, rather than famous dead ones).

    Do they seriously believe that Tor handed Scalzi a $3.4 million check up front? It doesn’t work that way, guys. That money will be doled out piecemeal, if he maintains sales, and if his books continue to be “acceptable” to Tor (or whoever winds up owning Scalzi’s indentures after Tor crashes and burns, which is going to happen a lot sooner than ten years from now).

  381. @Frank

    Here’s the thing. Either Gamergate matters, or it doesn’t. If you don’t know what it’s about, then you won’t know why Sad Puppies has caught some attention from Gamergate, but not in the same way that the Antis keep howling it has.

    Personally, I don’t think Gamergate matters much to the Hugos; Sad Puppies is related only because the reasons for it are similar, but they’re not exactly the same. Also, ultimately, we didn’t get the Gamergate numbers.

    Games are a multibilliondollar industry that dwarfs the writing one by a couple of orders of magnitude. The people who play them tend to be the types who will spend hours, stretching into days, weeks, months, to achieve whatever goals they set for themselves in that game; then do it all over again. They will spend money – on their consoles, their games, their computer hardware, maybe in ingame items – that I think only enthusiasts of other hobbies can understand (like say, V8 car and antique car enthusiasts).

    Gamers are stubborn, resilient, and persistent. They have the numbers that make or break companies in the industry. Why? It’s really simple. If your game or product stops being good, people stop buying it, they stop their subscriptions, they move on to other games. Your indie startup or small game company can suddenly find itself catapulted into the big leagues, simply by engaging the audience in some way – case in point, Minecraft, before Microsoft bought it.

    Books are fluff to most of them. Sure, some of the gamers will be readers as well; some readers may be as hardcore gamers as those who don’t. There’s some overlap – especially as books tend to supplement the virtual worlds in those games. Fun? Entertaining? Engaging? Intriguing? They’d better be, or forget being bought, since fiction books are, first and foremost, entertainment – and thus must attract attention from people who are passionate about their entertainment. I’m one of those, in terms of gamer interest / overlap, so I understand the audience and I understand the mindset.

    But that overlap is what ultimately the anti-puppies was afraid of, because that overlap doesn’t run into the ‘important’ or ‘literary’ that the social justice bullies think holds value, because being lectured or heckled or harangued as misogynistic, homophobic, racist isn’t entertaining – and reveals, ultimately, the massive disconnect the SJBs have with the audiences entertainment industries compete for. Gamergate is a pushback against the bullies, not the ‘hate group’ that the media is making them out to be.

    Vox Day has involvement in both gaming and writing industries, but I don’t think he’s as big as a ‘leader’ as the anti-puppy and anti-GG like to make him out to be.

    If you want to lay the blame of Gamergate involvement, whatever little it is, in Sad Puppies and the Hugos, in my opinion lay that blame at Brianna Wu’s door, and Teresa Nielsen-Hayden. If they hadn’t started blaming Gamergate for something GG hadn’t had any involvement in, GG wouldn’t have had known about it at all. I actually think if Brianna Wu hadn’t complained about Sad Puppies, the Hugos wouldn’t have been a blip on the Gamergate radar at all.

    Just for the record, Daddy Warpig tried to let Gamergate know about it and it wasn’t noticed, because books, as mentioned above, are peripheral to games, not integral.

  382. @Frank: A lot of those influx of supporting memberships are folk like me. Folk who just finally got fed up and decided to DO something rather than observe. Some of these observers are short time observers. ALL the ones I’ve heard are long time readers (a couple are GamerGaters but that doesn’t appear to be a driving force over all) but what I have heard over, and over and over and over again is “Wow, I saw X rant and did some digging and these people piss me off and thanks to Y sad puppy info (Or hitting the Sasquan page, though that is rarer in my observation) I discovered I had a say in this and y’know, these ranting gatekeepers pissed me off enough to spend $40 and read the packet and vote properly just to spite them.’ More came out of the ‘no award’ campaign than I’ve seen coming out of gamergate, but it’s limited observational data.

    As for Vox Day. He is their boogie man. He is worse than their Sauron. He is their Morgoth, their Witch King of Angmar, and their Golum all rolled into one. This gives him FAR more power over them than his actual influence seems to be. They genuinely THINK he’s that powerful so they wind up granting him more power.

  383. Gamergate is more similar to what’s happening in SFF than the SJWs want to let on. That’s because they want to make it about women-hatred and Zoe Quinn being harassed by her ex-boyfriend and then Anita Sarkeesian and Brianna Wu too rather than the feminists attacking men.

    In fact Sarkeesian’s initiatives precede Gamergate by over 2 years. Quinn was taking flack for her feminist stuff 18 months prior to Gamergate.

    SJWs also want to make it seem as if the journalistic ethics thing is a shill but that had also been going on for a long time with dishonest hit pieces on game developers long before Gamergate.

    This isn’t rocket science either here nor there. Normal SFF fans will do an analysis on a novel’s genre tropes or science. What the latest? A man pretending to be a woman at io9 is signal-boosting an analysis of rapes in the Game of Thrones novels. Deaths of men? Not important.

    When is obvious obvious? These people pretend to have an interest in SFF but it’s always from an extremely slanted viewpoint of gender feminism that’s flat out hostile and wacky.

  384. Here’s a timeline of controversial incidents in the core SFF community. Notice how in every single instance they are attacks on men, whites or straights seen through an intersectionalist gender feminist viewpoint.

    April 2012 Saladin Ahmed’s Is Game of Thrones Too White post
    May 2012 John Scalzi’s White Privilege post
    May 2012 First Anita Sarkeesian gender tropes in video games Kickstarter
    May 2013 Annual non-white “safer-space” at WisCon feminist SFF convention
    Sept 2012 N.K. Jemisin accuses fandom of being “racist as fuck”
    March 2013 Adria Richards Donglegate harassment hoax, claims blacks can’t be racist – cites Scalzi’s post
    April 2013 John Scalzi attacks men in “geekdom”
    May 2013 SFWA Bulletin “lady”/Red Sonja cover incident
    May 2013 Kameron Hurley’s eventually Hugo-winning post about women erased from military history by men
    May 2013 Annual non-white “safer-space” at WisCon feminist SFF convention
    June 2013 N. K. Jemisin Australian Continuum Guest of Honor Speech
    July 2013 Mary Robinette Kowal Dear Rabid Weasels Please Shut the Fuck Up post
    August 2013 Jim Hines makes racial innuendoes over photo of WorldCon chairs
    January 2014 Alex Dally MacFarlane at Tor calls for an end to binary gender in SFF
    February 2014 Feminists on Twitter swarm Waterstones Bookstore male SFF book display
    March 2014 Jonathan Ross hounded out of hosting the Hugos by feminists and their supporters
    April 2014 John Scalzi writes “please bone up on the concept of intersectionality.”
    April 2014 Damien Walter SF future-is-queer piece at The Guardian
    May 2014 Mary Robinette Kowal Tweets “only one award went to a white male” after the Nebulas
    May 2014 Annual non-white “safer-space” at WisCon feminist SFF convention
    June 2014 Damien Walter Tweets “Google ‘intersectional’ and move on.”
    June 2014 Women Destroy Science Fiction Kickstarter released by Lightspeed Magazine
    June 2014 John Scalzi accuses SFF author L. Correia of “obvious misogyny” for using a vulgar slang term
    Aug 2014 Gamergate
    Feb. 2015 K. Tempest Bradford writes “I Challenge You to Stop Reading White, Straight, Cis Male Authors for One Year” at Xojane
    Feb 2015 Lightspeed reviewer admits he doesn’t review white men

  385. @Frank, @Shadowdancer

    GG is a very decentralised group and there are no real “leaders” as such. There are figures of note, and these tend to crossover with other internet groups – some of these are Total Biscuit, Milo Yiannopolis, Thunderfoot, Adam Baldwin etc. I don’t think Vox is to their level, but I’m sure he has aspirations.

    While the Daddy Warpig reachout doesn’t seem to have been picked up, Larry Correia did also reach out to Milo, who *is* a major figure within GG and got a signal boost from him:

    I see Milo’s signal boost aimed towards those GGers who were already primarily SF fans, but who probably didn’t participate in things like Worldcon/ Hugo. I don;t think it was particularly effective to get out the vote during the nomination phase.

    Given the subsequent levels of noise, I think it’s gotten to the point that it’s looking like GGers are regularly joining to trot out the old GG talking points and being shoehorning them into Hugo related discussions.

    There’s always been a core element of GG that revels in escalation to the point of threats, stalking, and doxxing, and my concern is that it’s just a matter of time before *they* show up, or bring those tactics to the Hugo’s.

    Are they paying up and joining in for the voting? I dunno, and time will tell on that I guess.

  386. SJWs also want to make it seem as if the journalistic ethics thing is a shill but that had also been going on for a long time with dishonest hit pieces on game developers long before Gamergate.

    Gamers have been complaining about game reviews being biased for quite some time. The big controversies had been related to the relationship between game reviewers and publishers due to publishers often also being advertisers. This has long been a hot-button issue amongst gamers, and the only reason it kept going on was the game reviewers could claim that they needed the relationship with the publishers as advertisers and as providers of games to review to be able to keep publishing. The fact that some of the SJWs would use biased reviews to promote their own works and encourage the use of biased reviews to promote their own political agenda immediately set them against the mainstream gaming community, and it immediately exposed to the gamers that they were being conned by at least some reviewers in that they were biasing reviews not just out of necessity but also for political or personal reasons. The fact that more SJWs sided with their allies against the gamers and continued to defend the perpetrators further hardened gamers who felt both unfairly victimized and felt that the perpetrators didn’t even understand the problem.

    There’s a definite parallel in the sci-fi marketplace, as non-Progressive sci-fi fans that felt shut out were told that the books they liked weren’t good enough and not many people felt like they did. It wasn’t until they were able to put their observations together and see how popular sci-fi was, how many people felt like they did, and, comparatively how few people voting it actually took to win a Hugo, that the situation started to change. (The nomination of If You Were a Dinosaur, My Love as a concrete illustration of just how bad things had gotten was one of the heaviest straws that broke the camel’s back).

  387. There’s always been a core element of GG that revels in escalation to the point of threats, stalking, and doxxing,

    Cite please.

    It’s a lot easier for me to cite a core element of anti-GamerGaters engaged in unethical (the Honey Badger Brigade expulsion from CalgaryExpo) to outright illegal (the Local 16 bomb threat) attacks against GamerGaters.

  388. Civilis – I suspect that is because those were far more recent, and I will not quibble with you as to their provenance, as to down that road leads infinite parsing. But notable incidents of the top of my head:

    *The fairly graphic death and rape threats that Zoe Quinn got fairly early on

    *The multiple threats that Utah State Uni received when Sarkeesian was scheduled to speak there.

    *The rape and death threats that Brianna Wu, and her family received. I think theyre the ones who had to move out, or maybe that was Quinn’s parents – not sure on this.

    *Felicia Day getting doxxed (after saying that she kept quiet because she was afraid of getting doxxed!)

    You can get links to attributions for all of these from the GG wikipedia page:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamergate_controversy

  389. @Snowcrash –

    The standard GG response to Vox Day (not to be confused with Vox Media, which owns Polygon) is either “Who?” or “Oh, that asshole again.” – GG-ers herd about as well as Fen, and didn’t appreciate being “Invoked as Vox’s Personal Army”.

    That’s not to say there isn’t crossover, especially when such luminaries as “GG Males Have Underdeveloped Brains” Wu and “Look at the Shield” Chu are among the ‘Luminaries” of Sasquan this year. But unless a CHORF/SJW does something monumentally stupid – which has been known to happen, shocking, I know – there won’t be a mass flood of GG-ers, just the normal cross-genre types, as well as bridge-dwellers and beehive-kickers.

  390. Also, Wikipedia is NOT a reliable source; SJWs own the page and anything on there is highly skewed. Any source that doesn’t fit the narrative is deemed “Unreliable”, despite being used everywhere else.

    The SJW camp have been caught red-handed screenshotting ‘hate messages’ while failing to log out of their primary account, or even hitting ‘Send’ in some cases. Giving an interview about being chased out of their house from their house – curious that the time they had to spend ‘away from home in fear of their lives’ coincided nicely with a three-month-long European vacation they had already planned. The ‘Utah Threats’ which were made against GG, not Saint Anita.

    In short, I think you’re trying to sell a pig in a poke, here.

  391. Actually, IIRC the Utah threats that cause Anita to bail, if we’re talking the ones Larry risked, were not directed at GG, but were FROM a completely independent troll, some clickbait Journo out of south america, and was actually uncovered and hunted down by GG.

    And yeah, then private “death threats” on twitter barely rise to the level of trash talk directed in all directions (I will give you it’s “sexist” in that the specific nature of the insults is shaped by what appears to – successfully – bother the intended target. Mayhap men and women DO think differently as recent science and old wisdom suggests….) while major Journo’s and developers trash talk their customers or even discuss using the GG blacklist (which caught Colonel Sanders) as an employment blacklist, and discuss shoving GG-ers into ovens.

    Fuck that noise.

    Never mind the aforementioned “look at the hate tweet we got” screen caps where they not only forgot to log out of their sock puppet accounts, but, hilariously, forgot to even hit “post”.

    They lie. I’m sure some have had nasty things said to them, but actual credible death threats? Stuff mailed to their houses (Mile had syringes mailed to him)

    And Anita? They love to conflate “she gets harassed (and I’ve seen respectfully pointing out the facts in related forae labeled harassment. See earlier sock-puppet screen caps for why I believe few if any claims) and she’s a woman” with “she get’s harassed BECAUSE…”

    No, she gets flack because she’s a liar. She won’t just piss on your legs and tell you it’s raining, she’ll go out of her way to SHOW you the exact opposite of what she claims, and insist you believe her instead of your lying eyes.

    And she tells us to believe women period – unless they have different opinions about her.

    She is one of the small number of people on this earth that, despite never having met them, I have utter contempt for.

  392. @snowcrash and yet, the Hugos do not have the sheer numbers that Gamergate routinely brings. Something I don’t think you antis are willing to admit. Larry pointed out to Milo that Sad Puppies exists, because both Sad Puppies and Gamergate has similarities in pushing back against the social justice bullies and scolds and the false narratives they’re building up about women, LGBT, ‘colored people’ – yeah, I refuse to use that stupid ‘people of color’ because turning a phrase around doesn’t make it sound LESS racist to THIS Asian chick, and I refuse to play to that hypocrisy – in gaming and in SFF.

    And honestly, the ‘waaah, there aren’t as many X’ in gaming / sff is bullshit. There’s plenty of us there, we just care more about the skills than whether you boink the same sex, have tits and can birth children, chopped your dick off and put in a hole, sewed up the hole and made a dick, whether you’re more susceptible to skin cancer or not, or if you’re in a wheelchair.

    All we care about is, ‘can you play the game / play your damn class.’ All we care about is ‘can you write a story that engages your audience without bludgeoning them with your ideology.’ You don’t get special treatment for the external stuff to that. Being LGBT/female, or having more melanin doesn’t grant you special abilities, ingame or out.

    For the record, my clan was almost 50/50 females, had members across the world and different time zones, had several gays and lesbians, ranged from age from 14 to 57, had people with families, and singletons, to the avowed celibates, had disabled people, people in wheelchairs, ranged from atheist to deeply religious, and ran the gamut of skin colors.

    Not a single one of those traits was a barrier to their playing the game. Hell, we only found out that one of the tanks was a person playing the character with one hand and a stick in his mouth, when we asked why his Ventrilo was detect speech instead of push to talk. It wasn’t due to flaws in his playing – he was a fantastic tank – but after we found out, nobody asked again. In fact, we were all impressed even more. And he was such a happy, cheerful friendly guy, nobody suspected that he had so much difficulty in his life.

    Women writers? Read this.

    http://t.co/gfYHTzc6T7

    The Utah State thing was bullshit, and you know it. It was deemed a non-threat by the FBI yet Sarkeesian decided that the drama was more milkable than talking and ‘fled for her life and safety.’ The main thing she was upset about was that Utah State Uni refused to lessend 2nd Amendment rights and conceal carry on her say so. Sorry, but she isn’t that special. And for perspective, I get death threats on my children, but I can’t have anything done about that because guess what? I’m in Australia and the stalker threatening is in Massachusetts. The person who threatened Sarkeesian was in South America – and it was Gamergate that revealed that. That’s why it was deemed an unlikely threat.

    The supposed ‘fleeing’ of the Wus was shown to be a hoax after an analysis and comparison of her previous videos and the ones claiming to be from a hidden location. They were the same location, but with furniture turned around and such.

    And dude, sorry to say, but Zoe Quinn can Q_Q harder, in my opinion. I get threats of graphic rape and murder after my party kicks the ass of another. I just shoot them in the face some more and laugh at their rage in the face of their defeat. Aff got one that graphically described ‘her’ getting bent over the sink and fucked in ass and pussy till ‘she’ bled, when we would routinely beat a much higher geared clan. When it was pointed out that Aff was a man, the graphicness of description only increased, at which point we ALL laughed, and the ones that laughed the hardest were the female players, and the gay guys joked about Aff swinging for their team now.

  393. If you want to make a case for a thing you quote people with actual names and an institutional presence, not anonymous people. They could be anyone and in any number great or small. Taking that stuff and then concluding Gamergaters are misogynists is ridiculous. If you have to use anonymous you’ve got nothing. There are plenty of high profile Gamergate women for SJWs to quote but who never are because it doesn’t match up with this lie men hate women.

    On the other hand SJWs hate my “screeds” precisely because I do use quotes from people well-placed institutionally or who publicly support their wacko racist man-hating feminists. The idea men hate women was created by the goofy lesbian feminist cult created by gay feminists SJWs constantly quote who hated men and whites such as Audre Lorde.

    How many Puppies or Gamergaters who are institutionally placed and with actual names can match Lorde’s remarks about “the gap of male ignorance” from her most famous and oft-quoted essay? If you’re looking for proof of straight up sex-hatred or supremacy, there it is.

    What kind of racist supremacist would write “it is the task of women of Color to educate white women”? Can you imagine the uproar if that was reversed? Lorde also refers to all white feminists as “racist” and “tools of a racist patriarchy.” Sound familiar? It should – I can find that rhetoric in dozens of SJW Twitter feeds right this minute.

    In that essay Lorde also quotes famous feminist Simone de Beauvoir, a Frenchwoman who had her teaching license taken away for seducing a 17 yr. old girl and who advocated for the sexual liberation of children via the “Front de libération des Pédophiles.” Lorde in turn blurbed Andrea Dworkin’s books, a woman who believed in the destruction of the normal family and the end of the incest tabu and sex rights for children. Lorde is one of the icons at the center of every bit of research I’ve done into this cult in the SFF community.

    What would someone think if Gamergaters constantly quoted David Duke? Suddenly lightbulbs would pop on.

    This is the fundamental core of SJW ideology. I’m not surprised SJWs don’t like these dots being connected. The question is why they continue to support such an ideology and stupid ideas like a general misogyny among all men when it’s clear there is a pattern of misandry that runs throughout this mentally ill cult.

    I’ve read your comments Snowcrash. They’re routinely short on facts and full of shit. If you have facts to support I am cherry-picking quotes or going into weeds looking for offense, make it or STFU. But weeds aren’t presidents of literary orgs or Hugo and Nebula nominees. Weeds are anonymous anybodies. You’re smelling yourself, not me.

  394. Also, http://www.crimeandfederalism.com/2015/04/why-are-people-opposing-gamergate-evil-9-sjws-who-are-horrible-people.html

    Not that antis are likely to read that, what with all the people there who refused to report rapes, falsely accuse of rapes, have criminal records, committed perjury, and advocate doxxing.

    But hey, go on, tell us more about Vox Day and Gamergate and try make us Sad Puppies evil, while the SJWs turn on GRRM. =)

  395. You had no problem saying There’s always been a core element of GG that revels in escalation to the point of threats, stalking, and doxxing for a bunch of unsourced threats, some of which are indisputably third party trolls, and some of which have evidence that suggests a false flag operation. On the other hand, there is no doubt that there was a public campaign by anti-GG activists to expel the Honey Badger Brigade from CalgaryExpo and there is no doubt that there was a public campaign by anti-GG activists to push the GamerGate meetup from Local 16 just before the bomb threat (which coincidentally accomplished through illicit means what they were unable to accomplish through legal means).

    At this point, given the anonymity of the internet, threats, even vulgar ones, are par for the course. I expect fringe elements of both sides and dedicated trolls to continue to use them. I don’t approve, and I don’t think most people on either side approve of such tactics, much less revel in them. On the other hand, when you’re engaged in a fight, you can’t expect the other side to play by your arbitrary rules when you’ve set them up to give yourself an advantage, and if you establish a tactic as legitimate, you have to expect it to be used against you.

    All of this is a smokescreen to avoid answering the real questions: are the gatekeepers of science-fiction and video games even trying to do their jobs as neutral arbiters, and if not, what can the people harmed by this imbalance do to fix the situation?

  396. The other link got moderated because it had more than one link, but the guy in the photo is Hotwheels, one of the more prominent GG personalities. I noticed snowcrash rather conveniently left him out because, that would be inconvenient to the narrative that Gamergate are full of hateful people who hate on women, LGBT, disabled people, etc.

    Quite a number of the pro-GG people are Filipino, of both sexes. Or they don’t count?

    #NotYourShield

    Bitch less. Work more, that’s what I say to Anita and her ilk. Nobody is stopping you from making the games you want, nobody is stopping anyone from writing what books they want. Let the market decide if it sucks or not. Don’t MAKE other people do what you want them to do by shaming them into it; because last I checked, Anita and Brianna Wu have working arms and legs and are supposedly able to make games.

    SadPuppies? We voted in the books WE liked. Cue outrage.

    Y’all are proving Larry right again and again.

  397. What kind of dystopian SF would SJWs who massively support these racially segregated spaces write? A fearful future society where there are no racially segregated spaces? LOL Man I shudder at that thought.

    Can you imagine what The Twilight Zone would’ve been like if SJWs wrote it? Morality tales? Of what? Pro-Jim Crow?

    The SJW version of “The Marching Morons” would be called “The Peaceful Normal People with Critical Thinking Skills.”

    Oh, gee, and here’s one of next year’s WisCon GoH retweeting icky “whiteness.” Do you really have to ask who Roxane Gay even is at this point?

    “Justine Larbalestier retweeted
    Laura Ruby @thatlauraruby · 4h 4 hours ago “Discussing diversity in publishing is the worst kind of Groundhog Day.” @rgay on the whiteness of “best of” lists http://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2015/05/28/410015276/the-worst-groundhog-s-day-time-to-talk-again-about-diversity-in-publishing?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=books&utm_medium=social&utm_term=artsculture …”

  398. What would anyone be called who whined about the blackness of NBA teams or rap?

    Hell, we’re called that just for waking up in the morning. SJWs are incapable of making even the simplest comparisons, which is why they come off as pathological liars.

  399. All we care about is, ‘can you play the game / play your damn class.’ All we care about is ‘can you write a story that engages your audience without bludgeoning them with your ideology.’ You don’t get special treatment for the external stuff to that.

    In gaming “can I trust you to stand by me against my enemies?” is the only question that matters, whether the trust is in your skill to hold the line against the foes, your integrity not to defraud our guild through theft or fraud, and your honor not to bring drama or external politics into the guild interactions.

    I’ve teamed up with characters that literally have a big glowing sign over their heads stating their ideological affiliation (one oppositional to mine), and I’ve had no problem with it, and in fact would team up with them again, because they didn’t bring it into conversation and were excellent teammates. If they didn’t put it above their heads, I’d never have known.

  400. No offense, folks, but this^ is why I don’t really want to know more about GamerGate. It’s not my scene.

    I think a lot of the Supporting Memberships are being bought by people like @wyrdbard above, namely people who had no idea you could pay $40 and vote for the Hugos. I didn’t know until the last year or two, when I was buying my LonCon membership. And for $40, you also get the Hugo voter’s packet, which probably contains a lot more than $40 worth of SF/F writing. The big X factor is that nobody really seems to know where most of these people fall on the ideological spectrum. They may be pro-Puppy (SP3 and/or RP), anti-Puppy, or Everyone Elsers who just think it’ll be cool to vote for the Hugos. And we’re all probably going to have no idea until they hand out the voting tabulations on the night of the awards.

  401. @Frank – then why keep bringing it up if it means nothing? Vox Day is either a gamergate threat or not. Which is it? You said you didn’t understand that (about Vox and Gamergate), but then you also state that you don’t want to know, because, ‘it’s not your scene.’ If it’s not important, why bring it up again and again? What’s the point if you don’t want to know?

    My advice? Drop it if you don’t want to know. You’re going to annoy people with that ‘but…but…Vox Day and GAMERGATE but I DON’T WANT TO KNOW’ strangeness.

    Honestly, I actually agree that lots of the supporting memberships are being brought by people like wyrdbard and myself – folks who didn’t know that we COULD. (I found out during SP2, was reminded when SP3 started.)

    In the short term, the Puppies succeeded in their goal of getting more people aware of being able to vote for the Hugos. I’m trying to see why that’s supposed to be a bad thing… except oops, we didn’t vote for The Approved Works.

    For the people who run the Hugo Awards, they’ve made more money this time than I think they expected. That’s the Puppy’s fault, no matter how you slice it. More awareness = more memberships. Will it be in the interests of the organizers to arrange for new initiatives that keep us ‘ordinary wrongfans’ out? I think not, but hey, ultimately, my attitude is, ‘well, they don’t want my money, so I’ll go spend it elsewhere, and there’s plenty of Japanese artists and writers I happily will support because they don’t think I’m scum for liking their work.’

    http://tlknighton.com/?p=7152

    Why is it ‘our’ fault that the anti’s are wanting to vote No Award? Or did we imagine y’all being independent human beings capable of making your own decisions? I don’t know what the new metric is this microsecond, whether treating people as if they’re adults and capable of making up their own minds is supposed to be good, or wrong today.

    I don’t really expect an answer to that. I’m going over to Tom’s, because it looks like we’re just chewing old soup over here, made of the red herrings of Gamergate/Vox Day.

  402. First Lensmen Misogynists
    Patriarchy of Venus
    If Cisnormativity Goes On-
    The Land That Forgot Whiteness
    Hildo
    Ancillary Male Ignorance
    Two Spirit Misogyny Hunter
    Prozac Station
    Disabled Genders of Mars
    Neuroatypical Star
    Genderblindness Messiah
    Polyamorous Steampunk Blimps
    Foundation and Cultural Appropriation
    Audre Lorde of the Flies
    The Chronic Illness Dimension
    Anglophone Albinos
    Civil Rights Movement 2500 A.D.
    Underrepresented Troopers
    The Stars My Marginalization
    Post-Binary of Doom
    Mixed-Race Hyphenate Skimmers
    Interstellar Impaired
    Neurodiverse Ask Not

  403. @Shadowdancer

    No, it was my fault. I’ve created a logical paradox for myself. (1) I want to understand Vox Day. (2) It’s difficult to understand Vox Day without educating yourself about GamerGate. (3) I really don’t want to educate myself about GamerGate.

    Normally, I’d just go to Wikipedia for background information like this, but Wikipedia is fairly useless for learning about Vox Day or GamerGate. The mainstream media is pretty much the same. When it comes up online, I get links to a number of radical feminists, whom I also don’t want to educate myself about. So I think you’re right–I should probably just quit bitching about it.

    As for who’s fault it is that people are voting No Award, I’ll lay that squarely at the feet of the people who are voting No Award. I don’t agree with the argument here, but it’s pretty straightforward: (1) Slates are bad. (2) Vote No Award above anything on a slate. It’s depressingly simplistic.

    I think the whole mess has been a bit of an eye-opener for me, and a very sad one. I didn’t realize that the SF/F community wasn’t more unified. I think I’ve said this before, but I’m coming back to SF/F fandom after being away for about 20 years. I paid to attend LonCon, but then couldn’t go for health reasons, so I didn’t get to go and mingle, and the first time I even found out there were people who felt left out was when this year’s Hugo noms were announced and all hell broke loose. I had just sort of assumed we were all one big happy family, and EVERYBODY tried to make it to WorldCon each year. (Granted, your ability to go would largely depend on how much you could afford to spend and where the convention was held, but you get the picture.) Now I’m finding out that there is a significant chunk of the SF/F community (including both fans and writers) who really don’t care for WorldCon and generally don’t attend. I just find that really depressing. I had assumed WorldCon was your “one stop shop” to get all of your favorite books signed, go to a few panels, listen to some readings, and watch a bunch of people win awards. Now I’m finding out that it’s more of a slug-fest that may have an awards ceremony that ends up slapping a bunch of writers in the face by telling them that NOBODY deserved an award in their category. (Hell, some people are probably going to get slapped in the face anyway, because the voting tallies are released at the end of the ceremony, so you’ll know if you got beat out by No Award.) That’s just not a convention that I’m all that excited to go to.

  404. Incidentally, does anyone know how our host is? I think he said “deployed”, but that can mean anything from get shot at overseas to pushing paper at a stateside military base.

  405. I think the reason you’re seeing this odd spectacle of SJWs as a kind of Orwellian anti-defamation defamation league is because they are an alliance of genuine anti-white and anti-male bigots and naive crusader do-gooders. Tom Wolfe called these mau-maus and flak catchers. Both are making a case – one out of hate, the other from uninformed compassion – that SFF is a kind of Jim Crow county but which includes women and gay folks too.

    In an actual Jim Crow county, it would not be defaming white people to point out law and privilege benefitted them as an entire group. In a fake Jim Crow county where laws are replaced by accidental demographies, assumptions and innuendoes, it is in fact defamation to say that about whites. And in this new fake Jim Crow country, add in men and heterosexuals.

    So where the problem comes in is those old Jim Crow laws – those hard edges – are gone. So are anti-suffrage laws. Lighting up straight white men on innuendoes and manufactured oppressions is group defamation of the same sort GLAAD and the ADL is set up to oppose.

    Notice how bigots always try and pretend there is some excuse to make their defamation merely an objective observation as if – for example – Jews and gay folks benefitted from an imaginary ideology that ties them all together in the way a Jim Crow county tied all whites in that county together. Bigots say gays will seduce your children and that Jews control the world’s finances. Our new SJW bigots say straight white men benefit from privilege. The Hugo-nominated Foz Meadows went so off the rails about this assumption in an article at the Huffington Post about the “privilege” enjoyed by SF authors Arthur C. Clarke, Robert Heinlein and Isaac Asimov she had to retract the article and heavily edit it 2 days later. Clarke was gay and Asimov Jewish and himself suffered from quotas in college. “Three straight, white Anglophone men” disappeared from the article.

    I think the reason this gay feminist intersectional ideology is so much in vogue with SJWs is because it is one stop shopping to cover women, gays and non-whites.

    The problem is that even the naive flak catchers show signs of obsessive fanaticism and in between them and the bigots are many who openly admit to crippling mental health issues. The common denominator with all three is it is self-evidently false to say mistaken identity is “institutional racism” or that an oppressive patriarchy, misogyny and privilege even exists. Also, one does not ignore male murders in a TV show and go nuts at the rape of a women or go nuts at protein shake ads with a slender woman in a bikini. One does not go nuts at blacks shot by police and ignore whites. That is simple supremacy and why you see these insane #BlackLivesMatter hashtags.

    SJW ideology is run through with supremacy, racism and bigotry and deserves its status as a group of anti-bigot bigots, anti-racist racists, anti-sexist sexists and anti-supremacist supremacists. SJWs are a combination of really hateful, really crazy and really stupid people.

  406. @James May

    Whoa. I honestly had no idea that Clarke was gay, or that one of the reasons he emigrated to Sri Lanka was because it was more tolerant.

  407. You claim that the Sad Puppies were a “push-back against a small pool of taste-makers getting to decide for all of Science Fiction and Fantasy (SF/F) what’s worthy of recognition.”

    Can you please explain how that statement is compatible with your slating of Wisdom From My Internet, despite the fact that nobody in the open thread for suggestions mentioned it and it’s not actually a work with the faintest relationship to SF/F? Because it looks for all the world like you included it on your list purely on your own initiative, and because the writer is a friend of yours, despite the fact that it shouldn’t have even been eligible, a decision that seems shockingly corrupt, and far worse than anything that had happened in any previous cycle of nominations?

  408. Phil, what are your opinions on “Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded”?

  409. “Can you please explain how that statement is compatible with your slating of Wisdom From My Internet, despite the fact that nobody in the open thread for suggestions mentioned it and it’s not actually a work with the faintest relationship to SF/F? ”

    Can you please explain how “Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded”, a similar work by John Scalzi, was not only nominated for a Hugo, but won? Why does Scalzi’s collection of (allegedly) entertaining Internet ramblings qualify, while Williamson’s collection of (allegedly) entertaining Internet ramblings does not?

    Thanks in advance.

  410. It is absolutely related to SF and fandom, by the way, Williamson being both a professional SF author and a long-time fan.

    There’s no real room to quibble here, given that Kameron Hurley’s winning piece was a work of bad fantasy fiction from beginning to end, and fiction is explicitly excluded from this category.

  411. If you scan the table of contents for Scalzi’s “related work” you’ll see that it’s mostly left-wing political diatribes.

    Can you explain why such entries as “Jesus’ Dickheads”, “The Election and Kerry’s Shoes”, “Bush Snorted Cocaine”, “Why Clinton Won’t Resign”, and “I Refuse to Believe that 9 out of 10 Republicans are Complete Tools” qualify as SF-related? If you can, please do so. I’ll wait.

  412. My Lawn a Sea of Stars
    I Wore a Dress on Altair-6
    Hot Tub Mission
    Old Transblacks’ War
    Hadji and His Sidekick Jonny Quest Succumb to Nancy Drew On Mars
    Locked-In Mumbai: Turban Engines
    Marginalized Shirts
    The Diversity Division
    RAINNs of Venus
    Investing in South African Krugerrands.
    Krugerrands on a Comet
    Diamonds Are Diversity
    The Diamond Hunters of Demos
    Why You Should Invest in South African Diamond Mines
    Locked-In: South Africa
    How K. Tempest Bradford’s Broad Shoulders Bought Me an Estate in South Africa

  413. Civilis

    You had no problem saying There’s always been a core element of GG that revels in escalation to the point of threats, stalking, and doxxing for a bunch of unsourced threats, some of which are indisputably third party trolls, and some of which have evidence that suggests a false flag operation. On the other hand, there is no doubt that there was a public campaign by anti-GG activists to expel the Honey Badger Brigade from CalgaryExpo and there is no doubt that there was a public campaign by anti-GG activists to push the GamerGate meetup from Local 16 just before the bomb threat (which coincidentally accomplished through illicit means what they were unable to accomplish through legal means).

    {quibble} Oh but the Local 16 thing was also a third party troll, was it not? And CalgaryExpo just asked HBB to leave, for violating their TOS {/quibble}

    Now think of your immediate reaction to my 2 statements above. When you gave those same examples, and asked me to cite, I said that I will not quibble with you as to their provenance, which is what you’re doing. One reason is that it’ll lead to endless parsing oof what is GG and what is not and various other fractal debates, but the main reason? There are no sources I would give that you will accept.

    The Wikipedia page I gave cites multiple sources for each of those examples, but you clearly don’t find them reliable, and perhaps justify it, like one poster, by saying that it’s owned by SJWs. You know what? That’s fine. Because chances are, I’d do the same to whatever source – Breitbart, NRO, etc – you provided.

    The main idea was to give my view on Frank’s question RE: Vox’s role in GG (short answer: aspirational!), as well as to give an idea of the decentralised nature of GG, and why there is so much interest in it’s role (or lack thereof) in Puppydom.

    I’m not looking to convince anyone of my views. They are my own. I merely wanted to give feedback from a viewpoint that was less than sympathetic to GG (it didn’t look too common here)

  414. Now think of your immediate reaction to my 2 statements above. When you gave those same examples, and asked me to cite, I said that I will not quibble with you as to their provenance, which is what you’re doing. One reason is that it’ll lead to endless parsing oof what is GG and what is not and various other fractal debates, but the main reason? There are no sources I would give that you will accept.

    You’re gaslighting. You stated, without qualification, that “there’s always been a core element of GG that revels in escalation to the point of threats, stalking, and doxxing“. That statement cannot be allowed to stand unquestioned, because it poisons the debate, and my objecting to it is not a mere “quibble” with its provenance. If you’re trying to make the anti-GamerGate case, then present your case without throwing in a blow below the belt.

    I often find myself playing Devil’s Advocate in debates where I argue just because the other side of the debate needs to be adequately represented. I can appreciate someone standing up to present the anti-GamerGate position. If you had not included the word “core”, I would not have even challenged your statement at all, and if you had said “fringe” instead, I would have taken your statement as trivially true. I was careful to limit my statements to what could be proven, especially by not attributing anything to the anti-GamerGate movement as a whole.

    The vast majority of both sides, at least publicly, are of the position that threats, stalking, and doxxing are not acceptable tactics. You can tell this by the lengths both sides will go to deny their own side is doing it, accuse the other side of doing it, and define away those cases where a reasonable observer might have reason to think that it has been done in their name. This is clearly not the case with using public pressure on conventions and public establishments to force out GamerGaters, as these tactics are being done publicly, and this holds true even if the expulsion of the Honey Badger Brigade was coincidentally unrelated to the pressure. I don’t want to see anyone, even those in a debate I have no interest in, even my own side, resorting to pressure tactics to silence the other side of a debate, even if it’s a case of proportional response, so I have a strong incentive to stop this before it becomes an acceptable norm.

  415. Notice how that Wiki uses the term “feminist” rather than making a distinction those “feminists” themselves do to the point of having feuds with what’s left of equal rights feminists; in fact they disdain and even hate them. Whether out of ignorance or dishonesty – the effect is the same: Wiki makes Gamergate seem as if they are against equal rights for women, an already settled and accepted issue for decades.

    Anita Sarkeesian, Brianna Wu and the entire rest of this bunch are not equal rights feminists. The idea they are is ridiculous and refuted in their own rhetoric and gender jargon. Christina Hoff Sommers is an equal rights feminist and young feminists hate her, disrupt her college talks and try and get them stopped entirely. Wu and Sarkeesian are part of an anti-male anti-white ideology that sees masculinity and whiteness as a menace. Sarkeesian’s biggest hero is bell hooks and her academic jargon comes from gay queer theorist Judith Butler. “Nuff said.

    These feminists do not critique law as did equal rights feminists – they critique men the same way the KKK critiques blacks and neo-Nazis Jews. Naturally, men being the biggest targets it is men who will push back. That is spun into a clever con game where just disagreeing makes one a right wing misogynist.

    “Christina H. Sommers retweeted Claire Lehmann @clairlemon · Oct 21 Critiquing the methodologies of contemporary feminism is not the same thing as being misogynist or even sexist. Far from it. #GamerGate”

  416. “there’s always been a core element of GG that revels in escalation to the point of threats, stalking, and doxxing“. That statement cannot be allowed to stand unquestioned,…

    Well, you did question it, and asked for citations. I provided them to you, and *then* we went on to the quibbling part.

    Regardless, all right then. It wasn’t clear to me that the issue was with the usage of the word “core”. I understand better what you’re saying, but I disagree with you that it is a fringe element, and certainly not a trivially fringe one. That has not been apparent from my perspective.

    It’s probably more due to both our beliefs, and to where we get our information from. Your’s may mention GG more frequently (ie, meet-ups and the like), and more sympathetically. Mine may not (ie, when something actually happens – most recently times would be the HBB thing – which surprise surprise, I have a completely different view of than you 🙂 ), and don’t.

    Like I said, I’m no particularly sympathetic to GG, so there will obviously be these differences and challenges to your worldview, and to mine. It is what it is.

    Similarly, on your last point, I will say that while I like the concept of free speech, I’m not particular in favour of the idea of consequence-free speech. Make of that what you will.

  417. I’m going to make a comment about “slates” here – and then be off of blogs for a while (nothing to do with anyone here or elsewhere – it’s that I’ve reduced my smoking to a point where I’m going to try once again to quit – and NOBODY wants me around when I do that).

    I am of the hope that we see MORE “slates” being proposed. Mainly because there IS so much SF/F (loosely defined) content out there. When a “slate” is proposed by people that are qualified by my definition of “darn good writers” or “darn good editors” it serves as an filter for what I may want to read, and POSSIBLY nominate for an award.

    If more people would simply follow that criteria, I think that the quality of awards can only go up. Assuming that the criteria of quality is followed – e.g., I think that Eric Flint’s social/economic/political views are pure idiotology, but he is a first-rate writer – which would have me reading and very seriously considering any work that appears on a “Flint Slate,” just as much as I would give to a work on the next SP slate (which will be somewhat of a “Kate Paulk” slate – although SP is more of a consensus by several people whose works I enjoy).

    A final word to “snowcrash” (and his “alternate”) – “legal” is “legal.” “Legal” is not “valid.” Refusing to deal with a Black in the Jim Crow South was absolutely legal. In no way was it ever valid. The same with the Hugo nominations. (As someone, I don’t recall who, noted – SP in all of its iterations has been completely legal.) The argument can be over it’s validity – which is where we part company, as while I think we all consider blind block voting to be invalid, you say it was that – and the majority here say that it was not.

  418. It wasn’t clear to me that the issue was with the usage of the word “core”. I understand better what you’re saying, but I disagree with you that it is a fringe element, and certainly not a trivially fringe one. That has not been apparent from my perspective.

    Would you then find it acceptable for me to state as a fact that the core elements of the anti-GamerGate crowd revel in threats, stalking, and doxxing? If not, you’re a hypocrite. If so, bringing it up in regards to GamerGate supporters is immaterial to the debate.

    Similarly, on your last point, I will say that while I like the concept of free speech, I’m not particular in favour of the idea of consequence-free speech. Make of that what you will.

    This is the key point. I doubt I’m going to persuade Snowcrash, so my arguments here are more directed to those like Frank that are here with an open mind.

    Society cannot function if the group that can yell the loudest can pressure opposing groups out of society. Society requires an open dialogue between groups of differing opinions. Those opinions may be unpopular, they may be uncomfortable, they may be obnoxious, and they even may be objectively wrong, but once you’re willing to suppress them, you’re established a precedent, and the temptation to use it will be unavoidable. The right of speech has to be absolute because once you’ve lost it, you’re unable to even argue to get it back.

    People like Snowcrash are willing to support the tyranny of the majority now, because they’re members of a group that’s vocal enough to believe they are the majority, rather than a particularly visible and privileged minority (the majority, as always, is ‘doesn’t care’). They’re also naive enough to believe that once people like them control speech, they will never find themselves as members of the minority on the receiving end.

    As far as “consequence-free speech”, it’s hard to take that argument seriously when what they are campaigning for is to prevent that speech from even being uttered. They’re not arguing that the speech should have consequences, but that the opposition shouldn’t even be able to make their speech in the first place.

    It’s also hard to argue that speech should have consequences when the consequences that are being argued for are so disproportionate to the speech. Should Snowcrash be hung from a lamppost for having stupid opinions? Should he be thrown into prison? Should he lose his job? Should he be barred from contributing to the discussion on the future of Sci-Fi? Of course not! Facing him with speech, including speech which may be offensive, on the other hand, is the appropriate consequence for his speech.

    Nobody ever argues that their own speech should be curtailed.

  419. I am of the hope that we see MORE “slates” being proposed. Mainly because there IS so much SF/F (loosely defined) content out there. When a “slate” is proposed by people that are qualified by my definition of “darn good writers” or “darn good editors” it serves as an filter for what I may want to read, and POSSIBLY nominate for an award.

    The purpose of the nominations and awards is to bring good works to people’s attention. Blocking anyone’s recommendations does no good. If the reviewer is lousy at recommending books (which is a judgement call), people won’t pay attention to their recommendations, so a block would be superfluous.

    The more people recommending books, the more I can compare what I’ve liked and disliked to what they’ve recommended and find reviewers with similar tastes I can trust and works I can have a better chance of liking. Honest book reviews lead to trusted reviewers, trusted reviewers lead to more enjoyment via better reading.

    In science-fiction reviewing “can I trust you to recommend books I will enjoy?” is the only question that matters, whether the trust is in your ability to pick books and write reviews, your integrity to review honestly, and your honor not to bring drama or external politics into your reviews.

  420. @Reality Observer

    I’m reeeeeaaaaalllly not a fan of slates (shock horror, right?). It seems to me that recommendations and reviewers you find reliable are a better solution to your “too much stuff” problem.

    I think you’re making the same mistake that John Wright made earlier, which is that I was referring to moral validity – I was not, that’s far to iffy a proposition.

    I’ve never said that SP was ever illegal. Similarly, it is perfectly legal for someone to vote all slate works under No Award. The morality of both, I leave it to each voters personal judgement.

    @Civilis

    I would find it as acceptable as you found my statement. Fair enough, no?

    On the speech thing….Well, that escalated quickly 🙂 . I think perhaps going from a bunch of people being asked to leave a con for being disruptive, to hanging people from lampposts unnecessarily escalates the rhetoric.

    No one is obligated to provide someone else with a platform by the way – CalgaryExpo found HBB disruptive, and asked them to leave. You’ve got that Clamps guy here, and he’s regularly “asked” to leave. That’s not people suppressing speech. As Hugo winner Randall Munroe put it:

    XKCD

  421. No one is obligated to provide someone else with a platform by the way – CalgaryExpo found HBB disruptive, and asked them to leave. You’ve got that Clamps guy here, and he’s regularly “asked” to leave.

    Clamps hasn’t paid for the privilege to be here, and wasn’t driven out by outside pressure.

    Outside protesters (anti-GamerGaters, who revel in doxxing, stalking, and threats) put pressure on CalgaryExpo to expel paying customers, the HBB, because the protesters disagreed with HBBs positions. Stephen Chu put pressure on Local 16 to expel the GamerGaters, and I’m quite glad the bar had the integrity to ignore the protesters.

    We’ve had attempts by SJWs (who revel in doxxi… you get the idea) to boycott the Chik-fil-a fast food chain (a perfectly acceptable tactic). Oddly enough, the chain had record sales the day of the boycott (a perfectly acceptable response). Would the world be a better place if those people that chose to counteract the boycott with speech by patronizing the restaurant had instead chosen to use that time and effort to identify the protestors and hound them and their employers until they were out of a job?

    You approve of what has happened because you approve of the results so far; to you, the ends justify the means. You are so convinced of the fundamental goodness of your cause that the rules don’t matter. The alternative, that you can’t empathize with others to imagine the results of being on the receiving end or the rules being abused against you, is too horrible to contemplate.

  422. I should take the time here to explain my last paragraph which seems a little too directed at Snowcrash, who, for all that I find his arguments insulting, is here trying to debate honestly. Snowcrash is on record elsewhere in this long thread arguing against the use of slates in the Hugo award voting because it is against the spirit of the Hugo. Snowcrash would have it acceptable for, say, a blogger to use their influence to enforce ‘consequences’ on the Honey Badger Brigade, yet unacceptable to have a blogger use their influence to have books they like nominated for the Hugo. He’s taken a side, he’s judging things on the short-term outcomes, and that’s why I say he has an ‘end justifies the means’ mentality. For me, I support fighting speech with speech, and allowing as much speech as possible.

  423. The HBB was “disruptive” by virtue of existing openly. It’s pathetic and disgusting that punishing people for their public existence can be framed as “consequences” of their speech.

  424. I wrote:

    “Can you explain why such entries as “Jesus’ Dickheads”, “The Election and Kerry’s Shoes”, “Bush Snorted Cocaine”, “Why Clinton Won’t Resign”, and “I Refuse to Believe that 9 out of 10 Republicans are Complete Tools” qualify as SF-related? If you can, please do so. I’ll wait.”

    Still waiting, Sandifer. You demand that our host, who has a civilian job, a military job, and a writing career, answer your questions posthaste, but you won’t do the same. As far as I can tell you’re an unemployed academic, which leads me to believe that you have somewhat more free time on your hands than Brad Torgersen does.

  425. Imagine if the pearl clutching ninnies were crying that some men in turbans were creating an “unsafe” convention for them… Totally ruined their weekend because they were so afraid of what they might do.

  426. Scalzi’s pimping the Nebula Weekend poster, which has Chris Kluwe on it. L Correia says “pussy” and Scalzi say that’s “obvious misogyny.” Kluwe says “nacho shield” to Latina Mercedes Carerra and gets a Nebula invite cuz SF.

    I find SJW principles clownish and yet endearing, especially since I know were it not for people like me upholding civilization most SJWs who have always fought but never been drafted would perish in slave pens somewhere in Asia.

    Shanks the Punter screams SF to me, just like other new additions to the genre like Audre Lorde’s gay feminist racism and zombies who can’t see gender, per the wishes of some daffy nutcutter like French Queer Theorist Judith Butler. Who the fuck are these people?

    Do you think for even one minute Kluwe has a single notion of what it is he’s fronting with this anti-Gamergate stuff? What’s the Nebulas going to embrace next – building lawn furniture and teaching woodcraft? Does anyone know if feminist Myley Cyrus has a new SF novel out about Gender Selfie Overlords from Nimbus-9?

  427. I’ll dare say that Scalzi’s left-wing political diatribes are the primary reason Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded won.

  428. And here’s Phil Sandifer on Twitter:

    “Phil Sandifer ‏@PhilSandifer · 20h20 hours ago
    Seriously. Brad Torgersen is a sniveling coward without the faintest shred of intellectual honesty or integrity.”

    I don’t think there’s any point trying to seriously engage this guy.

  429. “And here’s Phil Sandifer on Twitter:
    “Phil Sandifer ‏@PhilSandifer · 20h20 hours ago
    Seriously. Brad Torgersen is a sniveling coward without the faintest shred of intellectual honesty or integrity.”
    I don’t think there’s any point trying to seriously engage this guy.”

    Nope. He’s one seriously butthurt toolbag. Obviously too full of projection to even bother, because he basically described himself.

  430. Sandifer is so brave he slings his insults on Twitter, instead of here.

  431. “I’ll dare say that Scalzi’s left-wing political diatribes are the primary reason Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded won.”

    Indeed. They’re also likely why he has a career at all.

    “I don’t think there’s any point trying to seriously engage [Sandifer].”

    Certainly not when he drops drive-by questions and then fails to stick around for the resulting conversation.

  432. Don’t yank at Capt. Phillip. People living in diving bells at the bottom of the Marianas Trench are easily frustrated and often say things they don’t mean. Find out when the next shipment of Kraft Macaroni and Cheese with Bacon Bits is headed his way and put in some Spam and Grey Poupon as a peace offering.

  433. Civilis, would it better clarify if I made explicit that I was referring to the legal consequence of speech (boycotts, criticism, etc) as opposed to the illegal ones (stalking, illegal harassment etc)?

  434. With all the thousands of words written about Sad Puppies it is weird to see the fundamental issue at the core of the divide in SFF has not even been addressed. Glyer’s site is emblematic of the problem: a bunch of people arguing in circles about nothing. That is helped by the fact Glyer seems to mysteriously never find the obsessively hateful Twitter feeds and blogs of race and sex-hatred that started this ruckus in the first place. On top of all that is there is no agreed upon definition of what “hateful” even is; it depends – mostly on skin and sex. That means that even quoting the race and sex-hatred will be mitigated into nothing. “Oh, they meant this” or “What’s the context here” and “Where’s the source?”, etc.

    Meanwhile complete lies made up out of some fuck feminist’s head are given the force of actual quotes, even in the face of actual retractions from major media outlets like Entertainment Weekly and the Huffington Post. In the case where there are actual quotes on the SP side, those are accepted at face value and 2 men multiplied into an army and guilt by association is applied. On the other side the army melts away and there can be no guilt by association. To the SJWs the idea of NOT supporting N. K. Jemisin is as ridiculous as supporting Vox Day. There is no joy in Mudville, the land of punching up power/privilege theory – nor fair play. If you’re white and male you’re fucked – end of story.

    Whether purposeful or out of ignorance the effect is much the same: a whole lot of lying is going on.

    If you want to see someone who’s not me for a change, go to the Twitter feed of Milo Yiannopoulos.

    https://twitter.com/Nero/with_replies

    Milo is a U.K. journalist who has been responding to the exact same thing in video-gaming which created the divide in SFF: third wave gender feminism.

    Milo and a few of his colleagues have their fingers precisely on the pulse of what’s going on and they are going for the jugular. There is no one like Milo in SFF. Milo understands this is a thing which hides in liberalism and is widely supported there yet understands this is not liberalism. You cannot mock people for being Marxists who never once use the word. Going after “leftists” and “liberals” in this sense is like shooting a cow after a fox entered the henhouse. You’ve depleted your ammo and the fox is laughing.

    In point of fact taking down the morons at 770 should be as easy as eating apple pie and the fact that’s not being done shows the problem. You cannot present this case on any site you don’t control or argue with idiots and their moving goalposts. There will be too many deletions and moronic sidecars and lies about Rush Limbaugh, conservatives and Men’s Right Advocates. Talk of “douchebag liberals” doesn’t help either. And it goes without saying anyone who admires let alone listens to a single word of idiots like Resnick, Wisse, Erin, Sutherland, Sommerville and also Flint is interacting with ignorant dunces who couldn’t find a fact and in context if you stapled it to their heads. If someone is going to whine about not naming names after having named 8 kazillion names over 3 years and then ignore the naming then just put that cow out to the same pasture with GRRMartin, especially if they’re citing Martin just days before gender feminists descend on their defender like locusts over Sansa Stark.

    The short version is SJWs are not being forced to address this issue because no one is making them. They are getting away free and clear because they are being allowed to argue the Battle of Midway as if no one ever heard of Pearl Harbor. Naturally their arguing about Midway is a bunch of lies after the fact.

  435. If you want to smack these people on the head you must go after the anti-white, anti-male bullshit being sold by intersectionalism to SJW useful idiots which in the end results in their affirmative action drives, discrimination and segregation.

    That means all their bullshit about “cultural appropriation.” Weaponize that and stick it right back down their racist throats.

    “White privilege.” Weaponize that and stick it right back down their racist throats.

    “White saviors.” Weaponize that and stick it right back down their racist throats.

    ‘Misogyny.” Weaponize that and stick it right back down their misandrist throats.

    “Patriarchy.” Weaponize that, weaponize “diversity,” “male gaze,” “rape culture,” “underrepresented,” “marginalized,” “homophobia,” “Islamophobia,” “sexism,” “toxic masculinity,” “genderblindness,” “transphobia,” “Anglophone,” “non-Western,” “mansplaining,” “whiteness,”

    There is this thing in the world called “compared to what?” Start using it.

    This is not liberalism. This is not equal rights feminism. It is a hate movement.

    And here’s your new SF by people who laugh at the idea of rocket ships:

    “Aliette de Bodard retweeted Alyssa Wong ‏@crashwong 23h23 hours ago See you at the Nebulas! I’ll be on two panels: Writing Gender & Sexuality, & Diversity in Short Fiction!…”

    Lord love a fucking duck. The “axis of privilege in Western Anglophone countries.” Really? Zzzzzzzzzzzz

    http://thebooksmugglers.com/2015/05/sff-in-conversation-on-diversity-round-table-with-m-sereno-aliette-de-bodard-zen-cho-bogi-takacs-and-jy-yang.html

  436. Some borderline libel from File 770 comments:

    “Doctor Science: What the heck did [TNH] ever do to him or his? Gor blimey.

    Also, she was originally raised as a Mormon, and on numerous occasions, has spoken less than complimentarily about the LDS Church. Which Torgersen, a devout LDS member, no doubt finds unforgiveable and worthy of persecution.”

    Also, someone thinks that Brad hates Tor because they wouldn’t publish his work. Fortunately, Brad’s not the one looking petty and vindictive when statements like this are made.

  437. Civilis, would it better clarify if I made explicit that I was referring to the legal consequence of speech (boycotts, criticism, etc) as opposed to the illegal ones (stalking, illegal harassment etc)?

    No, it wouldn’t. You’re fixated on the legality of actions; anything that is legal must be acceptable. Society can not function if almost everyone behaves in ways that are legal yet obnoxious; it’s a necessary outgrowth of the tragedy of the commons. Take the speed limit. People can (and do) drive in excess of the speed limit (an illegal action) in good conditions without noticeably impacting road safety. However, if everyone were to drive precisely the speed limit (a legal action) in horrible road conditions (say, heavy fog or a sudden storm), the results would be horrible. Just because an action is legal doesn’t mean it won’t have bad effects, and just because a handful of people take action and nothing seriously bad happens, doesn’t mean that nothing bad will happen if everyone does it.

    Boycotting businesses for the practices of the business as a whole and criticizing people for what they say is fine. At some level, these actions are necessary for society to function, although even they have their limits. If everyone boycotted businesses that employed people with differing political opinions, it would be impossible to run a business. At some level a business is a group of people; practicing collective punishment against all for the transgressions of one doesn’t help.

    See http://tinyurl.com/p8wale8 ; I don’t think it was justified firing the guy, even for his actions as opposed to his opinions, but in no way does that excuse the behavior against the employee he bullied. “…he and his family are living on food stamps after losing everything, and no employer will touch him because of his notorious video.” Nobody deserves to have their life ruined for their political opinions, or even being obnoxious or offensive.

  438. “A0nd here’s Phil Sandifer on Twitter:”

    “I don’t think there’s any point trying to seriously engage this guy.”

    The weasel is over at Vox’s. Quick to try to point out holes in others’ arguments, but exceedingly evasive about defending any opinion that he might be quoted on.

  439. (Shrugs) I see no reason to care that Sandifer has decided to swing by Vox Day’s place. Those maniacs will metaphorically tear him apart, and, hopefully, he’ll spend the rest of his days trying to assault Castle Castalia.

  440. “Legal” is a cowards excuse. Someone who chooses to break the law for their own benefit is at least honest in that they’re not pretending to be law abiding, not pretending to be a good person. But everyone knows someone who will slavishly follow the letter of the law, or rules, or procedure, in order to maintain the illusion, the farce really, that they are a good person, while they do their best to take what isn’t theirs or destroy people they don’t like.

    I agree with Civilis that *not even* that guy… and if someone does deserve it, it would probably be him… not even that guy deserves to loose his job. Some level of stern advice to shape up might be appropriate, but if we’re talking about what is “legal”… sure, it’s “legal” to hound those with unlovely opinions out of the economic sphere. This has a grand tradition of legality, as well. Sometimes even state sanction. And the way it generally works is that, much like middle school, if anyone dares to stand against the mob, they become a target themselves. So people know not to do that. That’s why the mob goes after employers and other people, why there are demands that those tangential to the target turn on the target as well. Are you going to hire a Jew? Are you going to hire a black man?

    Same tactics these days and just as foul.

  441. Civilis

    You’re fixated on the legality of actions;

    I can see where that’s coming from….

    …anything that is legal must be acceptable.

    …but not this one. In fact, this would be almost exactly the exact opposite of what I’ve been saying.

    To drag us back into what can laughably be termed on topic:

    Slate voting is legal. But there are people who for whom this is inappropriate.

    It is legal to vote work below No Award because it was on a slate. But there are people who for whom this is inappropriate.

    I hold one of these views. I suspect you do also, though perhaps not the same one :p .

  442. …but not this one. In fact, this would be almost exactly the exact opposite of what I’ve been saying.

    I actually pointed this out above where I said you were being inconsistent: Snowcrash is on record elsewhere in this long thread arguing against the use of slates in the Hugo award voting because it is against the spirit of the Hugo. Snowcrash would have it acceptable for, say, a blogger to use their influence to enforce ‘consequences’ on the Honey Badger Brigade, yet unacceptable to have a blogger use their influence to have books they like nominated for the Hugo.

    I’m interested in the long term results of actions, which means going several turns down the decision/response chain and seeing what the logical response will be. If you only look at the initial effects (Bob did A, so I do B in response), you’ll miss the long term effects (if I keep doing B, Bob will do C, which would be bad). In these cases, the logic you use works like this: the GamerGaters said something I found bad, so the anti-GamerGaters (who revel in doxxing, stalking, and threats) put pressure on people to deny them services, which was legal, so everything’s good. The logic I use goes on to say: putting pressure on people to deny services (or fire) people for what they say once is not going to have a noticeable impact on society (though it can be ruinous for the individual people on the receiving end), but legitimizing the tactic makes it happen more and more (ruining more and more people’s lives) and eventually making it impossible for people to function in society.

    Likewise, the logic you use works like this: I think ‘No Awarding’ works that aren’t up to my standards is legal. My logic says if everyone ‘No Awards’ books that aren’t up to their standards, then this destroys the utility of the awards (and also encourages slate voting, because that gives you the best chance of powering through people determined to ‘No Award’ based on politics). Let’s say there are a fifty sci-fi books written every year that are in someone’s ‘top five’ books. If those favorites are evenly distributed, then (roughly, it’s too early for me to do math) 65% of the people will not have one of their favorites on the list. If those all vote ‘No Award’ over everything else, then it’s impossible for any book to win. A handful of people voting ‘No Award’ doesn’t change the results, but if almost everyone does it (and making it trivially acceptable means more and more people will do it), then the award is dead.

    My long term goals is to get better science fiction, and I believe this is ultimately both sides goal even if they are taking measures counterproductive to it. The Hugo is a method to promote better science-fiction if and only if it rewards the best science-fiction. Slate nominating, if its a problem, is one that will sort itself out over time as more people get involved with the Hugo. Encouraging the use of ‘No Award’ don’t fix anything about the Hugo, it just accelerates the decline by encouraging each side to spite the other.

  443. Civilis

    “…I actually pointed this out above where I said you were being inconsistent: ….”, yet unacceptable to have a blogger use their influence to have books they like nominated for the Hugo.”

    That’s again a fairly inaccurate phrasing of my statements.

    the GamerGaters said something I found bad, so the anti-GamerGaters (who revel in doxxing, stalking, and threats)

    Just as you disagree that Gamergate has a core element that revels in escalation to the point of threats, stalking, and doxxing, I’ll take the opportunity to say that the above is incorrect as well with regards to the non-GG perspective.

    🙂

    We’ll also have to disagree on the impact of nomination slates. To me, like gerrymandering, they effectively distort voting patterns to an extent that your solution of increased voter participation is not effective. Given the sheer pool and varied tastes that exist, a sufficiently dedicated minority would be able to completely distort the nomination ballot, even with a significantly larger nomination base.

    Unchecked, I see it as leading to a pattern of competing (or like this year, complementary) slates, where instead of voters nominating their favourite, they may go for a lesser choice that has better chances of defeating another slate that they dislike; or where categories where some voters would normally leave blank, they simply follow their preferred slate – ie, Editor/ Fanzine etc categories.

    No Award is there for a reason. And if you have that many people voting No Award, it strikes me as clearly a message to be heeded.

    As such, I see No Award as a perfectly reasonable and effective response to this. It decreases the number of candidates who will willingly participate. It sends a message to slate runners that it’s not an effective rule-gaming tactic, and can backfire. And like any social sanction, it allows a community to establish acceptable rules of behaviour within that community.

    It is the perfectly legal response to a perfectly legal manoeuvre.

  444. Just as you disagree that Gamergate has a core element that revels in escalation to the point of threats, stalking, and doxxing, I’ll take the opportunity to say that the above is incorrect as well with regards to the non-GG perspective.

    Your contention was that even though it was an unprovable accusation that poisoned the discussion, it was acceptable to mention the accusations against the GamerGaters as if they were true, and true in the most prejudiced fashion possible. It’s like a prosecutor in a criminal case describing the defendant as a horrible heartless murderer as if that’s already proven when that’s what he’s trying to prove. However, there is nothing that is stopping me from doing the same. In fact, this is a perfectly good example of what I’m talking about. Just because it’s legal, it doesn’t help the discussion if I keep reminding people that anti-GamerGaters revel in doxxing, stalking, and threats (and I admit, it’s unsporting of me to do it once more just to make a point, but it’s a point that I think needed to be made). If we both regard each other in the debate in the most uncharitable fashion possible, debate is not possible. Reminding people of the accusations is legal, but it harms the debate, and I think you are here to persuade people, not just to throw insults at the other side.

    It is the perfectly legal response to a perfectly legal manoeuvre.

    And you wonder why I think you’re obsessed with things being legal? The only reason I keep mentioning it is because that seems to be your standard for acceptability. Nobody here is talking about the legality, and the entire point is that legal behaviors can still be destructive.

    We’ll also have to disagree on the impact of nomination slates. To me, like gerrymandering, they effectively distort voting patterns to an extent that your solution of increased voter participation is not effective. Given the sheer pool and varied tastes that exist, a sufficiently dedicated minority would be able to completely distort the nomination ballot, even with a significantly larger nomination base.

    Okay, but distorted voting patterns already exist. Sufficiently dedicated minorities already distort the voting patterns, unless you think “If you were a Dinosaur, My Love” is sci-fi (much less one of the top sci-fi pieces of the year), and Dr. Who is truly the only good sci-fi TV in the past 9 years. You’re complaining that something might cause a problem which already exists, and solve it by creating a bigger problem that you have no way of ever fixing. The worst thing is that the overuse of “No Award” for political reasons against Sad Puppies 2 is what brought about the slate ‘problem’ in the first place. I’m much more worried about the effects of a “No Award” war between the anti-Sad Puppies and the Rabid Puppies in the future (which is what legitimizing the “No Award” veto does) than I am about your crusade against slates. Ironically, the other issue is that slate voting, like any brute force approach, follows the rule “if brute force doesn’t work, you’re not using enough”; all that your crusade is doing is encouraging stronger slates.

    You’re trying to treat one symptom of a much larger problem in isolation without considering what effect your treatment will have on the rest of the problem. Start with your goal, and what needs to be done to get there. My goal is that I want more enjoyable sci-fi, and a supporting goal is that the Hugo awards should recognize the most enjoyable sci-fi to bring it to people’s attentions to encourage more people to write good sci-fi. The reason this isn’t happening is a sufficiently dedicated minority is determining the outcome of the awards (Note that a SJW could sincerely say the same thing back in the mythological bad old days when The Patriarchy dominated sci-fi, and, likewise, you can say it next year). If you choose your starter goal of “I want more minorities in sci-fi” (as opposed to “I think a lot of talented minorities are excluded from sci-fi, so their works aren’t coming to people’s attention”), you end up with lousy sci-fi, because quality wasn’t your goal, and you’ve created an enemy with which there can be no compromise. To use a different example, once you’ve recognized your goal is “I want better video games” rather than “I want to punish the misogynists” / “I want to punish the SJWs”, you can find a solution that gives both parties something rather than keeping a war going that ends up giving both sides nothing.

    On another note, something else to consider when talking about the spirit of the Hugos: When you say “categories where some voters would normally leave blank“, why haven’t people “No Award”ed those categories in the past? Isn’t your logic ‘I don’t like any of them, so nobody should win’?

  445. I agree with Civilis that *not even* that guy… and if someone does deserve it, it would probably be him… not even that guy deserves to loose his job. Some level of stern advice to shape up might be appropriate, but if we’re talking about what is “legal”… sure, it’s “legal” to hound those with unlovely opinions out of the economic sphere. This has a grand tradition of legality, as well. Sometimes even state sanction. And the way it generally works is that, much like middle school, if anyone dares to stand against the mob, they become a target themselves. So people know not to do that. That’s why the mob goes after employers and other people, why there are demands that those tangential to the target turn on the target as well. Are you going to hire a Jew? Are you going to hire a black man?

    In that case, it wasn’t even direct public pressure, just the thought of bad PR. But the underlying issue remains, that there are real lives ruined by public pressure tactics, and it’s not always the person the tactics are intended against; I feel a lot worse for the guy’s adopted kids. If you want to boycott a baker that doesn’t feel comfortable making a cake to celebrate something they see as immoral, more power to you. But fining them out of business? The damage done to them for their beliefs is well out of proportion to the damage (if you can even call it that) done to those that have to shop somewhere else.

  446. I have criticized David Gerrold harshly the past two months, however honesty and fairness compels me to point out when he’s not wrong. Take this recent Facebook posting by Gerrold:

    “Some people have advocated going to Amazon and Goodreads and other sites to post one-star reviews of works by authors whose views they oppose.

    Please, don’t do it.

    It’s a failure of integrity.

    If you’ve read the work, then post your honest opinion, good or bad. But punishing an author by down-voting his/her work — that’s not fair to the author, to the work, or to readers who are looking for useful reviews.

    If you’re claiming to be one of the good guys, you gotta act like it.”

    In the paraphrased words of one of the Puppy nominees this year: Gerrold may be an A-hole, but he is not 100% a dick.

  447. Civilis

    Sufficiently dedicated minorities already distort the voting patterns,

    So why would anyone be in favour of slates, that make the situation worse. Where instead of *some* items in the ballot being driven on, like what happens with the Dr Who and WoT fandom, entire nomination categories are taken over?

    …crusade is doing is encouraging stronger slates.

    Like I said, I don’t think that’s likely. I find it more likely that people will be less willing to voluntarily join slates, and that slate runners having it backfire on them with their candidates being No Awarded would be sufficient discouragement.

    . Start with your goal, and what needs to be done to get there. My goal is that I want more enjoyable sci-fi

    My goal is that I want to discourage and diminish the power of slates. A systemic fix appears to be things like the E Pluribus Hugo proposal, with No Awarding current slate nominees as a potential rectification for the current, and perhaps next Hugo. And regarding your goal, I must ask – you have considered the possibility that enjoyable sci-fi is different things to different people right? And for you to have more enjoyable sci-fi, shouldn’t the campaign be to go get more people buying the type of sci-fi you like, instead of getting it nominated for awards? Publishers look for sales, not awards.

    When you say “categories where some voters would normally leave blank“, why haven’t people “No Award”ed those categories in the past? Isn’t your logic ‘I don’t like any of them, so nobody should win’?

    Again, that’s not my logic at all. Also, there’s a distinction between No Award and simply not voting in a category.

    But to be clear, when I say “categories where some voters would normally leave blank“, this is regarding the nominations phase. For example, X may only have personal preferences for the Novel, and Dramatic Presentation categories – she’s widely read in novels, and has watched a lot of genre items. She may also have a couple of Short Stories/ Novellas that she’s found memorable. Under ideal circumstances, she would have nominated full set of 5 for Novel and the BDPs, and just those Shorts that she’s read. Normally, she would leave most of the other categories blank.

    However, there’s a slate out there, by an author that she likes, and thinks has a good sense of taste. So she decides to fill in the blank part of her nomination ballots with the authors recommendation. This includes things like the Editor category, or Fanzine, or Semiprozine – which are things she may not have the ability to judge across the field, and is relying purely on the slate by the author she likes.

  448. @Civilis

    Where do you think No Award was overused last year? I’m looking at the stats here:

    http://www.thehugoawards.org/content/pdf/2014HugoStatistics.pdf

    My take is that Larry Correia (Warbound) and Vox Day (Opera Vita Aeterna) were both below No Award on a lot of ballots, but Warbound still came out above No Award, and Opera Vita Aeterna (which ultimately came out below No Award), got pretty horrible reviews on Goodreads. (Warbound, on the other hand, has mostly positive ones.) Brad Torgersen came in 4th in both of the categories in which in was nominated. Looking at Larry Correia’s blog posts from last year, I’d say they had a MUCH nastier tone than the ones he’s posting this year. It looks to me like it was almost all deeply sarcastic, but sarcasm often isn’t clear in blog posts (or on facebook or Twitter, for that matter). He also appears to have been largely responding to other people who were being pretty nasty to him. Still, he comes across as someone with a pretty big chip on his shoulder. I just finished his online writing class, so I have a very different opinion of him now than when I first learned about the SP2 and SP3 campaigns (when the Hugo noms were announced this year), but it’s not hard to see how someone could have taken one look at this blog and decided not to bother reading his work. Fortunately, he can go home and roll around in all of the money he’s making.

  449. My take is that Larry Correia (Warbound) and Vox Day (Opera Vita Aeterna) were both below No Award on a lot of ballots, but Warbound still came out above No Award, and Opera Vita Aeterna (which ultimately came out below No Award), got pretty horrible reviews on Goodreads.

    Thanks for the info; I hadn’t seen the actual numbers and was going by memory and the rhetoric being thrown at the issue. I do have other things I’d rather be doing than arguing, such as reading good sci-fi, but I argue now because I worry I’ll have less good sci-fi later.

  450. So why would anyone be in favour of slates, that make the situation worse. Where instead of *some* items in the ballot being driven on, like what happens with the Dr Who and WoT fandom, entire nomination categories are taken over?

    Slates do not necessarily make the situation worse. As I’ve said repeatedly, if people actually read the works with an open mind and vote for the best, slates don’t matter. if people don’t read the works with an open mind and vote for the best, the lack of slates won’t matter. Encouraging political tribesmanship, which the anti-Sad Puppies are doing, and which the anti-slate campaign is supporting, discourages people from reading the works with an open mind and voting for the best.

    Again, that’s not my logic at all. Also, there’s a distinction between No Award and simply not voting in a category.

    I thought it was you that said something along the lines of “if nothing strikes me as the best, I vote No Award”. If I was mistaken, my apologies. My issue is specifically with using “No Award” to prevent people from winning, because it’s a politically easy to use weapon.

    However, there’s a slate out there, by an author that she likes, and thinks has a good sense of taste. So she decides to fill in the blank part of her nomination ballots with the authors recommendation. This includes things like the Editor category, or Fanzine, or Semiprozine – which are things she may not have the ability to judge across the field, and is relying purely on the slate by the author she likes.

    And this is worse than the horse trading that has occurred in these categories in the past? Looking at the results of those categories suggests that anything that brings new competition in to these awards would be a good thing. Competition promotes improvement. You’d have to convince me that the result of having authors/editors competing to appeal to tastemakers that compile recommendation slates and tastemakers competing to appeal to fans to read their recommendation slates produces worse results than the situation we have now where a privileged inner circle arbitrarily limits the competition so their pet favorites keep winning year after year.

    My goal is that I want to discourage and diminish the power of slates.

    If that’s your ultimate goal, there’s no point in debating, because that makes it sound like you don’t care about what I care about, which is good sci-fi, and you’re not going to persuade me to support your interest to the detriment of my own. Perhaps I didn’t make my point understandable. There’s obviously some reason you care about slate voting in the Hugos, so your goal is to preserve something about the Hugos, which you believe slate voting imperils.

  451. Neal Stephenson presents the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles
    Revelation Nothing
    We Have Always Fought with Our Tits
    Neuroatypicalmancer
    The House of Seven Sexes
    Time Considered As My Navel
    City and the City and the City and the City
    The 3 Body Cultural Appropriation
    Seven Incest Brides for Claude Levi-Strauss
    Feminists at Iwo Jima
    The SF Affirmative Action Hall of Fame Presents Recent Hugo & Nebula Winners
    Fahrenheit Kameron Hurley
    Young Judith Butler Goes to Hawaii
    Lightspeed Magazine Presents: Everyone But White Men Destroy SF
    Inadvisable Gender Tropes of the Pacific War
    Bell, Book and Failure
    The Weight of the Checklist
    Wakulla! Wakulla!
    Best SF of the Year: The Hugo Losers
    Misandry Castle
    The Wizard of Patriarchy
    Voyage to the Bottom of My Pants
    Selkies Earn $7.50 An Hour
    Ancillary Daily Kos in the 25th Century
    Gravity’s Toxic Masculinity
    How Minneapolis Became the Capital of China

  452. Slates do not necessarily make the situation worse. As I’ve said repeatedly, if people actually read the works with an open mind and vote for the best, slates don’t matter.

    You’re predicating your statement upon the existence of an ideal world and that all voters are acting in good faith. Looking at the results this year, where the final outcome has closely followed both complementary slates announced publicly, I do not believe that to be the case.

    And this is worse than the horse trading that has occurred in these categories in the past?

    Given that the whole allegation of horse trading/ logrolling/ prior slates has never been supported by evidence – and no, poorly-done statistical analysis is not proof. Even well-done statistical analysis is not proof, without supporting evidence – I’m gonna have to disagree with you on this accusation.

    Secondly, as I said before, even if it wasn’t worse, why would anyone be in favour of something else that further distorts voting in such a fashion as voting slates?

    Looking at the results of those categories suggests that anything that brings new competition in to these awards would be a good thing.

    Even if they didn’t read those works (short stories/ novellas, fanzines) when they nominated it? Even if they have no idea how to assess a well-edited work vs a poorly edited one? How does that tally with your postulation of voters acting in good faith? How does that tally with your position that people who No Award works for reasons other than the merit of the work itself are acting beyond the pale?

    Regarding your goal for “good sci-fi” – Have you given any thought to my earlier question : “you have considered the possibility that enjoyable sci-fi is different things to different people right?”

    My reason for disapproving slate voting has been stated before – in a wide open field like SF, they effectively distort voting patterns to an extent that a sufficiently dedicated minority would be able to completely distort the nomination ballot, even with a significantly larger nomination base.

  453. You can tell as much about this mentally ill feminist ideology in SFF by what they never talk about as what they do.

    What are the chances a social justice movement which never shuts up about racism, misogyny and hate speech would not on one single occasion I’ve ever seen offer up a definition of what those things actually are for everyone?

    The clue is in the fact these weirdoes say there is literally no such thing as misandry in a world of misogyny. That’s how you tell a hate movement from an actual social justice movement: they define bigotry itself by a person’s skin and sex, not principle, not words, not actions. Surprise! That is itself bigotry. These people don’t need definition – they just use photos.

    That leaves racist round tables like the one I linked to at Book Smugglers a free fire zone to let whites have it with both barrels while defining anyone mistaking them for one another as “institutional racism.” You can bet that’s a one-way street, just like “cultural appropriation.”

    What are the chances in an SFF community that will argue the nuts off a brass statue about the length of Dr. Who’s ears SJWs would ignore repeated requests to define hate speech, even though it is clearly an issue? You’re being sold a con game. They’ll argue everything but what needs arguing.

    SJWs and their racist man-hating handlers are predictable and tiresome liars.

  454. You’re predicating your statement upon the existence of an ideal world and that all voters are acting in good faith. Looking at the results this year, where the final outcome has closely followed both complementary slates announced publicly, I do not believe that to be the case.

    Then the problem is to get voters to vote in good faith, not to favor the side that bends the rules the sneakiest.

    Given that the whole allegation of horse trading/ logrolling/ prior slates has never been supported by evidence – and no, poorly-done statistical analysis is not proof. Even well-done statistical analysis is not proof, without supporting evidence – I’m gonna have to disagree with you on this accusation.

    So, we’ll settle on ‘slates, log-rolling, backroom deal making, ideological blacklists, etc.’ are fine as long as there’s no absolute proof that they happened?

    Even if they didn’t read those works (short stories/ novellas, fanzines) when they nominated it? Even if they have no idea how to assess a well-edited work vs a poorly edited one?

    It’ll become a popularity contest. Which it already is. Heck, you’re recommending people “No Award” works without reading them; what’s the difference?

    Regarding your goal for “good sci-fi” – Have you given any thought to my earlier question : “you have considered the possibility that enjoyable sci-fi is different things to different people right?”

    Yes. Have you? I mean, the question is a central part of this whole debate, and it’s the best evidence we have that something’s not right that there’s such a disconnect between book sales (what people are reading, presumably because they enjoy them) and Hugo awards (what people are promoting as the best literature). If the people aren’t reading the best sci-fi, why not? As an author or publisher, wouldn’t you be at least curious? It would be a way to both win sci-fi fans (good for sci-fi) and make money (good for the author/publisher). Having Twilight win one year would likely be a good thing for sci-fi fans in the long run in that it would encourage someone to do a well-written teen paranormal romance to bring the teenage market into enjoying better quality books; it certainly couldn’t hurt more than throwing a nomination towards “If you were a Dinosaur, My Love”.

  455. “You’re predicating your statement upon the existence of an ideal world and that all voters are acting in good faith.”

    Pretty much… no.

    “Looking at the results this year, where the final outcome has closely followed both complementary slates announced publicly, I do not believe that to be the case.”

    So, essentially… what you’re saying is that we *used* to have an ideal world where all voters acted in good faith… but this year, with *slates*, the world is not ideal and voters have not acted in good faith. If we do something, somehow, to make “slates” illegal and end them, then the world will again be ideal and the voters will somehow be acting, again, in good faith. Even if what we do to end “slates” is punish the slate makers (and the innocent authors that they happened to think wrote exceptional stories that year) by voting them below no award.

    That’s silly, of course. I don’t think that you think that a perfect world ever existed where all voters are acting in good faith. But somehow this becomes a good enough argument against the sort of expansion of participation and crowd-sourcing that many Sad Puppies envision?

    There’s a logical problem going on there.

    No, Sad Puppies (or Civilus or me or whoever) do not believe in the existence of an ideal world where every single person votes in good faith. It did not exist before and it won’t exist in the future, no matter what anyone does. Many people will vote according to who they are a fan of, no matter what their favorite author happened to write any particular year. Many people will vote according to some social agenda that they feel is more important than excellent prose and compelling stories. People will vote their tribal affiliations.

    The only way to combat that is to make a Big Fugging Deal about reading and voting for the best story, to evangelize the concept of looking outside of your own affiliations (So you’re a Dr. Who fan… that’s wonderful, but maybe some other TV show had a particularly wonderful episode this year while Dr. Who this season was as fun as ever but ordinary. So you routinely shriek “Take my money!” at Larry Correia… that’s wonderful, but maybe the novel he has out a particular year doesn’t stand above the others but a novel by someone else does.) The only way to combat it is exactly the opposite of what you seem to be wanting everyone to do.

    Brad made a Big Deal of looking outside of his affiliations to construct his list of recommendations (with the explicit caveat that there was excellent stuff out there that he hadn’t had time to read). VD also recommended at least some works outside of his affiliations, proven by the reactions of some of those authors. Doubling down on the Us vs. Them is what anti-Puppies are doing.

  456. @Civilis and julieapascal

    I’m in the camp that believes that the system isn’t perfect, but it’s probably the best system we’re going to get. If I make it to the con, I’m planning on going to the rules meeting and opposing any of the goofy changes that people are recommending. I think SP3 and RP have shown that a small number of people can make a huge difference in the nominations process. I think everyone knew that that could happen in theory, but now that it’s happened in practice, a lot of people are upset about it. Tough luck. I don’t think I’ve seen a single argument that a particular work was “robbed” of a Hugo nom. (In other words, no one is claiming that the Best Short Story Ever was written last year and didn’t get a nom.) So we now we vote on the works that were nominated. Voting No Award is within the rules, too, but I really hope it doesn’t happen, because I don’t want to go to an awards ceremony where half of the categories don’t get an award. (ESPECIALLY if the crowd is obnoxious and applauds a No Award win rather than just keeping quiet.) My big question is, what happens next? If we end up with SP4, RP2, and SJW1 slates next year, we get an arms race between the various camps. That’s also within the rules, but I think that the end result will be a lot of rhetorical bomb-throwing between the two groups, and we’re going to lose sight of reading good SFF. I’m really hoping that MidAmeriCon II is more of a “Can’t we all just get along?” convention rather than a massive screaming match, but I’d doubtful that it’ll turn out that way. I don’t have a good solution for any of this. I just don’t see it ending well.

  457. @Frank

    This caught my attention:

    “I don’t think I’ve seen a single argument that a particular work was “robbed” of a Hugo nom. ”

    Just 2 examples I’ve seen cited frequently elsewhere

    1. Novel – Three Body Problem, (which did make it, but only due to to withdrawals by Correia and Kloos)

    2. Related Work – Robert A. Heinlein: In Dialogue with His Century, Volume 2: The Man Who Learned Better: 1948-1988,

    I think the answer to your question will become clearer when nominations data are released obviously. Myself, I also think that Deirdre Saoirse Moen reporting on Marion Zimmer Bradley should’ve made it in to Fan Writing and/or Related Work, but perhaps that’s just me.

  458. @snowcrash ‘there’s no evidence of log rolling’ read this: http://madgeniusclub.com/2015/04/13/nostradumbass-and-madame-bugblatterfatski/

    The evidence is there, certainly enough to merit actual investigation which no one official will ever suggest.

    There is one aspect of ‘slates’ that you have failed to recognize. ANYONE can put forth a slate. Anyone in the entire world. They are limited only by their own personal reach and scope. Tor pushed the Wheel of Time last year, google should get you the pages. The more slates there are the more dilute they become. You are arguing from ignorance of the people to whom you are speaking. Rummage through the comments over on Sarah Hoyt’s blog or Larry Correia. There are quite a few lively debates between long standing members (plug in ‘anarcho-capitalism’ to the search at Accordingtohoyt and read the fireworks between several of us and a long standing poster named Josh.) Including over authors and books and the relative entertainment value of several. You will also find a large number of posts where people go ‘now to read these and decide’ and ‘dang this category is hard because ‘ and ‘I hope I can get through all these in time’. Pre-nom, you’ll also find comments along the lines of ‘I plan on voting for the packet but I haven’t read enough recently to feel comfortable noming’ and ‘I liked those and think they’re worthy except for X because I read Y and think it’s waaaay more worthy so I’m noming it instead.’ (and some times that’s 2 or 3 sub-outs or an entire category’s worth) Also several ‘Yeah I only made 2 noms because that’s what I’d read and felt comfortable nominating, the others didn’t make my standard, or nothing I could find in X category really seemed worth nomming to me’ though that last was somewhat rarer.

    This is not the behavior of people who block vote. This is the behavior of people who think for themselves. They may take recommendations, but this is NOT the behavior of a crowd of blind followers. I’m wondering how much of your concern is because in YOUR circles, which seem to swing more in the anti-puppy side than the puppy side people are blind followers and will vote for whatever they’re told and you can’t comprehend people who don’t work like that, or that you’re talking to a huge crowd of them right now.

  459. Re: the Three Body Problem and the Heinlein biography. 1) neither were the first choice of anti Puppies and yet it was the Puppies fault they weren’t nominated? Cute how that works. 2) These sorts of omissions are one of the problems that crowd sourcing can help to solve. Sarah Hoyt is an uber Heinlein fan and “industry aware” and didn’t know that was eligible because it wasn’t “pushed”. Several people had heard vaguely about the Three Body Problem but buzz hadn’t built sufficient and people hadn’t read it yet. Consider the contrast to SP4 and knowing this far ahead of time that Kate will be presenting the “slate”. We’ve a point person to gather recommendations as we go should someone encounter a story they feel shouldn’t be overlooked. “Competing” groups will have the same benefits particularly if they value looking outside of their affiliations.

  460. @snowcrash –

    re: The Three Body Problem / Heinlein Biography

    Soooo, we were supposed to nominate works we hadn’t read? I guess dishonest voting is okay with you then? Geez, you anti-Pups are unpleasable. Read the work and nominate and you’re screaming logrolling. Don’t read the work and nominate you scream logrolling. It’s pretty clear that no matter what we do, you don’t think of us as capable of making up our own minds or doing anything right.

    Both Vox and Larry said that it was on their TBR pile and Vox explicitly said that if he had read it on time, it would have been HIS top Hugo pick.

    Julie and wyrdbard replied already about the rest of the stupid shit you just pulled out to beat us over the head with.

    Keep beating on that strawman. I see the massive bales you’ve got to make more when you’ve burned that one.

  461. @Julie, @Shadowdancer

    Frank said that he hadn’t seen arguments that anything was “robbed” of a nomination – given that I understand that no work has a right to be nominated, I gave him a couple of examples that I’ve seen offered up elsewhere of works that either didn’t, or may not have, make it onto the final ballot.

    I’m not sure how you’re reading that as me saying that either Puppy slates should have nominated those works sight unseen, and/or on a point of them not being the first choice of non-Puppies. Also on the latter, preference order doesn’t matter during the nomination phase.

    As I said, when the nomination data becomes available in August, we’ll have a better idea of this, including how strongly people followed either slate, as well as total numbers of people voted in that fashion. From there, we should have sufficient data to see what, if any works didn’t make it on to the ballot.

  462. The only people who I think got robbed this year are Annie Bellet for Goodnight Stars, which so far has been the best eligible Short Story I’ve read, and Marko Kloos. Those are the people who got robbed.

  463. Snowcrash… I understood that you were citing other people’s claims of “robbed of nominations”. My response was only to that very silly idea, not to you. I’d heard both, of course, most likely somewhere in this blog’s comments. The reasoning was awfully stupid. My response to it has always been the same…

    The works that ought to win get missed… we want to not miss those things. When publishers don’t “push” something noteworthy people don’t hear about it. “Buzz” doesn’t build in the “year” time limit, often enough. More people working in concert to sort through what is published in a year rather than just thinking… “What did I read this year that I liked and remember the name of…” and picking a recognizable author *again* when nomination time comes around is the best way of lessening (not eliminating) that problem.

    The arguments themselves were particularly silly because the people making a stink clearly hadn’t voted for either of those works. They probably wouldn’t nominate anything with Heinlein cooties, not even for money, and they clearly weren’t pushing big for Three Body Problem.

  464. Pingback: Puppies in Their Own Words

Comments are closed.