Sheepdog staring at the horizon

At this point, there will never be anything like a final comment on Sad Puppies 3. I myself have been talking less and less about it, as my block of overseas time nears. Once I am in the Middle East, I may not address the Sad Puppies issue again, until the Hugo voting is closed, and the actual results have been made known in August. With the voter packets now being reviewed, people are reading, and making up their minds. Which is ultimately the only thing that matters for this season anyway. But this hasn’t stopped the rest of the internet from chattering about the Hugos — whether it’s pro-Puppy chatter, anti-Puppy chatter, or that special kind of vindictive ad hominem commentary I like to call Puppy-kicker chatter.

Some of the anti-Puppy discussion has been reasoned, and makes its points without resorting to ad hominem language.

Most of the Puppy-kicker discussion focuses on how Larry Correia, Brad R. Torgersen, John C. Wright, et al., are horrible writers, horrible human beings, and deserve to die in a fire for their endless crimes against all that is good and decent in the universe.

A few Puppy-kickers remain convinced that Sad Puppies 3 was nothing but racist, sexist, homophobic cis-straight old white men fighting the future. Despite all actual evidence to the contrary. Which (to my mind) simply speaks to the fact that many armchair activists are far too invested in narratives to actually take the time to discover that Sad Puppies 3 had lots of women, it also had minorities, and didn’t give a hoot what the authors looked like, what was between their legs, or who the authors preferred going to bed with.

But then, armchair activists are forever inventing bogeymen to battle. They are forever winning, the future is forever theirs, but the present is forever besieged with (insert bad people here) so we have to FIGHT and PROTEST and NEVER GIVE UP, because having actual measurable objectives and quantifiable goals — the vast bulk of which have been reached or surpassed already — might mean you have to find a new line of work. And for armchair activists, that’s unthinkable.

So, today, Sad Puppies are the ultimate evil. Tomorrow, Joss Whedon is the ultimate evil. Or George R. R. Martin is the ultimate evil. Or Martin’s producers, at least, for the HBO rendition of Game of Thrones. I forget, who are the armchair activists attacking this week? There should be some kind of memo circulated, or something:

AT DAWN, WE TWITTER-BOMB J.J. ABRAMS FOR THE RACIST, SEXIST, CISNORMATIVE HELL-HOLE THAT WILL BE STAR WARS VII.

It might be funny, except for the fact that the whole reason I am going overseas in the first place, is the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. Most folks know them as ISIS, though the Arabic and Islamic nations partnering with NATO and other countries to fight ISIS, call those guys DAESH, which is derogatory towards ISIS/ISIL. DAESH are the charming folks who throw gay men to their deaths, from rooftops. And chop the heads off of innocent women and children.

That stuff is happening right now, in the real world.

But apparently, going after a writer or a director — for movies and TV shows — is the best way armchair activists can spend their time?

No, I don’t get it either. I don’t think I ever will.

For God’s sake, if you’re going to have a cause, shut your flapping (digital) mouths and put your bodies where your talk is. Get involved. Do something measurable. Concrete. Pursuing a quantifiable objective. Maybe even stick your necks out, and take a real personal risk? And I don’t mean tweeting fake threats to yourself, to gin up publicity and sympathy. I mean actually putting your body on the line for what you claim to think and feel. That’s why I joined the military in the first place, after 9/11/2001. I wasn’t satisfied being just some guy who gets pissed off on the internet. I took Roosevelt’s adage — about the man in the arena — seriously.

As my friend and author (and Sad Puppy critic) Eric Flint recently noted, he’s put his body on the line for what he believes. Other people spew a lot of hot air about being “warriors” for social justice. Eric’s a man who can actually claim that title, and be taken seriously; by allies and opponents alike.

So you will pardon me if I can’t spare much serious thought for those who think being some guy who gets pissed off on the internet, is somehow going to make a difference — a real, lasting, actual difference.

Which takes me back to a point Larry Correia and I have both made, about the Hugo awards: loads of people loved to complain about how the Hugos suck, and almost nobody was doing anything to make an impact. I say “almost” because there were interested parties working hard to effect the kind of change they wanted — Seannan McGuire didn’t get five Hugo nominations in a single year on accident — they just didn’t conduct their operations in broad daylight, nor on a scale to compare with Sad Puppies.

Which takes me back to a comment Michael Z. Williamson once made: we’re bad because we’re competent?

Well, whatever people have against Sad Puppies 3 — legit, or imaginary — it’s clear that the various narratives will continue without my input. I can only restate the obvious, in the hope that it sticks with people who have not decided to be dead-set against us. We (Sad Puppies Inc.) threatened nothing, demanded nothing, and closed no doors in any faces. We threw the tent flaps wide and beckoned to anyone and everyone: come on in, join the fun!

The Puppy-kickers have threatened and demanded a great deal. They most certainly do not want the “wrong” fans being allowed to participate in “their” (the Puppy-kickers’) award.

Sad Puppies 3 was a thoroughly transparent operation. We hid nothing. Concealed no ulterior motives. We said what we wanted to do, we invited people to help, and with that help, we did it. We transformed the Hugo landscape — at least for one season — and we got the spec fiction world talking about the Hugos like never before. In both good, and bad ways. How this all shakes out in coming years, remains to be seen. There are individuals — again, Puppy-kickers — who will mobilize to install new Worldcon rules that prevent the “wrong” kinds of people, from voting on the award. Either by eliminating the nomination and voting rights of supporting members, or by driving up the cost of attending membership, or both. Or perhaps they will simply alter the assembly and selection process of the final ballot proper? No more crazy democracy. A juried system. Who knows?

I do know that if Worldcon actually boasted even a third of the attendance of an average Comic Con — say, 25,000 people — almost no slate or push or bloc of any sort, could have the same effect such efforts have had in the past. Which is, again, a goal of Sad Puppies: to bring in more voices, more votes, more fans. We never turned our cold, wet noses up at anybody. We happily wagged our tails for any living soul who cared to participate. Because we (Puppies Inc.) believe participation was the overriding, validating factor in the extant process.

Others will doubtless disagree — and some of them are long-time beneficiaries of “small” participation which kept the voting pool puny, thereby making it easier for the quiet blocs to exert influence.

To wit: “I don’t know why people think the Hugos are broken, I get nominated and I win all the time!”

You could probably write a doctoral thesis about the privilege contained in that sentiment, eh?

So, I stare to the horizon. Aware of the fact that there won’t be any last words. Just maundering. My first month of active duty is ended. I’ve got a lot of work still ahead of me — both military work, and writing more books for Baen; which have been contracted. I won’t have the luxury of being able to keep my finger on the pulse of this whole ongoing argument. Nor will I try. Others — pro, con, neutral — will say most of what needs to be said, and they will say it far better than I could.

For this year, I hope every category sees a human being called to the podium, to receive a Hugo award. Because I still think Science Fiction is the best, most imaginative game in town. It’s a remarkable and marvelous field. That’s why it’s been worth getting involved — and not just talking.

Because — love us or hate us — the Sad Puppies give a damn.

940 comments

  1. 1) Prayers for your safety (I assume you will accept them even from a cranky old agnostic…)

    2) Congrats on your Anlab.

    3) SP3 will, eventually, become murky history – presuming it succeeds. If not, it will be enshrined forever in the victimhood narrative. Which narrative will reach fewer and fewer people, so it’s a wash in the long run…

  2. Cue demands for proof of an open, transperent process and claims that SP3 was a BT led self licking ice cream cone in 3, 2 1….

    Meanwhile, stay safe, best wishes to the T clan during your deployment and thank you for the hard work on SP3.

  3. Reblogged this on The Arts Mechanical and commented:
    I think that the puppy kickers have a LOT to answer for. I’ve seen this kind of crap, but really are few little plastic rocketships worth destroying people over? Apparently the puppy kickers think so. Just pathetic.

  4. Brad, you and Larry have my undying thanks for bringing true democracy to the Hugos, and my utmost for what you yourself are about embark on. As I watched Game of Thrones tonight, the battle at Hardhome, the parallels were just too, too apparent: the Bad Guys win, all of us are dead, Puppies and CHORFs alike.

  5. This is a stacked deck argument you will never be allowed to win. No quotes are floated about as actual quotes, actual quotes are dismissed just… because. Other quotes are taken at face value… because. That’s because society’s rules about such things are simply ignored. At the Hugos you had rules and now those rules will be ignored in a similar manner… just because. They will move the goalposts. You will run after them.

    Look at all the statistics about women not having won Hugo Awards together with claims of tacit discrimination over decades but with no real proof in actual quotes or mission statement that speak to anyone saying it was a male-only space. These are the same people who laugh at others for saying there is a “cabal.”

    For some reason no one runs a similar analysis of WisCon’s Tiptree Awards. They are allowed to openly discriminate so their awards will forever ideologically skew female AND those same people run after the Hugos. But which one gets accused of sexual discrimination? Sure, men are technically eligible for the Tiptrees… technically. Guess which one has openly racially segregated spaces and dinners? Guess who whines about which?

    If you didn’t know either award and had to guess using gender feminist rhetoric, you would be certain it was WorldCon all these years which had male-only “safer-spaces” and dinners. So affirmative action and “diversity” is initiated where it is not appropriate and laughed at where it is appropriate. So in a bizarre display of logic, the Hugos moves ever closer to the gender feminist ideology and mission statement of the Tiptree Awards.

    If you push back? That’s right… MRA. Add in “right wing,” “reactionary,” Rush Limbaugh,” “misogynist” and “racist” for good measure. In more Orwellian doublethink, the Hugos move in that “diversity” direction because of an accusation it has been secretly operating like the Tiptree Awards. My mind is whirling trying to catch up to these “rules.”

    Meanwhile a mountain of quotes that openly admit to collusion to initiate affirmative action at the Hugos are simply ignored. This is also known as lying.

    You will never win an argument with minds that can embrace that kind of doublethink. WisCon has an entire convention set up for women even while their members not only LOL at the idea of a mirror image of themselves – namely Men’s Rights Activists – but say anyone who is against them is automatically an MRA whether they are or not. In other words WisCon is technically against themselves… technically. It depends. It always depends. And what it depends on is your race and sex, not right and wrong.

    You will never win an argument with such people. Their rules move in a way where you are forever running after them to catch up. This is also known as lying. There are no two ways about what it is these people do. And “these people” are not 100 million Americans or half of all people on Earth. They are a couple hundred people with actual names and are an ironically racially and sexually “diverse” bunch… of ideological gender feminist bigots.

    “Misogyny” – everywhere. “Misandry” – LOL. In a world of humans, it’s both or neither. This is also known as lying.

    This was recently retweeted by one of our gender feminists who is on a Hugo-nominated team. She Tweets anti-male rhetoric every day, all day. It is completely typical of gender feminist rhetoric:

    “Alex Blank Millard ‏@Hippoinatutu May 10

    Real:
    Systematic Racism
    Police Brutality
    Marginalized Voices
    Patriarchy

    Not Real:
    Reverse Racism
    White Genocide
    Gay Agenda
    Misandry”

    Who will our Hugo-nominated misandrist vote for? Literature? Here’s my LOL. You’ll have a slate, as if you needed such a thing in an echo chamber.

  6. Puppy-kickers… appropriate, and just as much reasoning involved in most of their diatribes as someone who tries to explain why they are kicking a puppy.

    The thing is, they always seem to think they are the ‘future’… always the future.. because when their arbitrarily designated future period arrives and they aren’t ‘it’ then it is just… they are ‘the future’ again. So, the goalposts constantly move…

  7. Fight against ISIS? Don’t you know how Islamaphobic that is!?
    Those not in the know may think I’m being hyperbolic (I think that’s what that word means…), but I believe the UK (my lovely home country)’s NUS were the ones who refused to publicly denounce ISIS on those very grounds. Maybe they’re still upset with gay men for ‘appropriating African-American female culture’, and don’t mind seeing one or two getting thrown off a building?
    Still, let me urge you to instead stay at home, where you can fight for justice worldwide just by sending a strongly worded tweet to Joss Whedon, rather than putting all that… shudder… ‘effort’ in to going to another country? Or just #GiveYourMoneyToWomen?
    (Seriously though, stay safe. 🙂 )
    #BanJJAbrams!

  8. Brad, I sympathize with *you*. My kid is deploying again and I can only worry. Because he has to go and do his part against real evil. As you will be doing. And I truly wish and pray that one day it won’t be necessary.

    And that is why I am going to stand against the Rabid Puppies and the Ilk. Because I have read too many of their warlike screeds and their rantings vs people to not find them truly real-world evil. Not like ISIS, but in the mindset or rhetoric that allows them to think that a SJW can be nothing but a contemptuous liar and object of ridicule, which, as history shows, can lead to real-world horrors. I don’t say the anti-Puppy side has clean hands but mostly they have not shown the same low of discourse in the threads I have read (which is following File 770 ‘s roundups in particular) — obviously I don’t see everything but the open posts are mostly very different in tone.

    So I am going to pony up my forty dollars and vote my conscience — and I have bought on my own dime AND READ — the nominated books and stories. I did not go in with any prejudice towards any writers and I have judged as fairly as I can. That is all a visually impaired and tottery old grandmother can do.

    But, again, I wish you all the best and will continue to read and enjoy the books you write.

  9. “And that is why I am going to stand against the Rabid Puppies and the Ilk. Because I have read too many of their warlike screeds and their rantings vs people to not find them truly real-world evil. Not like ISIS, but in the mindset or rhetoric that allows them to think that a SJW can be nothing but a contemptuous liar and object of ridicule, which, as history shows, can lead to real-world horrors. I don’t say the anti-Puppy side has clean hands but mostly they have not shown the same low of discourse in the threads I have read (which is following File 770 ‘s roundups in particular) — obviously I don’t see everything but the open posts are mostly very different in tone.”

    *eyeroll*

  10. BTW, to put my money where my mouth is, books I have bought and read this month include Mike Z. Williamson ‘ s newest, your short story collection, several of Eric Flint ‘ s 1632 series, a Baen reissue of Andre Norton ‘s Beast Masters Planet, The 3 Body Problem, and Uprooted by Naomi Novik. I read what I like. I like a lot of books. I own a lot of books. I gave never stopped reading sf and fantasy since the very first book I held in my two-year-old fists and devoured. I didn’t stop when my Dad made me burn my books because I was reading Kurt Vonnegut. I didn’t stop when I had no money and a new baby and I had to save for weeks to afford a paperback. I haven’t stopped when every book seems to be a retread of old tropes and or urban fantasy. I look for books that tell me new stories and take me to new worlds. If those new worlds happen to be written by women, cool. If thy are written by men, cool. If they have social structures that are odd, well, I am not living there, I am only visiting. I don’t understand the people who have said they couldn’t stand sf after ” things changed”. You love a grnre, you support it by reading. End of story.

  11. Hi Brad! First of all, all the best in your endeavours, and make good choices (sorry, just re-watched Pitch Perfect, so am stuck in random quotation mode)!

    “Sad Puppies 3 was a thoroughly transparent operation. We hid nothing.”

    I think calling open and democratic previously, and I’m not quite seeing it. I’m trying to figure out just exactly how the slate was determined. Works that were never even nominated or recommended by *anyone* in the open thread (i.e., 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 )

    So I guess what I’m trying to figure out is how exactly was the selection made?

  12. We have our first winner @ snowcrash : June 1, 2015 at 9:00 am! You get to choose between the fresh cheese roll and the stack of unused FDX boxes!

  13. Either by eliminating the nomination and voting rights of supporting members, or by driving up the cost of attending membership, or both. Or perhaps they will simply alter the assembly and selection process of the final ballot proper? No more crazy democracy. A juried system

    Brad – the process of making changes to the Hugos is really transparent. You can go to this webpage and see every proposal up for consideration. As of today, there are no (zero, none, nada, nyet) proposals to eliminate anybody’s voting rights. None. The proposals on the floor are merely designed to prevent a slate from locking up the entire ballot. These proposals have to survive two (2) business meetings – business meetings attended by real people like me who sometimes are only supporting members paying their own freight.

    I mean actually putting your body on the line for what you claim to think and feel. That’s why I joined the military in the first place, after 9/11/2001. And I thank you. However, you’re by no means the only person who joined the military. I did my bit, as did others who are criticizing you.

    For this year, I hope every category sees a human being called to the podium, to receive a Hugo award. Then for heaven’s sake, don’t nominate crap like “Wisdom from my Internet.” I’m sorry, I *like* Mike Z., and I’ve bought his books. But that’s neither related nor funny.

  14. “I did my bit”
    ‘Chasin Haitians’ in between bouts of Olympic grade soft serve ice cream ingestion while seated in air conditioned, mess steward served comfort in a Navy wardroom is hardly the same as spending six months to a year in Iraq or Afghanistan.

    Get fucked Gerrib.

  15. “As of today, there are no (zero, none, nada, nyet) proposals to eliminate anybody’s voting rights.”

    But yours would just erode them by reducing the choices a nominating voter can make. Sorry, your precious idea is punitive and just as prone to being games. I wish it, and any other proposal designed to punish Worldcon voters, the success of the Titanic. (The ship, not the movie.)

    “Then for heaven’s sake, don’t nominate crap like “Wisdom from my Internet.” I’m sorry, I *like* Mike Z., and I’ve bought his books. But that’s neither related nor funny.”

    “Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded” says hello on both accounts.

  16. There’s not much you can do with people who are more than willing to turn an entire genre upside-down as an affirmative action Kickstarter to correct the ancient expulsion of women, gays and people of color from the Land of Golden Age SF. The reality looks something more like what drives Field and Stream and Cosmopolitan but let them have their delusion they’re fighting the Civil War all over again and that cis-misogynist everything-phobes have it in for them. We’ve tried reasoning with them time and again and they are immune to facts and logic. Virtually everything SJWs say on this issue are easily proven lies. Yet SJWs hold onto this like it’s their Precioussss.

    My idea going back to the last SP was to just start your own award, maybe rotating it between sites and eventually hooking it in with a convention, one not yet infested with the feminist virus. Or you could rotate that as well to stay ahead of that virus.

    Although I think the Hugos deserves every bit of mocking it gets, it’s frankly not even worth pranking. If one wanted to delegitimize them you could start a petition on a website where anyone who thinks they may ever be eligible for a Hugo signs it stating they will never accept a Hugo nomination until WorldCon deals openly and forthrightly with their hate speech problem. One thing’s for certain: they don’t see it – not at all. Fine – forget about ’em.

    Without the intervention of SP you would’ve seen the same white privilege conference at the Hugos already gearing up at the disgrace known as Nebula Weekend. Why anyone would let morons from other countries come to the U.S. or a genre by their own definition they didn’t create and call everyone a bunch of culturally appropriating Anglophone racists and then get rewarded with Nebula nominations is a mystery for the ages. Plus they’ve burned down all their own museums in the process because… shame. The shame of Field and Stream and Cosmopolitan. It takes a lot of naivete, meds and hate to fuel that Reichstag fire.

    It’s never too late to start your own award and just ignore these daffy Freedom Riders all pushing to the back of the bus for the privilege of most oppressed. That’s what the Nebulas and Hugos have partially turned into: The Most Intersecting Vectors of Oppression Award defined by John Scalzi and his gender feminist mentors themselves – the gay non-white female. If the Nebula Award was changed to the Audre Lorde or Octavia Butler Award, it would be far closer to the truth, just as the Tiptree Award is for WisCon.

    So start a Burroughs Award, one that’s about the actual genre and its art.

  17. FWIW, I told my father (retired USAF Officer) ((he who introduced his children to RAH and SF)) about the kerfuffle; gave him a cliff notes version of both sides. When I said the opposition claimed the list was wrong, his response was “bullshit”. There’s nothing wrong with sharing a recommendation list.

    When I said you were “over seas, location undisclosed” he said “Well, I hope he comes back safe.”

    So there ya go, someone who was not, is not, involved that says the Puppy-kickers are full of BS.

  18. “And that is why I am going to stand against the Rabid Puppies and the Ilk.”
    “So I am going to pony up my forty dollars and vote my conscience — and I have bought on my own dime AND READ — the nominated books and stories. I did not go in with any prejudice…”

    These statements are contradictory. Either you are coming in with any prejudice OR you are taking a stand against RP – which btw, have nothing to do with SP.

    Typical double speak.

  19. It’s not necessarily fair to ::eye roll:: the grandma who opines that decent people stand up and speak out against those who call a group of people “nothing but a contemptuous liar and object of ridicule, which, as history shows, can lead to real-world horrors.” because for all we know, she’s done her part in now and in previous years to stand up and denounce communists, radical Islam, as well as, like James May, taking time to speak out against those whose rhetoric shows nothing but contempt and ridicule for consevatives, Christians, white people.

    It’s a strict standard she hews to, but an honorable one. If there were more people like her requires hate wouldn’t have been applauded and nominated for awards.

  20. Snowcrash: Brad discovered the slate of recommended titles carved on the gravestones of a ghoul-haunted (his name is Mort) cemetery; buied in the trackless rainforests of the Cascade Mountains, and deep within the dread pyramid of Ichlichlichlichlitzl. We have photographic cartoon evidence!

    Brad: Your willingness to go out on a limb for what’s right, to light a candle instead of just cursing the darkness, inspired my husband and I to create Tempest in a Teardrop. We hope, in a small way to provide aid and comfort to folks like you. I hope we can live up to your example. Thank you for all your service. Godspeed.

  21. Stay safe Brad and hugs and prayers for the family.
    I’m working through the Hugo materials and plan to do so annually as long as I can be a voting member of whatever.
    By the end of the month I’ll get back to my reading queue (Kratman, Correia, Gannon, Flint, Drake, Hoyt, Gemmell, Stirling, L. Anderson, K. Anderson, Dietz, Weber, Conroy, Green, Lawhead, Gabaldon, Shaara, Iggulden, Cameron, Meluch, McMurtry, Bujold, Torgersen, Freer, Day, Friesner, Kennedy, etc. and a few non-fictions for balance).
    I’m retired and I love to read good stories.

  22. “Brad discovered the slate of recommended titles carved on the gravestones of a ghoul-haunted (his name is Mort) cemetery; buied in the trackless rainforests of the Cascade Mountains, and deep within the dread pyramid of Ichlichlichlichlitzl. We have photographic cartoon evidence!”

    Careful, some of the folks on the other side might take that seriously. 🙂

  23. Wyldkat— No doublespeak. I read the nominated items after buying them. Before I made up my mind. I never said I would no award anyone whose writing I liked. Because I *have* said that I would have voted for The Chaplain’s War as best novel if it had been on the ballot. And I do give Brad a lot more credit for being sincere than a lot of anti-Puppies do. So I did approach the works with an open mind. Or at least a willingness to be blown away by stories that harked back to the Golden Age. Some of the nominated stories were cool enough, but by no means all. IMHO.

    However, the “rhetoric” and meanspiritedness of some of the commenters here and on VD’s blog have inspired nothing more nor less than a wish that they should be forced to live in the world they see. Which is not the world I would like to live in. Maybe I am too Pollyanna-ish, but the world I see has respect and courtesy and a willingness to grok the views of others. IDIK, in the Vulcan. 🙂

  24. Bill S.— another Meluch fan! I love her books. I think I own every one she has ever written. Which is your favorite? The Queen’s Squadron is my most recent reread so it’s my current favorite.

  25. Overgrownhobbit– another hobbit? Cool! And, yes, I have spoken out against things I consider wrong and mean-spirited in the past. I certainly have no love for radical Islam although the Islamic women I have met have been awesome (of course, they were now American citizens and wanted to remain so). My son has fought against the Taliban and I support him and our military. I spoke against Requires Hate, too. So… I may not be physically able to do much, but I do try to stand for my ideals.

  26. Yes, love R M Meluch. Wish her older stuff would get reprinted.

  27. RM Meluch has a new one coming out in August, Twice and Future Caesar. My favorite tour stop was Strength and Honor.

  28. Good luck and stay safe. And thanks for your work in exposing more places where self-appointed “thought leaders” lurk.

    Fun fact: Thanks to SP3, today I joined Worldcon so I could vote. Researching the Best Novel authors led me to discover some very interesting connections in their Twitter followers. Especially how many of the people Ann Leckie follows use the Anti-GG blocker.

    Anyhow, thanks for SP, and thanks for risking yourself in a real way to help keep the world safe and free!

  29. Which one of these phrases is from Audre Lorde’s 1979 keynote speech “When Will the Ignorance End?” at the National Third World Gay and Lesbian Conference, and which one from the Book Smugglers link above?

    A.) “transphobia or ableism or classism”
    B.) “beyond racism, beyond ageism, beyond classism, and beyond homophobia”

    It’s all about the rocket ships.

  30. Vile Faceless Minion here, a follower of the Evil Overlord of the Evil League of Evil, Vox Day. Twilaprice? You want to see the kind of world you wouldn’t want to live in? Take a look at the world social justice warriors are trying to impose on all of us. Ask yourself why you would prefer to live in a world with thought-crime controls instead of freedom of conscience. Your comment made me snort. But then we Vile Faceless Minions snort a lot….

  31. Here’s a Tweet from Leckie a day after the Eric Flint post and aimed at no one in particular:

    “Ann Leckie ‏@ann_leckie May 19 Oh, honey, if you ever met an actual radical feminist I suspect you might keel over from shock.”

    If this sheltered darling grinning housewife ever Image Googled “birdshot Egypt” she’d have a fainting spell taking that aimed at photographer’s eyes and then going back for more the next day… and the next… and the next.

    Leckie’s Tweet is a perfect example of the brave diving bell SJWs live in. I’m trying to imagine Leckie standing alone in a circle of 12 of Mubarak’s secret police and telling them to fuck off and somehow I can’t dredge that up. That’s feminist hashtag territory there. The bravura fades outside the internet and diving bells.

    Shocked at a radical feminist? Sure, honey. Keep dreaming and womansplaining. Watch how fast your career fades the instant you stop pandering to gender abolition SF novels. That gimmick is a one-trick pony and you can’t get shot out of a cannon at SF conventions to help sell drudgery.

    I know what I’ve done. What have you done? Put out a frying pan fire? Try that when someone’s targeting your eyes with birdshot. Then we’ll see who keels over.

  32. Doesn’t ‘The Three-Body Problem’ read like a Solzhenitsyn novel (I think I read all of them) in a scifi context?

  33. “RM Meluch has a new one coming out in August, Twice and Future Caesar.”

    FINALLY!

  34. @Twilaprice: Ma’am, here’s the thing. If there were an actual war, chances are a bunch of Vox Day’s boys and girls would end up getting shot by Torgerson’s or Correia’s crew for either shooting prisoners or for executing people for demonstrating insufficient offensive spirit. Vox would end up with a jail sentence.
    Based on the available evidence, the shooting of prisoners and purges of the ideologically impure would be either rewarded or explained away by the anti-Puppies.

  35. “If there were an actual war, chances are a bunch of Vox Day’s boys and girls would end up getting shot by Torgerson’s or Correia’s crew for either shooting prisoners or for executing people for demonstrating insufficient offensive spirit. Vox would end up with a jail sentence.”

    LOL, come on, man! Vox’s actual fans are far more sane than they get credit for. 😀

  36. “It’s not necessarily fair to ::eye roll:: the grandma who opines that decent people stand up and speak out against those who call a group of people “nothing but a contemptuous liar and object of ridicule, which, as history shows, can lead to real-world horrors.” ”

    My eyeroll was specifically aimed at the part of her message that I quoted. She is, of course, completely entitled to her opinion, even if I think she’s completely wrong. Yes, it’s very rough-and-tumble over at Vox Popoli, and you need a thick skin, but if you go in there with respect, the vast majority of the regulars will give respect right back. If you go in there with your Troll Pants on, God help you.

    “Brad: Your willingness to go out on a limb for what’s right, to light a candle instead of just cursing the darkness, inspired my husband and I to create Tempest in a Teardrop. We hope, in a small way to provide aid and comfort to folks like you. I hope we can live up to your example. Thank you for all your service. Godspeed.”

    Totally agree, stay safe and come back, Brad! @overgrownhobbit, while we’re on the subject, I just wanted to say that I love your webcomic and appreciate the work you’ve put into it. It’s very “Inside Baseball”, but I love that about it. Trying to figure out the references is great fun! Thanks for doing it!

  37. “LOL, come on, man! Vox’s actual fans are far more sane than they get credit for.”

    The reaction to Kloos and Bellet withdrawing themselves says that there’s a fairly good chunk of crazy, and I’ve been through the comments section a time or two, which reinforces the impression. Some things said there make me twitchy, and if you click through the link you’d see that I tilt…rightward.
    But it’s true, y’all’re nowhere
    near as bad as the anti-Puppies would make you out to be (Let’s face it, though, every last commenter on there could be the hypothetical offspring of Vlad Dracula and Ivan the Terrible’s children and not be that bad) and in fairness I should have said that y’all would likely end up doing some of the shooting yourselves.
    However, the larger point, which I think we agree on, is that the Puppies tend to discourage such behavior. The anti-Puppies go so far as to encourage it, which indicates that twilaprice, much like Eric Flint, really needs to take a closer look at who’s doing the killing. They really need to remember Kerensky.

  38. Brad,

    I suspect that we don’t really need 25,000 people, and it would be extremely hard for Worldcons to grow (physically) to anywhere near that size. Likewise there is no need to push the award in the direction of becoming an internet-based referendum voted on by fans who would never attend the convention. All it would take is for folks who are currently sometime-attendees – or even those hoping to attend an occasional Worldcon in any year they can do so without taking out a second mortgage, falling asleep at the wheel or crossing the International Date Line – to wake up to how important this fan award is to them and start to read and nominate the stuff they think is great. That goes double for any stray pups who did not take time to do that job properly and lazily filled their ballot with the things some author summarily listed for them on a blog. (It goes triple for any minions who did so intentionally, and I suspect that if next year everyone simply went ahead and participated in the awards actively and conscientiously, minions would have succeeded in making their point, but it might be better to listen to what they say they want than try to guess.) Whatever else one says about SP3, you have already done more than a thousand “rules changes” could to motivate people to bring that future closer to reality. Thank you.

  39. But its okay for Tor to buy forty or so memberships for their employees and for them to be told how to vote, right?

  40. Listen to the voices of stupid and what you’re dealing with:

    “Noah Body on June 1, 2015 at 9:38 pm said:
    Always love getting caught up in the latest episode of Torgersen’s Puppy Night Lights. You never know where the goalposts will turn up next.”

    That’s coming from a cult (of readers and authors mind you) in the 21st century that can’t come up with a definition of the word “racism.” They see segregation where there factually is none and can’t see it where it factually is. With these people the words “racial defamation” is a revolving door on wings. These are Orwell’s kiddies in the Ministry of Romper Room.

    *

    “Martin Wisse on June 1, 2015 at 11:54 pm said:
    Why does ANYONE listen to someone as blatantly phony as this guy is?

    “Because he flatters their prejudices and taps into a huge pre-existing audience for ‘white men are the REAL victims’ stories, cultivated by Fox News, Limbaugh and related rightwing media. If you’re not in that bubble it’s hard to understand how prelevant that narrative can be, but Brad and Larry both, consciously or unconsciously, tap into it.”

    That’s coming from a guy in the Netherlands who wants to talk how much he understands being in an American conservative bubble that exists only in his stupid head and who gets his news about America from an internet bubble. This has nothing to do with “REAL” victims and everything to do with a fair standard for hate speech and racially offensive remarks. Wisse knows more about Limbaugh than I do. Since I default to “right wing” merely by disagreeing with open racists and an arrogant, privileged and protected class of gender feminists who’ve never seen the inside of a draft office, Wisse’s idiocy about conservatives is laughable. He and other commie lunatics put me into a party I don’t belong to, in front of a TV I don’t watch, and a radio I don’t listen to and then he uses the word “prejudice” without his nose growing out to the Oort Cloud made of windmills and wooden shoes I’m certain Wisse lives in and wears… because stereotypes.

    Next time Nazis invade Holland we’ll agree in advance it’s a bridge too far and leave you to exchange your wooden shoes for jackboots. Go visit an American misogynist patriarchy military graveyard near you and then fuck off. Here’s a hint: there’s no feminists in it.

    Maybe Putin will save you and put you in a nice post-structural collective.

    Nuance is a thing lost on people like Wisse. If someone told him there were Mughal sepoys fighting under a French tricolor Republican flag against Hindu sepoys fighting under a Bourbon flag and with a Zuffur Plutun of Mughal women musketeers on one flank in 1795 he’d probably reduce it to redcoats with monocles, pip-pip, cheerio and eh wot! plus The Duke of Rush Limbaugh.

  41. I’m sure I’m not the first person to try to tell you this, but the people who spew hot air about “warriors for social justice” are all over here with you. That’s not a thing people called themselves. It’s a pejorative made up to dismiss people, a la calling someone “PC patrol” or “feminazi” or “thought police”.

    Some people have taken it as an ironic badge of honor or made geeky riffs on it (like “Social Justice Paladin” or “Social Justice Bard”, but by and large, you’re chiding people for not living up to the standards of a label that was foisted upon them in the first place.

    Which is actually part of the function of the label. Most of the people I have seen getting slapped with the “SJW” label not only don’t describe themselves as social justice warriors, they don’t describe themselves as activists. They’re just people, living their lives, dealing with their own problems, and acting their consciences.

    Example: I’m not an activist. I’m a writer. Like most writers, I try to write the books that I want to read. As a reader, it’s really kind of important that books 1) acknowledge the reality of my life, that people like me exist, or failing that 2) don’t openly insult me, or 3) portray people like me in laughingly unrealistic ways that jar me out of the story. For “people like me”, you can read queer, women, disabled… any of that.

    Now’s the part where you blather on about I-Dentity Politics and PC Police and imaginary quotas and the censorship you think I’ve just called for and wonder “What ever happened to telling a good story and not caring about politics?”

    But is a story a good story if it is otherwise good portrays Christians all as being wrongheaded, narrow minded superstitious fools? I mean, can it be a good story if a significant cross section of humanity is rendered in an extremely unrealistic—say nothing of meanspirited, let’s focus on the fact that it’s realistic—fashion?

    Some of this is subjective, obviously. We all have different life experiences, which means different things will ring hollow to us (which is one reason that so many thoughtful writers suggest having beta readers with different experiences). One example that I believe came up in the comments on File 770 is that it’s a sure sign a man wrote a piece if the female viewpoint character is described admiring her perfect breasts in the mirror. That’s a very small, very mundane, and fairly innocuous example of bad writing that happens essentially because of an empathy gap or experience gap, but it’s not going to jar every reader the same way.

    Now imagine a book full of things that are all just “off” by that same amount.

    Well, you probably don’t have to. You’ve probably read books that are like that, in their treatment of men, or Christians, or the military. And it didn’t just strike you as insulting, but also as bad writing. Right? Your ability to enjoy the story suffered, because while disagreeing with a writer’s politics is one thing, seeing yourself replaced by caricatures page after page is another.

    When you talk about taking politics out of writing, what you’re doing is demanding everybody else stops noticing these things as they affect us, but you haven’t announced any plans to do the same.

    Anyway, if all you wanted to do was open wide the tent flaps, then you weren’t competent. You were horribly inefficient. You stirred up a ton of bad will, you’re still spending your time and effort fighting the negative impression of you and yours that your actions have fostered, and you only succeeded in the wrong goal (getting a slate of nominees on the ballot isn’t “opening the tent flaps”, is it?), and if we are to take you at your word, you only did that accidentally (because it was demonstrably only the push from that totally-not-with-you guy and his rabid pack of dreadful elks that got any of your nominees on the ballot).

    As I said on my blog: next year, if you want the world to believe that your goal is to raise awareness that anyone can nominate whoever they want for the Hugos, make a blog post that says, “Hey, everyone! Did you know that the Hugo Awards, one of the top awards for science fiction, is awarded by the members of WorldCon? And did you know that for $40 you can buy a supporting membership in WorldCon? Now’s your chance to nominate whoever you want!”

    That’s all it takes. It won’t succeed in getting a slate of hand-picked nominees on the ballot and blocking people you think don’t deserve to be on the ballot because the wrong people like them for the wrong reasons…

    But hey, that’s not what Sad Puppies is about, is it?

  42. Sigh, I see Ms. Erin has “blessed” us all with another one of her drive-by postings.

    “You were horribly inefficient.”

    You wouldn’t be complaining about Sad Puppies on a daily basis if that were the case.

  43. Or erecting a pack of straw puppies to kick, either. The projection and ineffectual mind reading is strong in this one…

  44. Are you seriously trying to lecture us about *microaggressions*, Alex? SERIOUSLY?

    We don’t care.

    “As I said on my blog: next year, if you want the world to believe that your goal is to raise awareness that anyone can nominate whoever they want for the Hugos, make a blog post that says, “Hey, everyone! Did you know that the Hugo Awards, one of the top awards for science fiction, is awarded by the members of WorldCon? And did you know that for $40 you can buy a supporting membership in WorldCon? Now’s your chance to nominate whoever you want!””

    You really expect us to believe that lie? We can read what gets said all over on places like Making Light and Tor.com, you know. As for next year, Kate Paulk is running SP4, as has been said a million times. Why don’t you go tell Kate the Impaler what you think she should do? Just let me get my popcorn first.

  45. BTW, You Know Who is in Erin’s comments, spouting his usual crap.

  46. Well, I finished watching Cowboy Bebop last night. Not entirely sure how I feel about the ambiguous ending, but at least it has an ending. It’s good they didn’t drag the concept out too far.

  47. You’re right, it is meant to dismiss you.

    We are already aware you are blind to your own activism. You support a bizarre race-gender cult obsessed with patriarchy. It is anti-white, anti-male, anti-Western and even anti-Anglophone it is so steeped in racial hate, misandry and heterophobia. I regard it as nothing more than a hate movement, and that’s using your own paper-thin standards. How you get around that is by claiming the “marginalized” are never racists, sexists, misandrists, etc. I reject that.

    Here’s the dividing line and the crucial issue: I don’t care what you do. I don’t care about any of your initiatives. What I care about is it is never expressed without dehumanizing men and whites as racist, women-hating, homophobes who have conspired and continue to conspire to keep everyone but the straight white male out of SFF. That is a lie we have proved with facts over and over again. The history of SFF as portrayed by SJWs is a hoax. It has never been any more exclusionary than Field & Stream.

    We have also proved with facts over and over again that SJWs do exactly what they claim we do: namely advocate for and discriminate against people based on their race and sex.

    You claim you are against Vox Day and John Wright but in fact you were throwing us under the bus in swaths of no less than 100 million people before you ever heard of them. You are a protected and privileged class of goofball feminists who will never pie-chart a military cemetery as long as you live because intersectional gender feminists are liars.

    The idea we as an entire sex and racial group oppose women, gays and non-whites entering any arena whatsoever is laughable. Pretending we are all conservatives is Bigotry 101: paint an ethnic or sexual group as an ideology. Boom! Done. Let the Anita Sarkeesian “critiques” begin. We are aware of what your so-called “allies” have to do to escape the shame of being straight white men and so escape their “ideology” by showing their bona fides. We are aware of how quickly you turned on “ally” GRRM. Crime? Oops! He reverted to a straight white male and forgot to only torture men in his books. Concern for the in-group while ignoring the out-group is just more classic bigotry. Either you’re against violence or you’re not.

    And notice how I myself have gone out of my way to show you are not liberals or Marxists and nor do I light up entire demographic groups. Although your cult laughingly pretends to represent all women, gays and non-whites – with radical feminist shit-titles like “Women Destroy SF” – you don’t. Gays are not the problem – gays who are bigoted supremacists are. Women are not a problem – female bigots are. Non-whites are not a problem – non-white racists are. If you claim to be human, then claim those human failings, since it is so self-evidently true of your cult. Whites are not a problem – white supremacists are. And that is a principle any race or sex can embrace. Wake up to that. My pushing back against this cult is no more pushing back against women, gays and non-whites than pushing back against the KKK makes me anti-white.

    SJWs continually use random demographic spikes as if they are Jim Crow – but only if they benefit you. Otherwise random demographic spikes are fine as long as they aren’t straight white men. Boxing, Arab film, Samba, the NBA – no prob.

    Say this over and over again: demography is not ideology.

    Say this too: group defamation is always wrong – ALWAYS.

    Stop lying and pretending you critique anything but our race and sex. No matter what we say, no matter the facts, you move the goalposts so straight white men remain in the crosshairs. Go look at Nebula Awards Weekend. It is a disgrace. Literature? LOL

    I am not interested in your stupid con game or your hateful brand of feminism which pretends to be the successor to equal rights feminism, a thing I do support.

    We cannot even converse until we agree on rules that work for all, not just some. This is called a “principle.” We have rightly portrayed your cult as one which rejects principle in favor of identity.

    I reject everything your cult stands for.

  48. “Well, I finished watching Cowboy Bebop last night. Not entirely sure how I feel about the ambiguous ending, but at least it has an ending. It’s good they didn’t drag the concept out too far.”

    Yeah, the ending always hits me right in the feels too. I wish they’d make more, somehow. Een side stories would be cool. Make sure you check out the movie. It takes place between episodes 22 and 23:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowboy_Bebop:_The_Movie

  49. I did watch the movie, but I messed up and saw it after Session 23.

    Eh, close enough.

  50. A few thoughts:

    Ratseal – I rather doubt that a Reserve Warrant Officer on his first tour is leading patrols outside the wire. I could be wrong, but I suspect he’s at an FOB somewhere. At any rate, I suspect I’ve stood a crapload more midwatches than you have.

    Chupik – the definition of an open process is that the people running said process can and do answer basic questions about how it was done. (Such questions as “how many votes” and “how many nominees”). The fact that Brad can’t or won’t answer them means it is not an open process. It is a closed process, by definition.

    Draven – who says Tor buys memberships for their employees? Do you have proof of that? Can you prove that Tor tells people whom to vote for?

    James May – I’m trying to imagine Leckie standing alone in a circle of 12 of Mubarak’s secret police and telling them to fuck off and somehow I can’t dredge that up. I’m trying to imagine anybody, including you, doing so. Here on Earth, Ann’s point was that she’s no more a radical feminist then you are the Pope.

  51. Example: I’m not an activist. I’m a writer.

    Quick rule of thumb test for anyone trying to argue definitions: do an internet search for the definition of the term involved. Like everything, the internet can be biased, but if your claim clearly goes against the internet, you’re going to need to explain why the definition is wrong instead of just casually dismissing it.

    Activist:(n): An activist is a person who campaigns for some kind of social change. When you participate in a march protesting the closing of a neighborhood library, you’re an activist. Someone who’s actively involved in a protest or a political or social cause can be called an activist.

    You’re involved in a social cause! Guess what? You’re an activist! Just about anyone that has chimed in on either side of the issue can be called an activist. You can be both a writer and an activist.

    Here’s another definition:

    Social Justice; justice in terms of the distribution of wealth, opportunities, and privileges within a society

    Anyone that is voicing their concerns about privilege is an activist for Social Justice. You might not like our dismissing concerns and activism for Social Justice using the pejorative terms, but the inherent multilayered flaws in the whole concept of ‘Social Justice’ deserve some form of contempt from anyone with any understanding of logic, be it scorn or mockery or outright anger.

  52. Well, I finished watching Cowboy Bebop last night. Not entirely sure how I feel about the ambiguous ending, but at least it has an ending. It’s good they didn’t drag the concept out too far.

    The idea of endlessly dragging series out for syndication rather than plotting tight stories with an ending has turned me off from a lot of TV series (as well as most Shonen anime).

  53. Anyway, if all you wanted to do was open wide the tent flaps, then you weren’t competent. You were horribly inefficient. You stirred up a ton of bad will, you’re still spending your time and effort fighting the negative impression of you and yours that your actions have fostered, and you only succeeded in the wrong goal (getting a slate of nominees on the ballot isn’t “opening the tent flaps”, is it?), and if we are to take you at your word, you only did that accidentally (because it was demonstrably only the push from that totally-not-with-you guy and his rabid pack of dreadful elks that got any of your nominees on the ballot).

    If the ‘activists for Social Justice’ (ASJs) hadn’t spent so much effort trying to keep us out of the tent, we wouldn’t have needed to bulldoze our way in. If you didn’t even try to compromise with us when we were on the outside, don’t complain about the solution we came up with to get in.

    The story goes like this: ASJs complain that sci-fi literature doesn’t acknowledge the reality of their lives, openly insults them, and portrays people like them in laughingly unrealistic ways. Rather than acknowledge that this may be subjective, that humans are flawed, and that people are individuals, not just aggregations of groups, they demand that sci-fi conform to their every whim. At the same time, the ASJs don’t acknowledge the reality of others lives, openly insult others, and portray them in laughably unrealistic ways.

  54. Did Chris Gerrib just mansplain a woman?

    Qasr al Nil Bridge, 2010. Were you there, Gerrib? Thanks for the back-handed compliment. Thanks for confirming we don’t live on the same planet.

    I can parse English, Gerrib. The idea I’d keel over meeting a radfem is monkey shines. They don’t even go where I go. At least I’ve never seen one whining about trigger warnings in places where the action is. If you get hysterical over shirts, the Black Widow, patriarchy and bikini ads, what’re you going to do when lava bombs are flying at you? Surrender? LOL.

    If I play Devil’s Advocate and use their own silly language which divides up the sexes and takes credit accordingly, radfems don’t go where men go. See: Feminists of Guadalcanal: Vol. 0. Let’s see Clarkesworld pie-chart a Vet’s Hospital. I think we’re down to only 97.7%. Let the diversity and affirmative action begin. They’re not exactly scrambling for that door over at the Book Smugglers’ round tables about Anglophone naughty people.

    But then, I don’t divide people up like that.

    Let me annotate that in advance so I don’t have to listen to some dumb answer to something I didn’t say: I don’t divide people up like that. However, I do weaponize stupidity.

  55. Blue Falcon Chris, I see you are noticably silent on the punitive nature of your proposal, one that strips away options from Worldcon voters.

  56. Alex asks us to imagine books that are attacks on our identities and admits that these would be “bad” writing and that examples are easy to find. Hello? This is what comes from not bothering to listen to other people or believe what they say about their own lives.

    But when the most important thing ever is constructing a straw army of people who simply MUST be against inclusion, accepting that they have legitimate reason to feel pissed upon and that they understand what it’s like to either encounter the sucker punch or cringe because they know it’s coming is out of the question. If there wasn’t the need for that straw army and a need to create the pretend oppression and exclusion to fight against and anyone bothered to agree that hey, maybe it’s rude and exclusionary to issue a random rant about Boosh Hitler while on a con panel or a just-so soliloquy on how all evil in the world is because of Christians…. Followed by the completely unironic explanation that conservatives just aren’t very *creative* so the fact that none are around isn’t because they’ve been run off… Maybe Sad Puppies would have never existed.

    Also, in the interest of TMI, I’ve looked at my breasts in the mirror. Maybe I’m the only woman on the planet who has but it wouldn’t strike me as obviously “off” and worthy of angst if I ever happen across the book that happened in.

    By all means write alternatives with characters that make sense to you. People are wonderfully different. Just stop unpersoning people who see themselves in characters that you find alien. There’s room for everyone.

  57. Nathan – it’s not punitive. It’s a move to prevent 20% from blocking 80%. If I’m wrong, then the people being “penalized” AKA attendees at Worldcon won’t pass it.

  58. Well, that was a nice piece of drive by condescension from A. Erin. Honestly, the notion that I can only relate to characters that are the same ethnicity, culture, sex, and religion as me is offensive.

    “I am human and nothing human is alien to me.”–Terence. And that includes aliens written by humans.

    What makes me relate to character is not their demographic breakdown. It’s what happens to them, what experiences they go through. Has a character had his heart broken? I have. Has a character experienced betrayal from someone she loved and trusted? I have. Has a character been denied the opportunity to have something he wanted his whole life? I have. Has she struggled with questions of faith and doubt? I have.

    I reject the notion that I am being cheated or deprived when the stories I read and watch don’t happen to include single white heterosexual left-handed Mormon women who are conservative.

    And if you are so in favor of diversity, how about including a conservative woman in your stories without implying that she’s either brainwashed by the patriarchy or a gender traitor, fit only for the deepest circle of hell.

  59. Julie Pascal— In the event of looking upon your bodily parts in the mirror, did you then rhapsodize mentally at length about how wonderfully round and perfect they were? If so, you must either have breasts of ultimate perfection (congrats!) or you have escaped the social conditioning that leads most of us to concentrate our attention on our bodily flaws (and, again, congrats if that’s so). Most women I know do not describe their self-examination as one of mental lusting. Maybe that’s my generation talking…. but maybe it’s true that how a woman would observe/describe her own body is very different to how a man would describe the same body. Unless one is very careful as a writer, it is woefully easy to write from one’s unconscious assumptions about how to frame things.

  60. Arwen– if what I wanted was a protagonist exactly like me, I would never read or watch anything. And I don’t expect that. I can identify with male protagonists perfectly well— a large chunk of my childhood was given to collecting and reading all twenty-some Tarzan books, while I wasn’t rereading L’Mort de Arthur by Thomas Mallory or whatever sf book I had found and glommed onto. But I see no reason why I can’t ask for a few iconic women to go along with the giant cohort of guys.

    And, to be perfectly frank, I have read Heinlein and Clarke and Asimov and Eric Frank Russell and Clifford Simak and Poul Andersen, and a hundred other classic sf authors. I enjoyed those books. Still do, when I get the urge to reread them. But now and here I want something more, something refreshing and not the same old story I have already seen a thousand iterations of. I want Cherryh and Bujold and Elizabeth Bear and, yes, Anne Leckie and even Aliette de Bodard… because the worlds and characters they write are awesome and thought-provoking and fun.

    So my question is: What is wrong with liking what diversity and new writers are giving me? It doesn’t mean Heinlein isn’t still awesome. It doesn’t take away from all the books that have been written before. No one is asking anyone to be a fireman and get rid of any books, at least no one who isn’t totally insane.

    All I want in this I’d to read who I want when I want and not to be told I am stupid or an SJW or a whole-word reader or whatever because I happen to read Ancilliary Justice and think it’s a rocking space opera with some interesting world-building. I don’t really care what you read, either. Unless it is super cool and then I want to read it, too.

  61. Brad has explained how they got the books for the list. The puppykickers just keep ignoring that it wasn’t JUST on his blog, but other places including… email! Keep building those strawmen, Chris Gerrib. We know you’ll ignore what we say anyway and argue something nobody is either discussing or has said. You’ve been doing it for years, ever since I encountered you back in Jordan179’s LJ, more than 7 years ago.

    Screenshot of Brad answering that question.

  62. “All I want in this I’d to read who I want when I want and not to be told I am stupid or an SJW or a whole-word reader or whatever because I happen to read Ancilliary Justice and think it’s a rocking space opera with some interesting world-building. I don’t really care what you read, either. Unless it is super cool and then I want to read it, too.”

    Fair enough. All I want is to read whatever I want whenever I want and not be told that I am stupid or a racist, sexist, homophobic bigot because I read the Dinosaur story and thought it was utter tripe. I haven’t read Ancillary Justice and I am not going to because the pronoun gimmick is off putting. I don’t care what you read either. But I do think it’s fair to say that what you consider super cool, diverse, thought provoking and fun and what I consider super cool, diverse, thought provoking and fun might not match well enough for us to swap recommendations.

    Also, I also like iconic women in science fiction and fantasy stories. But I am firmly against the notion that there weren’t awesome female characters and writers in the Golden Age. And that only now, with the authors you mentioned, are women finally getting their due.

  63. There’s nothing wrong with diversity as long as they aren’t relentlessly attacking me morning, noon and night for not allowing it, including reaching the point they won’t review me cuz skin.

    How many times to we have to repeat that? Leave me alone and you’re a reader. Attack my skin and sex and you’re an SJW – end of story. And stop mischaracterizing what we’re saying about Ancillary Justice. No one’s attacking anyone for just reading it. The author writes obscenely stupid stuff about whites and men and we’re sick of listening to it, plus it was levered into awards cuz of feminist affirmative action. If you like the novel no one cares. it’s not like it’s the worst novel ever written, it just doesn’t live up to being the most awarded SF novel in history. That’s our beef, not just liking it. Who cares if anyone likes it? Just please don’t lever it into the stratosphere via the feminist grapevine and gay Queer Theory author Judith Butler’s post-structuralist gibberish about gender “performativity” and then pretend that never happened.

    That’s how that novel got levered and every review starts with the pronoun thing and now they want to pretend those reviews never happened and that it’s just so good. Well, that’s bullshit and it’s bullshit written down in black and white. When 3 anti-male gay intersectional gender feminists like Foz Meadows, Liz Bourke and Alex MacFarlane are frothing at the mouth about Hugos and pronouns from day one you can’t stick a feather in that hat and call it macaroni.

    In a humorously racist article at Tor.com called “Why I’m Voting for Ann Leckie’s Ancillary Justice,” a member of the intersectionalist collective named Justin Landon writes that SF is “a genre predicated on white cis men doing hero stuff.” Since what Landon writes is not true in any kind of sense which would merit the words “white” or “cis,” Landon can only go downhill from there:

    “Published in the middle of a cultural revolution within the science fiction and fantasy community, Ancillary Justice has become something of a clarion call for women and other underrepresented populations fed up with the kyriarchy.”

    Guess what? I’m fed up with this stupid cult.

    Then in a podcast at Tor hosted by Landon, N. K. Jemisin says Ancillary Justice has been “stripped of the male power fantasy… which is what that story managed to do successfully.”

    That’s not including Jemisin’s comment in that podcast that epic fantasy “embraces white male power fantasies… in which, y’know the white guys do everything”

    Got it? That’s our beef. We’re tired of these people putting the anti-white, anti-male feminist bicycle pump to unremarkable SF novels and then blaming it all on 100 million white men. Screw these weird people.

  64. Gerrib: Ice cream warriors who post about their Caribbean duty on a FFG making multiweek runs out of Mayport and claiming to have stood more midwatches in order to justify their dismissive acknowledgement of someone on active duty need to check their soft serve privilege.

    I really doubt that either your sea service counter or number of watches (stood at balls or any other time of the day) is more than mine after only 4 years AD. Hell, I could have had back to back shore tours and still have been deployed double your total service time.

    And the one upsmanship battle you just lost matters not at all because the grownup with kids and a wife who is now volunteering to deploy to a FOB in ‘stan has a lot more at risk than a snot nosed ensign right out of ROTC who plans on quitting as soon as his obligation is up so he can climb the ladder to be a 1% banker.

    And before you run your untutored, under-informed SJB mouth about how ‘safe’ the FOBS are, you might look up the relevant news articles on the ‘non-combat action’ ‘activity’ happening in the various ISAF regions. Unsurprisingly, the risks there are somewhat different than the risks of high cholesterol that you bravely faced across the wardroom table.

    Now go look for the mail buoy.

  65. “Nathan – it’s not punitive. It’s a move to prevent 20% from blocking 80%. If I’m wrong, then the people being “penalized” AKA attendees at Worldcon won’t pass it.”

    Bullshit, Chris. Every single Worldcon voter loses the ability to nominate five works per category. It’s punitive. Go five and seven and preserve each voter’s current ability

    And the fact that you can’t see how easily this can be gamed is also telling..

  66. It’s fascinating watching the Puppy-kickers in action. They demand answers we’ve already given, are outraged by sentiments we never expressed and upset by things we never did. Now some of them are attacking Sad Puppies 4, which means they are now outraged by things we haven’t even done yet.

    Two months of this crap. Two. Months.

  67. Just be glad we’re not GamerGate – they’ve been dealing with the back and forth (including legit bomb threats called on them by the anti-ggs, or aGGros, if you’ll pardon the gamer lingo) for like nine months now. (Might be off a month either way at this point, as almost entirely an observer and not a participant details get fuzzy for me.)

    Of course, something funny hit me today.

    They’ve been going on and on about how there aren’t any whisper campaigns, no conspiracy, (never mind that Brad and Larry didn’t actually call it a conspiracy, nor does it need to be one. To use a simple analogy of course the results will skew democrat if only the democrats are bothering to show up to vote, and of course they’ll disagree with the republican choices when they finally get off their keisters and vote) and that of course they aren’t coordinating anything.

    Well… I’m going to take them at their word.

    Of course taking them at their word means arguing with them is pointless, as by their reasoning they only influence a single vote each, and all the outspoken kickers combined don’t get you very far when you’re dealing with what? Around 10k voters now?

    Really, how much pull does an apparently very angry author who thinks we care far more about his social habits than we actually do (which is to say, not at all) have with the average fan when he hasn’t published a new book in a decade or two anyway? (As a simple example) Insiders? Okay, maybe. But they are limited in number and were already voting anyway. They’re not among the masses of newbies.

    Everything said by both sides aside, I’m willing to bet most of those 10k voters don’t give a single dried fig what the kickers have to say, or the puppies for that matter really.

    So, with both sides out of the way the logical assumption is they’re not ponying up money just to give awards to no-one, so it is a reasonable assumption they’re just reading and voting according to their own tastes.

  68. Nathan:

    I’d like to see the 4 to nominate 6 go through — ie, you can nominate 4 and there will be 6 on the final ballot. It’s so much simpler than the SDV-LPE system that will be proposed.

    Here that one is:
    http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/016262.html#016262

    I suspect that the SDV-LPE proposal will fail due to this simple reason: the answer to their FAQ #1 is “no”.

    FAQ’s:
    1. Can you explain the system in plain language?
    The important thing to remember is that nothing changes in how you nominate. If you think a work is Hugo-worthy, then nominate it. That’s all. There’s no need to rank your choices at the nomination stage, and there’s no reason not to nominate something you think even might be Hugo-worthy. All we are doing at this stage is throwing names into a hat. The final Hugo voting system, which actually chooses the winner, is unchanged. We could, in theory, simply put everyone’s nominations on the final ballot, but that would make for a very long ballot indeed. We therefore need to narrow the nomination list down. This system narrows down the list by eliminating the least popular works until only five (under current rules) finalists remain. Here are the basic steps to the elimination process:
    a. You have one nomination “point” for each category that will be divided equally among the works you choose to nominate in that category. So, if you nominate two works in a category, each will get half a point; if you nominate three works, each will get one-third of a point, and so on.
    b. All the points given to each work from all nomination ballots are added together. The two works that got the least number of points are eligible for elimination. One of these works is the least popular and will be eliminated. (We call this the Selection Phase.)
    c. To determine which of these two works is least popular, we compare the total number of nominations they each received (that is, the number of nomination ballots on which each work appears). The work that received the fewest total number of nominations is the least popular and now completely vanishes from the nomination process as though it never existed. (We call this the Elimination Phase.)
    d. We start over for the next round and repeat the process, however, if one of your works was eliminated, then you now have fewer works on your nomination ballot. This means that each work gets more total points, since you aren’t dividing your point among as many works. For example, if one of your five nominated works was eliminated, your remaining works now get one-fourth of a point each instead of one-fifth of a point. If four of your nominated works are eliminated, your remaining work now gets your full point.

  69. Twila, I’m not arguing that the passage in question wasn’t poorly done, but lots of stuff is poorly done and if there was some way to objectively prove my point, I’d put money on the fact that an author, male or female, who does a bad job at writing “women” also does a bad job of writing “men” because the real problem is that the author is weak at characterization. If they’re popular it’s because they have other strengths.

    What I find irritating is this notion, somehow, that women have been put upon by “stuff written by men” because men can’t write women well. (And women can’t write men and blacks can’t write whites and only a Native American could write indigenous and humans can write neither Artarians nor sentient vegetation… ad nauseam.) And that somehow this is a horror and an aggression and we’re supposed to curl up and die because someone wrote something silly. I’ve got three words for the whole thing.

    Big. Girl. Pants.

  70. “As I said on my blog: next year, if you want the world to believe that your goal is to raise awareness that anyone can nominate whoever they want for the Hugos, make a blog post that says, “Hey, everyone! Did you know that the Hugo Awards, one of the top awards for science fiction, is awarded by the members of WorldCon? And did you know that for $40 you can buy a supporting membership in WorldCon? Now’s your chance to nominate whoever you want!””

    And everyone nominates Larry Correia’s latest novel and the world explodes, sort of like it did when Warbound was nominated.

    A memory longer than two years… who’d’a thunk?

  71. “…I want something more, something refreshing and not the same old story I have already seen a thousand iterations of. I want Cherryh and Bujold and… ” Asaro and Wrede and Moon… Doyle and Lee and Duane…

    I realize I’m being nit-picky but I’m not trying to be snide or mean just… none of these women authors are NEW. I could have added women’s names of the generation before them, too, Norton at least. Bujold is not NEW. Vorkosigan books were published in the 1980s. Cherryh is not NEW. I was arguing with college friends how to pronounce her name 35 years ago.

    The thing is… when you list a bunch of old white men authors and then list a bunch of “new” (white?) female authors, you’re implying something about the History of the genre that is not true, and *true* matters. The rewriting of the genre such that there used to be some particular *absence* of women’s voices is… not true. Listing some of the most influential female authors who are absolutely *establishment* in the genre in a way that implies that they *didn’t exist* or have their success when they actually had it, and moreover to do so in a way meant to imply that someone, somewhere, wants to take them away from you? Why do that?

    People make very persuasive arguments, have great rhetoric about this vital battle that they are fighting for diversity and women in science fiction and in order to do that they’ve got to position the opposition as wanting something the opposition is not at all interested in… which is a return to the pretend-History where you only got to pick from those seminal *male* authors.

    Incidentally, a new-ish female author you should check out is Wen Spencer. If you’re not into elves start with “Alien Taste”.

    Also, I’ve been trying to decide who “boobs in the mirror” lady was, since it seems to be something I’m supposed to have been aware of. I don’t recall ever reading that scene but I wonder, if it was in Friday by Heinlein, her doing that, even to describing the perfection of her form makes absolutely perfect sense since the book was about her struggle with the fact that she was a non-human construct… genetic, but legally an object, and that warped her perception of herself as a person. I can think of a few other books I’ve read where the scene as described makes sense, but I doubt that anyone is going to fuss about John Ringo. (Honest, what would be the point?) Having kittens over Heinlein is far more fashionable.

  72. @ Julie,

    I’m wondering if the ‘boob mirror’ is from Saturn’s Children – But isn’t Stross a CHORF lapdog?

    As for Wen Spencer, I didn’t know she was a she until you just mentioned it – I just enjoyed Tinker, and thought Wolf who Rules was good, but could’ve been great – plumbing wasn’t an issue. But then again, she was Baen, and I I usually liked Baen books. Go figure.

  73. Christopher M. Chupik: They demand answers we’ve already given, are outraged by sentiments we never expressed and upset by things we never did. Now some of them are attacking Sad Puppies 4, which means they are now outraged by things we haven’t even done yet.

    I notice that the anti-puppy platoon heretofore maintained “SJW” is just a slur aimed at anyone to the left of Margaret Thatcher, and that it would be impossible to have a discussion with “the other side” about what it means. But when Brad stated clearly that by SJW he means people who spew a lot of hot air about activism without putting themselves on the line for the principles they claim to hold – the actual, you know, meaning of the term, invented on the left, no less – eyes rolled in unison and Alexandra Erin showed up to mansplain that he has a reading comprehension problem. I’m not the greatest fan of the SP3 campaign, but I have to say that this is a sad day.

  74. As for next year, Kate Paulk is running SP4, as has been said a million times. Why don’t you go tell Kate the Impaler what you think she should do? Just let me get my popcorn first.

    I dunno, I think I’d rather have one of those sheets of plastic like they hand out to the people in the front rows at a Gallagher show.

  75. I love Tinker, Orgell, but I’m a fangirl over Ukiah Oregon. 🙂 I’ll admit that she writes herself into a corner by book 4, but look up Alien Taste. Really.

  76. In the list of “characters for whom Julie has named cats” we have “Miles” and “Ekatarine” and “Ukiah” and “Indigo.” Now nevermind that “Indigo” had to become “Inego” on account of the girls I got him from insisted he was a girl kitten and he wasn’t, but that’s entirely beside the point.

  77. “Laura Resnick on June 2, 2015 at 8:34 pm said: I love that David Mack essay. The original public letter he wrote in response to his angry reader, last August, is also well worth reading. Makes me want to go get a couple of Mack’s books.”

    Welcome to John Scalzi’s career. There’s the mentality you’ve been up against. They say stuff like this every day all year and that’s how they vote. It’s so natural to them they don’t even see it, and nor do they see it results in an entire genre of shit with awards going to shit.

    I’m trying to imagine myself buying an SF book because the author has a proper social stance on gay marriage, or on price subsidies for milk for that matter. Isn’t that how Lovecraft became famous? Even worse is sticking that stuff in an SF novel. Why not have Star Trek investigate John F. Kennedy-era milk subsidies on Altair-6?

    A steady stream of this stuff in boring and kills art.

    In looking at SF stories from 1912 to 1960 there is no great trend toward overtly politicized stories based on current events. Welcome to the career of a man like Jack Vance… and art – art worth reading.

    As an example, it’s rather remarkable how much SF seemingly tried to pretend WW II wasn’t happening. When B-25s were flying from aircraft carriers dubbed “Shangri-La” in April 1942, Astounding Science Fiction was publishing Robert A. Heinlein’s Beyond This Horizon. The following month which saw The Battle of the Coral Sea saw the first Foundation story by Isaac Asimov. During the Battle for Stalingrad in Aug. of ’42 Heinlein published “Waldo.” As the Battle for Guadalcanal drew to a close in Dec. ’42 A.E. Van Vogt published “The Weapon Shops.” That trend continued in Astounding with “Mimsy Were the Borogoves (1943) by Lewis Padgett (C.L. Moore & Henry Kuttner), “Judgment Night” (1943) by C.L. Moore, “City” (1944) by Clifford Simak, “First Contact” by Murray Leinster as the war in Europe ended in May, 1945, and A.E. Van Vogt’s The World of Null-A as twin atomic bombs ended the war with Japan in Aug. 1945. Not only did Golden Age SF writers set out to explore human problems rather than white or male problems, they sufficiently divorced their themes from real world events to make that precise point. The fact intersectionalism sees that in the opposite way (white male power fantasies) but without proof to back that assertion up leads one to believe the SJWs are getting a whiff of their own self-obsessions and supremacy, not someone else’s.

    Here’s quote from an SF Livejournal: “… if you have a single default position for most of humanity in your novels and you don’t have a clear reason for such a thing, you’re not living in a complex world.”

    Actually you’re living in a world of literature, allegory, metaphors, symbolism and myth with a clear purpose. SFF is not meant to be a census or pie-chart. SFF that splits groups up according to contemporary provincial views doesn’t work. One (generally) aims towards a type of futuristic classicism. To do otherwise has a clang of discordance as idiotic as having people wear bell-bottoms in ancient Rome or a far future. Put all that in the context of a type of parochial Third Wave feminism that is nothing more than hate speech directed at men and whites and any claim to artistry dives into a trench.

    Here’s more from that LJ: “As writers, unless we do this active questioning, we don’t say ‘Which characters need to be gendered in a particular way’ and then make active decisions for all the others, to make them more interesting or demonstrate a more complex world or simply to make sure that 90% of the cast isn’t male, we give all the characters default male heterosexual gendering and only give other-than-this where the story absolute demands it… Gendering is a part of building a world for a novel. If we don’t build women in and other genders and different sexualities then they don’t exist for the reader… You’re living in a simpler more straightforward world of gender dominance and heteronormativity.”

    All that’s written without a hint of awareness, pretending provincialism is universal, as if the world gets frozen in Jacques Derrida and Judith Butler’s post-structural French Theory and Jacques Lecan and Claude Levi-Strauss become settled cultural custom and practice in another galaxy 2,000 years in the future. That’s children’s lit, not adult. Ancillary Justice was as clangy as an untuned engine. Feminist SJW SF has the same clanking sound as Lebron James using basketball to defeat an alien invasion, Christian pornography, Gays for ISIS or Hulk Hogan in Star Wars.

  78. What’s really funny, James, is that even when they do it on purpose they fail their own tests. I watched a sci-fi TV trailer for a new show being promoted by an “I’m super into inclusive stuff” person… not as his main focus but there whenever the subject comes up… and made by “Hollywood” right? Total bastion of diversity rhetoric and inclusion rhetoric. The cast was unbelievable. I don’t even generally CARE and I’m all… waitaminute… the Asian guy is into martial arts… the white guy is the leader pulling them all together… the black guy is the pilot… the skinny white chick with purple hair is a frightening mental danger… the other white chick… something… it was sort of hard to tell which stereotype the women were going to fall into from just the trailer.

    I could do better than that in my sleep with one hand tied behind my back and a set of fantasy dice… otherwise known as “random number generators.” You know what? How about put TWO black men in there. OMG.

    Really, the show is probably going to be great, but at no point is casting EVER not analyzed to death, and they can’t manage better than that? Fer pities sake… at least swap and make the Asian guy the pilot and the black guy the super ninja master.

  79. Actual reality can be far more nuanced if you pluck it from a distance in time and disguise its cultural markers.

    I earlier mentioned Hindu and Islamic Mughal sepoys fighting under revolutionary French Jacobin vs. Bourbon flags, with an all-female platoon of musketeers in action on a flank. Those French officers in turn took orders from an Islamic Mughal Nizam and a Hindu aristocratic confederacy. The British East India company had their own small armies, observers and envoys on both sides and refused to get involved in the war, though having treaties and living with and having their brigades stationed in the respective capitals of Pune and Hyderabad. All of that would soon be played out against Napolean’s invasion of Egypt and a then threatened invasion of India by Napoleon in alliance with yet another power, the renegade usurper Tipoo Sultan at Mysore, India.

    Now if you wanted to investigate complex power politics, why not strip out the culture, find the humanity, and use something like that bit of discordance instead of Andrea Dworkin in space? If you want to investigate colonialism and imperialism I find the idea of a fight over Greece with a Spanish Catalan mercenary army against a Frankish Burgundian army of nobles with Turkish and indigenous Greek mercenaries on each side an interesting example of how one can look at an event removed in time and take what is classic and generic about it and use it. The same stuff happened in China and pre-Columbian Mexico. What were those people doing there? How did that all come about? Removed in time they become humans dealing with human issues, not the Huffington Post. Turned into a generic everyman they sure as hell wouldn’t default to “whiteness” or disappear PoC from the future as is so often stupidly charged.

    Please spare us any more stories about Jim Crow and intersectionalism in space, Regency England, the Old West and 7th century Britain. You’re killing your own genre and turning it into a trailer park. I can read The Mary Sue and Jezebel if I want this week’s crying jag about patriarchy, whiteness and gender.

    Asimov’s Foundation wasn’t white, it was an everyman – get that through your thick skulls. There was a reason for that and it wasn’t racism or exclusion, no more so than the Arabian Nights. Human’s are going to adventure, but they have to be humans first rather than some neighborhood you know. This is like pouring wine: let it breathe, give it some distance, or it’s nappy sleeping pill time. Montag’s wife wasn’t watching the Montel Williams Show.

    “Oh, look Montag! It’s the Kardashians and I get to be Paris Hilton!” “Not now dahling. I have to go disemvowel some Robert Heinlein books at the Jane Austen fire-not-fire station.”

    That sure works for me. When’s Hildo II coming out?

    And don’t forget this classic bit of non-classic frippery from an SJW fem author: “‘For a moment, Dharthi considered such medieval horrors as dentistry without anesthetic, binary gender, and as being stuck forever in the body you were born in, locked in and struggling against what your genes dictated.'”

    Why not the horrors of the days of no racially segregated safe-zones at bus stops?

    That sure works for me. I bang my head against a wall every time I read that short treatise in how to preach me out of a story by the nape of my neck-of-the-week. What other “classic” horrors await? Walking around in bad medieval days without a cell phone? How did people do that? Were they a race of super-beings? What clown could live without a cell phone? There’s your SF story right there. Activist Suey Park was so afraid she was being tracked she ditched her phone and used a “burner.” It never occurred to her to just not have one. How could a human live like that cuz reality and the machine might stop. She rode a subway for hours hoping the signal would die, kinda like science fiction.

    Let’s all use “burners,” like Montag.

  80. Sad Puppies has never been about who gets a little rocketship trophy.

    It’s been about inclusion in the community of science-fiction and fantasy writing.

    By trying to limit who can get one of those little rocketship trophies, a small clique has for years been trying to exclude people on basis of their gender, race, political views, religion… anything which they personally find to be somehow offensive to their own sensibilities. To them, the author becomes more important than the story, as though quality of fiction were something achievable by a racial or gender quota.

    No one should care whether the author identifies as male, female, black, white, or dinosaur. What’s important is what they put in their work, what they give to the community as a whole.

    It’s time the Hugos once again honored that concept.

    That is why we fight.

  81. Right. Wrote a looong post talking about Hollywood casting and comparing the above example to the main cast of my current story, but decided it would be boring.

    The short version basically is this – as writers we should be making characters, not checks on a list. What makes a character interesting is so much more varied than skin pigmentation or even who they want to take to bed.

    Human beings aren’t just round pegs trying to be forced into neat square holes – we’re not pegs at all but weird things with all kinds of odd sides and contradictory faces. There isn’t a hole in existence any of us can be neatly shoved into.

    Morgan (protagonist of said story) is interesting to me because she’s a blue collar gal who escaped a heavy gravity mining world masquerading as a utopia. She’s interesting because she doesn’t hesitate to defend herself with guns at need, but usually falls back on her mechanical knowledge to get out of trouble. She’s compelling because she grew up in something _we’d_ consider a backwater, yet has to interact with the cosmopolitan cultures spread across chunks of our arm of the galaxy.

    All of that, just the tip of the iceberg. Isn’t that what we should be going for? Memorable characters that aren’t just some lazy stereotype?

    None of this has anything to do with the fact that her ancestors were Aztecs and Zapotecos. (That detail isn’t even in the book because she has no clue where she comes from, and Earth is gone anyway) It isn’t even particularly relevant that she happens to be straight, at least not until the romance subplot gets kicked off. Heck, the only reason she’s a she to begin with is because I started with the basic plot and asked myself “which makes for a more interesting story?”

    (Yeah. This was the short version of this post. This is why I’m here and not still editing. I get verbose when I get tired. 😛 )

  82. Julieapascal:
    “And everyone nominates Larry Correia’s latest novel and the world explodes, sort of like it did when Warbound was nominated.

    A memory longer than two years… who’d’a thunk?”

    Wasn’t that when the lies about Larry being sexist, racist etc. started?

    IIRC, his wife had people calling her, concerned because someone implied Larry was abusive.

    Ten to one, nobody on the Social Injustice Bully side had the decency to admit responsiblity for the latter.

    Five to one, none of them had the decency to apologise for lying about Larry.

    Even money, nobody on the Puppy Kickers side will have the decency to condemn the people making those false statements, either about Larry then or Brad now (wouldn’t want them to fight amongst each other).

    Anyone want to see if their local bookies will take the bet?

  83. There’s a reason fables use foxes instead of disabled gay Hungarians and that’s because writers don’t want morality (or lack of it) frozen into an identity.

    There’s a reason fables use foxes instead humans and that’s so a principle can become so disassociated from identity one can bypass bias more easily. Fables act as tools of self-criticism.

    Distance in time can serve the same effect. Sinbad or Jason and his Argonauts can become so meaningless in terms of their culture they become archetypes. That is a lesson for SF writers.

    I have no interest in reading self-absorbed fiction by identity supremacists and narcissists. Their work operates in precisely the opposite direction as the above. Diversity as it’s used by this hate movement in literary terms is as shallow as a spoon. Ask a literary question and you’ll get a literary answer. Ask a question about identity and that’s what you’ll get: nothing. The Orwellian SJWs claiming so much is embedded in identity will probably get awards from the KKK at some point. The KKK doesn’t use foxes in their sordid morality tails, and neither do SJWs. They embed morality (or lack of it) in specific ethnic and sexual groups in their entirety. The Ministry of Anti-Racism, promoting segregation. What a bunch of buzzards.

  84. Ah, James May. The gift that keeps on… churning? Roiling? I don’t know. I guess it’s a weird gift, but whatever it is, you keep doing it, and that’s fun.

    You guys pop off like that, and then you all turn around and wonder where people get the idea that Sad Puppies is some kind of regressive culture war thing instead of being about opening the tent flaps?

    Priceless.

    The thing is, the more consistently I fail to be anything like poor James describes, the more sure he’s right, isn’t he? It’s just so terribly dishonest of me to not ever say any of the things he knows in his heart I believe, isn’t it? I’d say it’s almost unfair, but of course my dishonesty in not saying any of those things proves that I am exactly what he thinks I am, because who else except the thoroughly evil person he believes I am would be so dishonest?

    James, if you ever have any inclination towards tiptoeing back into the reality-based community, go look up what actual radical feminists say about trans women like me. You’d find that you and they are natural allies on a lot of things. Like many of the commenters here, actual radical feminists are biological essentialists; i.e., they don’t believe gender even exists as anything distinct from a simplistic binary sex. If I wanted to be reflexively misgendered and this venue wasn’t available, all I’d have to do is strike up a conversation with a radical feminist.

    Yeah, they talk about gender abolition, but if you actually listen to them talk about their imagined post-gender utopia you’ll notice they still recognize a difference between the sexes. Where they would part ways with you is what the roles of the sexes should be… and while their vision isn’t the emasculating matriarchy that you seem to have nightmares about, I don’t doubt that would be the end of any alliance you might found with them on common cause.

    But that’s a digression. Like I pointed out to Brad about origins/meaning of “SJW”, I point it out to you only in the hopes that recognizing one point on which your view has diverged from observable reality might prove the start of a process of self-examination that leads you somewhere better.

    Back on topic:

    Of course we have reason to complain that you’ve opened the tent flaps inefficiently. We’d have nothing to complain about if you had run a competent campaign to increase Hugo awareness in the ranks of general SF/F fandom. What would we be complaining about?

    Oh, okay, maybe there would be some stiffs, some downright snobs, who are part of the WorldCon set who would sniff and look down their nose at all the Hugo-Come-Latelies, and if you guys had run an actual awareness-raising campaign and this happened, you could point to them and say what jerks they are and pretty much everybody else, inside WorldCon and outside it, would have agreed with you.

    But you didn’t do that. While I have no doubt that more people are now aware of what the Hugos are and how they work and how they can get involved than before you began, you did at a great cost in terms of noise and heat (loud noise and waste heat being the sure signs of an efficiently running engine, right?) and with the side effect (if we are to believe it’s a side effect and not a goal) of getting a number of people worked up over the personal grudges and imagined grievances of the slatemongers.

    What, I ask, does any of that have to do with “widening the tent flaps”?

    Should I take it that the opinions of this group is that I’m wrong in thinking that “HEY EVERYBODY, MEMBERSHIP IS OPEN AND YOU CAN NOMINATE AND VOTE FOR WHOEVER YOU WANT!” is a better way of letting people know that membership is open and they can nominate and vote for whoever they want than ramming through a slate of handpicked works?

    Because I’d be interested if anyone would like to explain why.

    Note that if your reason involves phrases like “make SJW heads explode” or “poke a stick in people’s eyes” or allusions to some cabal-clique-conspiracy to keep people out that’s somehow defeated by 5 or 6 nominations for the same writer in a single year, you’ll have to explain what the actual connection between this and opening the tent flaps is, in something other than Underpants Gnome logic.

  85. ” I’d like to see the 4 to nominate 6 go through — ie, you can nominate 4 and there will be 6 on the final ballot. It’s so much simpler than the SDV-LPE system that will be proposed.”

    I’m not against expanding the nominations to be greater than the number a single voter can make. That part’s a decent idea. I’m against taking a choice away from the voters. A 5 and 7 version would preserve the five nominees a Worldcon voter can currently make.

  86. “4 and 6” or “5 and 7” are not necessarily bad ideas. My only reservations would be: 1) the current system, which was pretty successful at selecting excellent books for a span of decades, sends the message to voters: “We are a community of serious readers. Read as widely as you can, and think hard about what to nominate.” In my experience, I can usually name three picks of books or stories in any given year off the top of my head. Picking a fourth is tougher, and picking a fifth really takes effort. I don’t have to choose five, but the fact that the option is there pushes me to rise to the challenge and consider things I might not normally have read. Also, 2) 20 works of short story to novel-length fiction plus related works and so forth is already a hell of a lot of summer reading. It would be tough for a lot of people to read 7 novels, 7 novellas, etc., etc., between March and July.

    I think SDV-LPE is a bad idea because it sends the message: “The goal of this exercise is not excellence (to shortlist the five works identified by the greatest number of voters as best of the year). The goal of SDV-LPE is fairness (to compromise by shortlisting five things that are make the greatest number of voters “happy” by virtue of at least one of their nominations making the final list). My “voter happiness” doesn’t come from seeing one of my favorite things get on the shortlist – it comes from an author being honored in accordance with the collective wishes of the community.

  87. Yeah… perhaps I missed it, but I don’t seem to remember anyone here really talking about transgendered anything besides you.

    There certainly are radical feminists that think that way, but they’re hardly the only group of rad fems out there. They don’t even all agree about sex-positive sex-negative.

    As for being an ‘inefficient’ get out the vote initiative, well, let’s put it this way. If the democrats don’t bother voting in a given area, of course the republicans are going to win much more often. If some of the democrats recognize this and start trying to get their side involved again of course they’re going to be much more successful among their own base, and of course they’re going to be targeting people who tend to agree with them. To suggest that they’re doing it wrong because they’re not also increasing the republican vote is ludicrous.

    No conspiracy needed, really. I’d also point out that Larry and the other authors involved weren’t the ones to bring up a ‘conspiracy’ until they had to start responding to people on your side accusing them of thinking it was.

    Really I find it quite silly to complain that the people reached by the Hugo messages of the SP authors tend to have similar taste in books – how many people do you really think read Brad or Larry’s blog regularly that don’t like their books?

    To use another parallel its just about to the level of you complaining that the people who decided to join and vote by hearing it on a knitting blog are almost all knitters. Of course they are.

    Going back to the D/R example, it isn’t the democrats job to drum up the vote among the republicans.

    As for complaining about the suggested books in this case again we already have overlapping tastes in books so it isn’t odd at all that we’d like a lot of the stuff on the list.

    And then there’s the little fact that the overwhelming majority of people who talked about voting SP said things along the lines of “I nominated some of them, but in other places I nominated different things.”

    I know I nominated a bunch of stuff from SP, and a bunch of stuff that wasn’t on it. Skin Game and Nemesis would have been on my list all the way back when I first read them last year, and it’s undoubtedly the same for a huge chunk of the voters.

    There were some things I nominated that I hadn’t read until Brad pointed them out, but again, I only nominated them because I read them and agreed with him that they were worth nominating.

  88. @Shadowdancer at 3pm

    Thanks for that screenshot – it’s literally the first I’ve seen that there were other sources for recommendations than Brad’s announcement post. I don’t really follow Brad on FB or etc, so that may be why I missed it out. Thanks again.

    It still doesn’t really answer the question many people have of why Brad keeps calling it open, democratic, and transparent if he’s going to say that there were a source of nominations where it’s not known what they recommended, or how many recommendations the final slate works received. (note, I’m not asking for names or details of who recommended what obvs – just something in line with what the data Hugos organizers release)

    If that part has been answered (i.e., what I stated above, or something else as to why SP3 was a open & democratic process) elsewhere, I apologise for bringing it up again and would appreciate a similar pointer or link. Thanks.

  89. @snowcrash Who cares? Obviously you’re all worked up about it and seeking the use the question as a platform to attack Brad. But the question has been answered. You just don’t like the answer. “I don’t care” if you like it or not.

    @Alex You know, Vox Day asserts that “SJW’s always lie.” I was only dimly aware of the fact before reading his blog, and then sought to challenge it. But you know what? He’s right. Your entire post is quite an example, almost paradigmatic. Truth is, you and your cohort got your asses handed to you by the SP/RP efforts, even with your typical SJW campaign of outrageous lies and character assassination. Didn’t work. So now “all of a sudden” you want to know why Larry and Brad weren’t all “reasonable” and why didn’t they proceed in your SJW-approved way. What bullshit. How typically SJWish.

  90. Erin if by “regressive” you mean live and let live and not demonizing vast populations of people based on their skin and sex then I’m regressive, but I understand you have to use Newspeak to get there.

    And since you brought up the topic, what makes you think I have to look up anything? I’m not going to get too far into the TERF-radfem wars for the precise reason it is insane, plus I don’t care, but suffice it to say when men posing as women get a 40 yr. old lesbian music festival like MichFest shut down that’s a delicious double-edged sword of “priceless.” Frankenstein’s monster comes after Frankenstein. Who predicted that? I’m already aware the insanity is so far advanced that people like you are accusing Third Wave Intersectional Gender Feminists of being Men’s Right’s Activists and vice versa. Maybe they all watch Rush Limbaugh too. It doesn’t get any nuttier than that. Let me remind you of what the radfems you oppose write:

    “Male supremacy is centered on the act of sexual intercourse, justified by heterosexual practice” – radical gay feminist Sheila Jeffreys.

    Suddenly that’s not insane enough. Who can keep track of all the “observable reality” where someone like Jeffreys is now out of her own movement, the gay Radfem 2013 London conference shut down, and you’re in? Maybe radical feminists were actually right about misogyny and patriarchy. But then again, what color is the sky in this world? No one knows. And you say I’m the gift that keeps on giving? There is no irony in your daffy movement, as one can tell when people like you use terms like “manfeels” and Brianna Wu “mansplaining.”

    But I digress. You are once again forgetting I don’t care what you do. I don’t care about anyone’s politics either. I care about the hate speech. All the hate speech your movement generates is nothing more than a biological hatred and phobia dressed up in finery and passed off as “politics” and “social justice.” When you routinely take out 3.5 billion people at a time using demonization and dehumanization theories like “patriarchy,” “rape culture,” and “misogyny” that’s the same bullshit we saw at Heidelberg University in the early ’30s, and I’m not buying it.

    As for the Hugos, we warned you about the hate speech for 3 years and not a single one of you would even address the issue, and will not to this day. So, you got pranked. Get used to it. I offer no logic or reason to a movement which hates me. I’m pushing back. I don’t care if you don’t like it. There is nothing more stupid than a movement supposedly based on opposing hate speech but which has no definition for the term other than “you not me on Wednesdays when the stoplight turns red.”

    Let me be as clear as I can be. I feel I owe this “feminist” movement the exact same respect and politeness black folks owe the KKK and Jews owe neo-Nazis, which is to say, none. Not one fucking iota. You can take your “white privilege” and “cis white dudes” and shove it.

  91. Let me mention Mixon’s Hugo-nominated expose of Requires Hate. In classic supremacist and bigoted movements, there is concern for the in-group vs. the out-group. In a humanistic view, there is concern for all.

    We recently saw the former in the Sansa Stark furor from feminists. They simply don’t care about violence against males. They are interested only in the protected group. Mixon and her cohorts didn’t care a single fig for Requires Hate when she went after white men hammer and tongs. It was only when she went after precious “women of color” that they ran up the flags.

    In fact several of the people whining used to leave sympathetic comments at Requires Hate’s website, including 3 current Tor.com bloggers. That’s cuz it’s okay for RH to write “… we consider buffaloes especially stupid as animals go. The perfect analogy for white men.” But don’t touch the Preciousssssss.

    Why be surprised the 3 doofuses of the Skiffy and Patriarchy Show Tweet with this madwoman to this very day. Burn, patriarchy, burn.

    Principles. Equal protection. Human rights. These have been excised from this movement’s vocabulary other than to be used in an Orwellian sense.

  92. There’s no point in engaging Alexandra Erin. It’s quite clear that she’s trolling us for views on her blog. She’s riding the anti-Puppy bandwagon for all it’s worth.

  93. I found one of Alexandra Erin’s earlier comments interesting. In part:

    But is a story a good story if it is otherwise good portrays Christians all as being wrongheaded, narrow minded superstitious fools? I mean, can it be a good story if a significant cross section of humanity is rendered in an extremely unrealistic—say nothing of meanspirited, let’s focus on the fact that it’s realistic—fashion?
    […] You’ve probably read books that are like that, in their treatment of men, or Christians, or the military. And it didn’t just strike you as insulting, but also as bad writing. Right?

    No. Not right. A story written from a viewpoint I don’t agree with can be superb writing. It can also be enjoyable. A story’s portrayal of stupid women, airheaded liberal-arts college graduates, socially inept mathematicians, and/or pretentious bloggers (to name just a few potential categories) does not disqualify the writing as writing at all.

    (Just for example, John Brunner hateses him some Americans [we will ignore for the moment that all his American characters seem to actually be Englishmen in disguise]. I would argue that his portrayal of Americans is both “unrealistic” and “meanspirited”, but that doesn’t make Stand on Zanzibar bad writing. Nor did it prevent me from enjoying the book. Greg Egan frequently portrays Christians “all as being wrongheaded, narrow minded superstitious fools”. And his science fiction is superb; there is simply no way that any rational person could claim that such portrayals disqualify it as writing.)

    That Erin assumes this – assumes that any story that unflatteringly portrays a group you’re part of must ipso facto be “bad writing”, and moreover assumes that everyone agrees with that and the only difference is which groups are portrayed – is revealing, and it may point to the real source of the disconnect here. If the “message-fic” fans literally cannot see quality in such a story and can’t enjoy it, then it’s no wonder they police fiction for “problematic messages about women, GLBT, or POC”. And it’s also no wonder that they like message fiction – because a story that pushes the messages they agree with is the only kind of fiction they can like.

  94. Erin doesn’t hear what she doesn’t want to hear. Goes on with the silly claim that if only Puppies were more seemly they’d have been welcome, and if someone really was rude that all the good people would rally in support.

    It’s not true. You need to actually look at the behavior around you. If you can’t see it, try throwing out a test balloon. Go somewhere SJW is and say really really nicely that you sort of love stories where colonists triumph over an untamed land. Find out how many people rush to your defence because you were nice about it.

  95. There’s another interesting bit in the part you quoted: “I mean, can it be a good story if a significant cross section of humanity is rendered in an extremely unrealistic—say nothing of meanspirited, let’s focus on the fact that it’s realistic—fashion?” How many characters are there in this story, anyways? The fact that one character, or even multiple characters in a story have something in common doesn’t necessarily mean that their characterization extends to all members with that common trait. The fact that the author assigned negative traits to one woman or even several women in the story doesn’t mean that the characterization applies to all women. Very rarely is a ‘significant cross section of humanity’ characterized in a story.

    Social Justice theory, which includes both identity politics and theories of privilege, necessarily reduces people to their group identities. Social Justice theory would have it be ‘justice’ to punish a white man for the collective actions attributed to white men. Once you’ve gone down that road, there’s almost no difference between insulting ‘the Patriarchy’ (the group), ‘Men’ (members of the group) and an individual man. Likewise, insulting one woman is an affront to all Women.

  96. Chris, I enjoy exposing the insane gibbering thing that squats at the core of SFF’s old institutions like one of Lovecraft’s things. There is nothing crazier than a “social justice” movement which indulges in or widely supports racial segregation, racism, sexism, supremacy, hate speech, censorship, refusal to debate, institutional intolerance, review censorship, group defamation, banning products, assembles lists of editors and authors strictly according to their sex and race.

    This is a KKK with affirmative action and that’s all it is. Since principle operates on precedent, SJWs inadvertently give the clowns at Stormfront more credibility every time they open their stupid mouths.

    SJWs have set things back 50 years and a lot of battles are going to have to be fought all over again.

    I call it “The Battle of Field & Stream.”

    “I wanna fish, why can’t I? I never see myself fishing. I fish. Where do I see me fishing in those old Field & Stream’s? I don’t. Surely there were people like me fishing. I want gay fishing stories, cuz fishing. Latinos fish. Where are those stories? Gays and Asians don’t fish like whites, and then there’s gay Asians. We have things to say about fishing. What’s up with the cis-hetero fishing? Most fishing as you know it is shaped by white patriarchal bias of people who claimed authority on it. I’m interested in fishing. See this big metal thing with torpedo tubes and a conning tower? That’s fishing now. I am redefining fishing… cuz patriarchy. Let me in racists. Everybody fishes. What’s with the Anglophone Western-centric fly rods n’ shit? You think there’s no fish in Singapore? Hah! There’s lots of fish. It’s an island. There’s rivers in Asia; lots of them. Don’t make me fish like you do. I have my ways. The marginalized fish, but we have no power. You have white power. I want some. Let me in. You never heard of the gay fisherwoman of medieval York? She could fish like anything. Jane Austen could outfish the lot of you assholes. Charlotte Bronte once caught a bass with her teeth while swimming the English Channel. Mary Shelley’s recipe for beer batter would shame any male who ever lived. Andrea Dworkin of Innsmouth could stay submerged for up to 12 hours. Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Cthulhu R’lyeh wgah’nagl fhtagn.”

  97. juliepascal —

    Oh, I have read Leigh Brackett and Andre Norton and C. L. Moore and Charlotte Perkins Gilman and Tanith Lee and Le Guin and P. G. Hodgell and R. M. Meluch and Wen Spencer and Jo Clayton and Judith Merrill and all of the other wonderful writers who happened to be women who were published pre-1980. Heck, for a lot of them, I bought the paperbacks as they were being published. I adore Andre Norton with a passion that means I reread her work at least once a month (though not Witch World. I do not LIKE Witch World.) I know there were always women authors in the field. I collected books by them avidly when I was but a wee lass who had to scour the bookstores when I actually got to go to a bookstore (once a year, perhaps), to see what I could afford on my $1.00 budget. I don’t say that I don’t like having MORE of them, because I happen to find their books more sympatico with me than the latest milSF (well, depends on the author, there, too, as I have enjoyed Brad’s books and I like some other authors of same — but if they are going to go hog-wild on the weapons and space battles, I am so out of there! though, of course, my husband eats that up with a spoon and I will read his books if there’s nothing else around — how I finally got to read some John Ringo and the last few Harry Dresden books, actually). I’m not saying that I dislike male authors in the slightest. Because I don’t. I just read what sounds good to me, and if that means that a lot of the books I’m reading these days are called “pink sf”, so be it. I am unapologetic about liking what I like — I buy Baen books and Tor books and self-published books and DAW books and whatever else piques my interest. I just read Michael Z. Williamson’s new time travel book, because the cover caught my eye. I thought it was pretty cool, though I was bummed to discover it was a trilogy. I thought it stood alone well, and I really hate it that over half the books I pick up are parts of a series. If there’s one thing I’d change in SF publishing, it would be that there are very few stand-alone novels coming out now. That’s the old school vibe I’d love to see come back.

    And, btw, I will give ANYTHING a chance to catch my attention. I’ve deliberately bought and read bad books because they were so bad; I’ve picked up Westerns and sports novels and other books way outside my normal channels of interest, just because I thought I’d give it a try and see what I thought.

  98. Yes, I believe Larry is on record stating that he’s not interested in a Hugo and would refuse a Hugo in the future. I can’t remember if it was for winning, or for merely being nominated. Either way, I think Larry’s done with the Hugo and done with Worldcon too. These are ‘small’ things for a guy working at Larry’s level, and he’s tired of being tarred and feathered for trying to simply tell the truth.

    Frankly, I am about there myself. I’ve said it before in this space: the market value of the Hugo (as an accolade) is highly suspect. There is no cash prize attached to the Hugo — unlike the Dell Magazines awards, or the Writers of the Future award — and it’s almost impossible to point to anyone and say, “She won a Hugo, and it made her career!” Usually the ‘made’ people have careers, with or without awards; and that’s Larry right now. Mainly, the Hugo (in the 21st century) goes to writers with tons of buddies and/or social media hangers-on. It in no way foretells sales potential, nor is it a signifier of broad audience appeal.

    I think this can be changed — but only if the CHORFs don’t lock people out of the selection and voting process. If the CHORFs do that (and there are many ways they could do it) the Hugo is doomed forever to being insignificant.

    And I will happily walk away from it, just as I walked away from SFWA (and the Nebula.)

    But at least nobody can say I didn’t try to fix things first — to make the Hugo live up to its reputation again.

  99. “Alexandra Erin ‏@alexandraerin 9h9 hours ago ‘SFF has never been more exclusionary than Field & Stream,’ the puppy tells me. ‘You will never pie chart a military cemetery.'”

    “Alexandra Erin ‏@alexandraerin 6h6 hours ago @dj_kittycat It’s part of a stream of non-sequitur from a Sad Puppy calling himself ‘James May’. Oddly, I’m pretty sure I know what he means.”

    My comment was precisely on point. The reason you see it as a non-sequitor is because you don’t understand principle, nor does any SJW or radical feminist. You first pretended not to be an activist and clearly are part of a movement committed to anti-male anti-white initiatives. My point was those initiatives are based on lies. Part of those fibs lies in the fact you can tell as much about an intersectionalist by what they never say and do as what they do say and do.

    In a movement obsessed with pie-charting everything under the sun, they will never pie-chart a military cemetery. The reason for that is obvious in a movement that splits humans into men and women and then takes credit accordingly: you have not done your duty and nor do you have any interest in pointing out the demographic spike of dead men to the tune of 97.7 in the Middle East in the last decade plus. Suddenly demographic spikes are of no interest to you. You will never pie-chart a military cemetery or try to introduce diversity there. It is a tabu subject. Intersectionalism also has a heightened interest in colonialism, as long as it’s never Ottoman, Mughal, Aztec, Incan, etc. In short, your movement is a fraud based on lies, convenient pie-chart blindness and a hatred of men and racism.

    SFF – which was almost exclusively a magazine literature from Burroughs in 1912 to 1950, has been proven over and over again to have been no different that any other few magazines out there that catered to cultural whims and tastes. Those magazines didn’t exclude anyone any more than the usual marketing whims of Field & Stream, Cosmopolitan, or anything else. The idea SFF pulps were cis-white male in any ideological sense is pure paranoia and fuckery.

    Look at your Twitter stream: it’s anti-white anti-male central.

  100. Yeah. I hadn’t looked at her twitter stream. I have now. A few things make more sense, like why an actual debate is lacking with her appearances here. Silly me for operating on the assumption that people want to debate as opposed to mere posturing.

  101. Brad, there is little doubt the Hugos have been transformed from a thing that operates like a hall of fame or museum into a movement to highlight the oppression of men, whites and heterosexuals. We have quotes from every influential figure in core SFF that speak not only to an affirmative action movement but one where those uplifted figures are obsessively anti-white, anti-male and anti-heterosexual in their non-fiction rhetoric.

    SJWs reply to that by simply ignoring it, redefining words, or pretending their own quotes dont’ even exist. You will never win an argument with such brazen liars.

    All of that trumps any consideration of neutral artistry and even the genre itself, as witness stories like Hild and “Wakulla Springs” which have no genre elements whatsoever. In each respective case, gay feminism and Jim Crow trumped the genre itself. “The Weight of the Sunrise” could’ve been written by Derrick Bell. Ancillary Justice doesn’t even exist without French Queer Theory and Judith Butler. The now Nebula-nominated “The Fisher Queen” (my vote to win) could’ve been written by Andrea Dworkin. The now Nebula-nominated “We Are the Cloud” could’ve been written by Allen Ginsberg. “The Lady Astronaut of Mars” could’ve been written by Betty Friedan. “Selkie Stories Are For Losers” could’ve been written by Simone de Beauvoir or Monique Wittg. I could go on and on. It’s all about the rocket ships and neutron stars. That is a dead literary movement; dead on its feet. And here’s a love letter from Wiscon. It’s a true Two-Minute Hate from some truly sick and stupid people:

    https://storify.com/tinytempest/misandry-reverse-racism-and-other-imaginary-creatu

    “Nivair H. Gabriel@nivairface We don’t want to nominate ppl just bc they’re in a certain category… unless that category is fucked-up white men! #ImaginaryMisandry”

    “Miss V@incitata Misandry & mansplaining are twins but one comes out during the day and one comes out during the night. #ImaginaryMisandry”

    “Chinelo Onwualu@chineloonwualu #imaginarymisandry Another imaginary creature: The man-hating feminist”

    “SoosheBot@SoosheBot The final imaginary creature: The Truly Objective Historian, armed with “facts,” “logic” and the [whitest of] truthiness #ImaginaryMisandry”

    You can kiss A Canticle For Leibowitz, “The Big Front Yard,” “The Dragon Masters” and The Demolished Man good-bye. There is no longer any interest in such artistry.

    These arguments – no matter the facts – are just running in circles. You will never win an argument with such people. They are racial and sexual fanatics fronted by idiotic naive water-carriers.

  102. @ct236 Who cares? Obviously you’re all worked up about it and seeking the use the question as a platform to attack Brad.

    I think that’s not entirely accurate. I’m not hiding the fact that I’m opposed to the concept of slates in general, but for it to develop into a well-informed position (instead of a reflexive opposition), the least I should do is try and find out how they were created.

    So far I get that there was a call for recommendations, and then there was a slate. Those are the elements visible to me, and as per Shadowdancer’s screenshot, Brad has mentioned that there were other sources that were not openly visible. Given that it’s also been called an open and democratic / transparent system, I’d like to know more about those features as well.

    I know it’s annoying to have a question that’s already been answered asked again, but I’m being completely honest when I say that *I’ve not seen those answers*.

    I’m keenly aware that many of us exist in our own bubbles of reinforcing media narratives and like minded people, and as such our views become a little bit of an echo chamber. One of the reasons I’m here is to try and get that *other side*, because in my bubble the narrative seems to be “We keep asking Brad how exactly this was open and democratic, but he keeps refusing to provide any proof or details”,

    Again, I’m sorry that you keep getting the same questions again and again, but I’m being completely honest in my, well, for lack of a better word, ignorance and curiosity.

  103. “open and democratic” isn’t referring to how the slate that Brad posted was formed. It refers to the SP3 campaign being carried out in the open and nominating democratically. There was no back-room dealing for who would vote for what in exchange for something. No vote buying occurred.

    And as many people have said already, The “slate” was a list of recommendations, I voted for those items on the slate that I had read and liked. I didn’t vote for some of the things there because I hadn’t read them, and I voted for things that weren’t on the “slate”

    but you keep harping on how Brad came up with the list of recommendations, and it frankly doesn’t matter how the list was generated. What matters is that the SP3 campaign was in the open from the moment it was announced, and that everyone who participated did so out of choice (paying their own money to do so) and there was nothing forcing anyone to vote in any particular way.

    When we finally see the nomination numbers, Chaos Horizons will do their analysis on them and show that the SP folks did not vote as a monolithic block, and you will ignore this and keep claiming that we did.

  104. I love when people come to Brad’s blog and act like they’re so reasonable and polite… But then go back to other blogs and rip on him incessantly. And then complain when he doesn’t engage them at their leisure.

  105. When we finally see the nomination numbers, Chaos Horizons will do their analysis on them and show that the SP folks did not vote as a monolithic block, and you will ignore this and keep claiming that we did.

    You know, since the admins have all the ballots, they could fairly easily compute and release a single number: The size of the largest set of ballots that are duplicates of one another. This could be done without revealing the number of votes for any given nominee and without revealing anyone’s ballot, or any other information that is embargoed or non-public.

  106. “…but I’m being completely honest when I say that *I’ve not seen those answers*.”

    Ya know, I really have to mention that… “what you know” and “what happened in the open” are not fully overlapping sets.

    What pops up from Google – dem·o·crat·ic (dĕm′ə-krăt′ĭk)
    adj.
    1. Of, characterized by, or advocating democracy: democratic government; a democratic union.
    2. Of or for the people in general; popular: a democratic movement; democratic art forms.
    3. Believing in or practicing social equality: “a proper democratic scorn for bloated dukes and lords” (George du Maurier).
    4. Democratic Of, relating to, or characteristic of the Democratic Party.

    There’s variation and more or less emphasis on politics depending on where the definition comes up but really, Snowcrash? People have been coming here like clockwork crying about how Brad said this was democratic! But he just chose what he liked!… I’m a bit tired of it because people aren’t that dense by accident. They’re only that dense on purpose. “Democratic” is a fully functional descriptive word that can be applied in a number of ways to various areas of human life that don’t include “One Man One Vote.”

    Even if the ONLY way that his process was “democratic” was that it was the rabble in opposition to the elite, his choice of that term is sufficiently justified.

  107. “People have been coming here like clockwork crying about how Brad said this was democratic! But he just chose what he liked!… I’m a bit tired of it because people aren’t that dense by accident.”

    What she said.

    SJW’s always lie. Always.

  108. Twila, I wouldn’t have even mentioned it except that there are a lot of people who really are trying to “disappear” those women authors. Also, I agree about the “series” problem. If something can stand alone, that’s great. Bujold was awesome that way with the Vorkosigan books. You really can pick up any one of them or start in the middle because they are separate stories. I’ve been burned so often I stopped reading books that are a series until I have all the books. What happens often is that I’ll read the first one, like it a whole lot but realize that it’s not the end, so I wait for the author to “get done”. While I’m waiting I loose interest. At least it’s *possible* now to buy all the books in a series at once instead of having to worry about missing book 2 because it was off the shelf (or never on it) when you remembered to check. That really sucked.

  109. I love when people come to Brad’s blog and act like they’re so reasonable and polite… But then go back to other blogs and rip on him incessantly. And then complain when he doesn’t engage them at their leisure.

    Look for Snowcrash over in File 770.

    davidelang replies to the rest. We did this openly, so the antis bitch and moan and complain that ‘we didn’t.’

    You know what? Fuck it. I’ve had enough. Hear that snap? That was my patience and tolerance for bullshit breaking. Apologies to Brad for the profanity-ridden rant.

    Seriously, Snowcrash? That’s the ‘first’? Then you didn’t do your research enough. I was in the hospital for pre-eclampsia risk when the nominations were being discussed and missed most of the discussions, but there were mentions of it being discussed in places like Facebook (which I don’t have), or According to Hoyt, or Mad Genius Club, maybe over at Larry’s in the discussions and comments, and that there were people emailing their suggestions in and that those were forwarded on to Brad.

    I’ve been saying over and over again that it wasn’t just on Brad’s blog that suggestions were being given. I’ve MENTIONED the emails BECAUSE BRAD AND THE OTHERS MENTIONED THEM TOO BEFORE. What happens? That inconvenient truth is ignored, like how the antis ignore James May when he quotes the people they uphold with their racist, sexist hateful quotes.

    Then – bad timing for you anti’s – my infant son died of SIDS while this was really heating up and I couldn’t focus on your fucking trivial nitpicky bullshit and constant accusations of us being racist, misogynist, homophobic, insert-checklist of social justice bully gotcha accusations here – bigots. This actually affected us all – Brad, Larry, Sarah Hoyt, TL Knighton, etc. – Go look at Larry’s blog around the early April weeks if you don’t fucking believe me. It was on Brad’s blogpost about his family that I first wrote anything about my son Brandon’s death, because I couldn’t take how hateful your side was being to him and his family. We lost the pace because of grief, and here are you assholes nitpicking about stuff we were all above the board on and behaving as if this award for books is more important than life. Awards for fiction. Sorry for the inconvenience of a sudden death that threw us for a loop and kept me from replying again and again repeating myself, not that it clearly was important enough for you.

    So yeah, so fucking sorry real life got in the way, we can’t deal with your stupid bullshit at the moment. That goes for both me who’s mourning, and Brad, who’s off to fight ISIS, while you sit here and bitch about ‘not good enough, we’ll no award everything Puppy!’

    Yeah, sorry if that shows to everyone exactly how petty you lot are. That is not OUR fault. Keep saying it is, then I guess none of you are capable of making your own decisions nor have agency of any sort. Because guess what? Your actions your responsibility. You can’t own that, then you’re not worth paying attention to or treating like adults regardless of your age.

    I’ve reached my absolute limit with you lot. We’re evil if we disagree, that much has been clear. If we don’t do things ‘the exact right way’ the way ‘you wanted’ – vis a vis Alexandra Erin – we are ‘inefficient’ at best and descend from there to evil hellspawn. You’re all throwing tantrums because the Hugos ALLOWS PEOPLE TO NOMINATE AND VOTE FOR WHAT THEY WANT IF THEY PAY THEIR 40$ – and we just got together to discuss and pull together a slate of suggestions that, even when the list came out, several people said they didn’t agree with everything on. But no, that truth, that reality, doesn’t mesh with the straw men you lot of anti-Puppies have built up that we’d be voting ‘lockstep’ and that ‘slates lock out other books.’ Hey, guess what? Not all of us read the same stuff, not all of us like the same things you do, and if we missed out on books because we didn’t read them in time, you’ve been howling that it’s OUR FAULT TOO. Ultimately, this is all because we didn’t agree with what the social justice bullies think is good, and nominated for what we thought was good and worthy, and now you’re all panicking because our numbers were enough to get those works nominated, and you’re all TERRIFIED those unapproved works WILL GET HUGOS. OH NO! SLATES OF SUGGESTIONS THAT DON’T AGREE WITH WHAT YOU LIKE! WAAAAH! DID THOSE AUTHORS AGREE TO BE LIKED BY THOSE UNCLEAN WRONGFANS ENOUGH THAT THEY INCLUDE THEM ON THAT LIST!!!!!!! NOOOOOOOO! DESTROY DESTROY DESTROY – that’s what you guys have been doing.

    It’s getting clear and obvious that no matter what we do, no matter how much we explain, you’ve already painted us as evil and are simply mining us for quotes to parade in front of the rest of your antis that we’re evilbadmeanies AND THAT IS WRONG AND NOT ALLOWED. You’re not interested in honest discussion. What you have is a witch hunt.

    You’re not even going to read the works or decide fairly. That much is clear. Hell, you lot have been proud of it. Proud of your bullying. Proud of your false Amazon review mongering and trumpeting about it being all Right And Good because it’s against Puppy-nominated authors.

    And if you can’t fucking deal with Vox Day, don’t bitch and moan about him here. Too scared that he and the Dread Ilk will rip you guys to shreds, but prefer to pretend that it’s because ‘he’s scum and not worth addressing?’ Then stop bringing him up on Sad Puppy blogs to BEAT US WITH, you hypocritical abusive two faced treacherous double-standard holding, goal-postmoving cowards.

    I’m done. Call us bigots, call us racists, call us misogynists, whatever – you’ve overused them to the point we don’t care about those terms any more. You have the real bigots and racists, and hateful people on your side. You have Brianna Wu “My husband has four Hugos, and half of everything he owns is MINE so I HAVE TWO HUGOS” stupidity, and Arthur Chu, and were the ones who drove an immigrant writer, a lesbian/bisexual leftist woman, and independent magazines off the Hugo Awards because you didn’t approve of their being liked by us. By your actions and words, we clearly see what you are.

    Oh yeah. And you have Clamps / Yamamanama on your side. The misogynistic stalker who has been stalking me and threatening my children over several years because I’m against Sharia law, has been repeatedly banned here on Brad’s site, banned from several other blogs, including Monster Hunter Nation, According To Hoyt, Mad Genius Club, and probably more that I don’t know of, for his excessive, hateful, spewtastic harassment. He’s shown up on Alexandra Erin’s and she’s obviously fine with his presence because VOX DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY.

    Yep, Vox Day. The man who is ‘worse than Sharia law and ISIS to the Puppy Kickers.’ Y’know, despite the fact that he isn’t likely to kill you for being a willful woman, being gay, being not Muslim, being an atheist, or being a Christian/Jew/Buddhist… but in Social Justice Bully reality, NOT LIKING AND NOT APPROVING IS SO MUCH WORSE THAN BEING KILLED OMGZ.

  110. *looks at carnage, decides to do his best to avoid doing anything that makes Shadowdancer angry at him*

  111. Y’know the trope of the big beefy soldier with a tiny Asian wife and how he tries NOT to make her mad? That’s why. I don’t get angry often. I’m easily irritated, but not easily angered – there’s a difference and if you don’t know what that is, you’re a moron (Not you, Patrick, but addressed to the antis taking offense at every tiny little fucking thing.) I have a long fuse – not as long as Brad’s holy crap that is a patient man – but this nitpicky bullshit over several months and constant goalpost moving and taking advantage over the fact that HI THERE BRAD IS PREPARING FOR DEPLOYMENT YOU FUCKING DOGPILING SODSUCKERS just skipped several feet of fuse and snapped the wrong wire to nuclear.

    The last time I did this on someone else’s blog was when that stupid little SJW cunt came over to According to Hoyt, made snipey comments at Sarah, said that Sarah was unlikely to show the comment… and Sarah did. “I’ll behave badly and EXPECT YOU TO BE NICE TO ME” is manipulative bullshit worthy of emotional abusers and I am sick and tired of that crap being pulled on us.

    And yes, I said cunt, because that what that whiny little cunt was. I call them as I see ’em. Don’t like it? Sod off, I don’t give a rat’s diseased arse.

  112. The “oh please martyr me while I act like a complete jackass” type posting? Yeah, I’ve seen that before. Very annoying, though mocking them sometimes throws them for a loop.

  113. For the record, the reason why Yamamanama’s a misogynist is because over a long period of time, we observed that he was consistently more awful in his behavior towards female commenters versus male commenters, while he was at Jordan179’s livejournal, especially if they held political opinions he disagreed with. Since he was commenting at a largely conservative blog…

  114. By the way, for the people who are unaware of Yamamanama’s history – his history of being misogynistic includes being hostile to people like Mary Catelli, Sarah Hoyt, Kate Paulk, the female commentators other than myself at Jordan179’s blog, and has a proven history of lying and misrepresenting the people he doesn’t like, and accusing people who disagree with him as Vox supporters.

  115. Ah, Clamps. I don’t believe I’ve had the misfortune of having you respond to one of my comments with some lame attempt to smear the person you hate so much.

    What a sad and pathetic little man you are. Full of loathing, projection and spite which is somehow someone else’s fault.

  116. Clampsy, why do you waste your breath repeating the same tired lies? No one believes you, least of all anyone here that’s dealt with you before. Go back to the kid’s table, the adults are talking.

  117. Yep, in Clampsy’s tiny overheated little head one can engage in misogyny with a clean conscience: simply claim they’re “extremist” and that makes it okay!

    Oh, and the “extremists” made him do it!

    Oh naughty, wicked Zoot!

  118. Oooo, you’ve added Markku into your bilefest now! Congratulations, Clampsy-poo, you might actually have succeeded in making a Finn laugh out loud! 😀

  119. You’ve already spent weeks (months? Years?) whining about Shadowdancer– and those who notice when you try to stir up e-mobs with your pathetic lies– compiling screen shots of your misbehavior.

    You threaten kids, and when people take screen shots and object, try to make yourself the victim.

    You have no power, Clamps; you don’t get to control others and demand evidence time and time again, especially not when everyone is already familiar with the evidence and your lying denial of it.

    About the most honest thing you’ve said is to clarify that examples of your woman-hating behavior span beyond this decade, and even that honesty is probably an accident on your part.

  120. 1. I’ve given evidence of Vox and Markku stalking my friend. Brad deletes it.
    2. Ok. Link me to something I wrote that’s misogynist. When I said it doesn’t matter.

  121. A known stalker and harasser finds the catalogue of his deeds ‘creepy’ because it gives his victims something to refer to. Classic abuser DARVO tactics. “It’s the victims’ fault that they’re being stalked by me! I’m stalking them because I think they’re hateful” is Yama’s attitude.

  122. “Your cataloguing is creepy. Mekadave is merely unpleasant.”

    Awww Clampsy, you’re gonna make me blush with pride! 😀

  123. This has some interesting reading…
    https://forums.affsdiary.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=41
    ….and by “interesting” I mean in the “morbidly fascinating” sort of interesting.

    (This is more for those whom have not read much about Clamps. I’m sure much whingeing and other complaining will come from Clamps in a frantic attempt to deflect attention from it.)

  124. Stalking women, threatening children, going to random places and lying about the targets of your stalking, demanding evidence that you’ve ever done it:
    not “creepy.”
    Collecting evidence:
    “creepy.”

    Watching public youtube videos, and informing someone that a person they know is a long-time stalker of women, is not “stalking your friend.” I can see how you might get upset about your behavior becoming public knowledge, especially since you obviously know it’s wrong– you wouldn’t keep accusing others of it, otherwise.

    Following a woman around the internet, lying about what she has said in an attempt to get people to make accusations and threats, slandering her in strange places and insulting her writing in totally random locations, on the other hand…. (Have you heard, by the way, that she usually finds out you’ve been doing that again because she gets a sudden spike in sales, and confused notes from people who look and find out she’s not actually Satan?)

    Please note the continued attempt to demand evidence right after complaining about there being a pile of evidence.

  125. There was that particularly creepy one where he flat out says, on finding out Aff is my housemate, that I
    ‘spread my legs for another man.’

    A housemate is a person who just lives with someone else, usually sharing rent and cost of bills. Yama’s thread of thought goes like this: “Aff lives with Shadowdancer. Therefore, Shadowdancer is sleeping with Aff” – a thread of thought that makes no sense unless he believes that a man merely living with a woman = gives that man sexual rights to her body.

    Also, the rather slanderous implication that I’m cheating on my husband and that I’m a slut is there.

  126. Translation: “Quick! Pay attention to my constant deflection attempts! Ignore me declaring people not worth my time yet spending so much time on them anyway!”

  127. Fool me once shame on me, especially if I wasn’t paying attention. Snowcrash is a disingenuous time-waster with a gigantic sense of entitlement.

    Seriously people, “where did Brad get the slate of recommended nominees” has been asked and answered over and over again. Five minutes with google and voila!

    From now on the only proper response is mockery. We got the recommendations from the N-dimensional super-mentalities buried beneath the dread pyramid of Ichlichlichlitzl. That’s why they swept the Hugos.

  128. “See, Dave, I know you said you’d dedicate your life to making me miserable.”
    Finish the sentence, you sad little troll: “if you didn’t leave Shadowdancer alone”. So typical of you. I love how you think you’re being devious. It’s adorable!

  129. Yama is lying in the hopes that nobody will click through to Vox’s site.

    http://voxday.blogspot.com.au/2013/12/the-trolls-new-target.html

    This is a quote directly from it, and you can click through to confirm a faithful copy and paste of text.

    Friday, December 27, 2013
    The troll’s new target
    It seems that Mr. Marston, aka Yama, Clampps, Arachnothera, Will le Fey, and a plethora of other pseudonyms, has now taken to vandalizing the Quantum Mortis Wikia in his copious spare time.

    18:49, December 25, 2013

    Welcome to the Quantum Mortis Wiki

    Nobody’s ever going to read this piece of shit.

    Thanks to Wikipedia, I’m accustomed to everyone in my private life knowing what I do online. The trolls, however, are not, and I’ve learned they really don’t like the people in their daily lives learning about their online activities. So, as promised, I’m gradually going to bring every banned troll’s online activity into his real life. Each time a troll shows his head after being banned, I will disclose one more piece of personal information about them.

    As you can see from his IP address, 72.93.116.138, Andrew Marston lives in Marshfield, Massachusetts. He works at a wildlife center, which is why he uses bird names for so many of his trolling identities.

  130. GRRM explains the rape in his work; obsession is right on the job:

    “Cecily Kane ‏@Cecily_Kane 2h2 hours ago @john_zeleznik @eruditeogre Which is a tool of systemic patriarchy and should be resisted at every turn.”

    “Cecily Kane ‏@Cecily_Kane 2h2 hours ago @john_zeleznik @eruditeogre The impulse to defend him and accept his explanation is the implicit pressure of bro solidarity,”

    “Cecily Kane ‏@Cecily_Kane 3h3 hours ago About 1 of every 20 men is a rapist. My theory is that the mechanisms which allow them to operate differ but number is a constant or close.”

    “Cecily Kane ‏@Cecily_Kane 6h6 hours ago OH YEAH @ghostwritingcow’s story ALSO ACES THE BECHDEL TEST 0 dudes, 0 mentions of dudes, I approve #Misandry”

    Ghostwritingcow is Sunil Patel, the guy at Lightspeed Magazine who won’t review white men. Lightspeed is responsible for the falsely named Women Destroy SF (and Queers Destroy SF) because in truth it was Ideologues of Gay Feminism Destroy SF. It was also a lesbian ideologue who created the absurd Bechdel Test. Why do people who so obviously have a thing for men make hashtags like #ImaginaryMisandry?

    Considering so-called misogyny is so rampant, where are the Twitter feeds across the SFF community which daily and obsessively take down all women as moral inferiors, or review censor non-whites, or make cracks about blacks? Exactly what are they pushing back against other than the inside of their thick skulls? In fact there is nothing that can remotely match the impulsive racism, misandry and paranoia of these insane gender feminists.

    There’s your literature, your love of art and the infestation that squats at the core of this community like a cancer.

    “Cecily Kane ‏@Cecily_Kane Jun 1 @jsuttonmorse So I ended up taking African lit with the same professor and that class was pretty wonderful. Hence me reading + Sundiata, an Epic of Old Mali, which is short and highly readable and awesome btw. + It kicked the shit out of Beowulf, other boring white boy epics, and the rest was history”

    With Kane as a new addition to the Hugo-nominated Skiffy and Fanty franchise, I feel sure they have more nominations on the horizon. The truth is there are no quotes about “boring black boy epics” and women-hating that even exist in SFF let alone the massive flood that comes from this sick gender feminist ideology. It’s all about the rocket ships and neutron stars and Ringworlds, isn’t it?

  131. The link here explains the connections between Yama and Sunlight, and one of them is the quoted IP from the forum logs.

    https://forums.affsdiary.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=41#p60

    Which matches the IP from Vox’s post.

    Yama defending Sunlight for hating Aff for ‘being a creep with an elf fetish’ makes no sense on a gaming forum for a Lineage II MMO clan – a game that has elves, dark elves, humans, winged humanoids, orcs, and other fantasy races as playable characters. Plus, the certainty in which Yama asserts his statement is, as Dr. Mauser observes, Yama referring to himself in third person.

    As I note, how is Yama supposed to know what Sunlight thinks, given that it is a statement of certainty with no ambiguity, if Yama is not Sunlight?

    There are other corroborating data in that link, which Yama is conveniently ignoring, that I use. With the use of the list of pseudonyms, it is also clear, along with Yama’s use of “Sasha”, “Pieter de Graz” “Clamps” and the latest, “the Chevalier de Graz” that Yama uses lots and lots of pseudonyms in attempts to disassociate himself from his past commentary, but the history I’ve compiled illustrates that despite the use of pseudonyms, he is identifiable by a variety of means.

    It’s six, nearly seven years of data gathering, so it’s a lot of info.

  132. Clamps is also apparently blissfully oblivious that he has committed two felonies.

  133. Sorry, guess you’re not up on U.S. laws. Cyberstalking, which he has provided more than enough evidence off *that i have seen him post before I even saw your thread documenting it*, is a felony in the state he lives in, compounded by the fact that he is circumventing security measures on a site he has been banned from in order to gain access. Even when this is done simply by creating an alternate login to access the site, it still counts as illegal access to a computer system he is not allowed on, and use of system resources on a system he has been specifically bidden not to access- colloquially, ‘hacking’. Both are felonies in his state of residence, the first with up to five years in prison and the second with up to two and a half years.

  134. Interesting link, Shadowdancer.

    I had no idea this person went so far as to stalk you to continuer harassing you.

    A truly sick individual.

  135. (and on that note, this while thing needs to be logged, Brad, before you delete him… and Shadowdancer, you could make screen grabs before he suddenly realizes that yes, his stupid BS can land him in prison and deletes the posts himself.)

    By the way, no, this is not a ‘threat’, Andrew. A court of law would tell you it is ‘a statement of fact’

    You want someone to stalk? in the modern vernacular, “Come at me, bro.”

  136. Ah, well, it would have to be Brad, or Larry, or Sarah, etc, who would have to file. There was that interesting request he made of Jordan179 to make him an account on our forums back when a friend had a story there behind locked access forums for members only, and he complained that our forums didn’t allow browsing by proxy. Jordan refused, and Yama was that it wasn’t bad to allow him to bypass the user registration process.

  137. Take note of how SJWs typically back up their stupid remarks with “research.” Merely being white and male gets you thrown into an advantage which never existed and so Foz Meadows has to retract and edit an article at the Huffington Post. Write a short comment and suddenly you’re thrown in front of a radio listening to Rush Limbaugh. Merely exist and write stories for 5 decades and you’re thrown into a woman-hating Ku Klux Klan. Articles at The Guardian simply make shit up out of their heads about white cis SF.

    Now let’s take real research that’s called “random quotes” by SJWs:

    Thousands of quotes from:

    The presidents of literary organizations
    The officers of those organizations
    Their most activist rank and file
    Editors
    Comics writers
    NY Times best-selling SFF authors
    Influential bloggers
    Con runners
    Convention Guest’s of Honor
    Multiple award nominees and winners
    Serial panelists
    Bloggers at the web site associate of the largest publisher of SF in the world

    What’s significant about that? They all share the peculiar fake academic language of a gender feminist ideology created by obsessively anti-male gay feminists for gay feminists and with an anti-white racial intersectional kicker later added on. Normal Americans don’t use that lingo. It looks like this:

    White privilege, rape culture, male gaze, patriarchy, whiteness, white saviors, tools of the patriarchy, misogyny, safe-space, trigger warning, ableism, cisnormative, neuroatypical, heteronormativity, transphobia, Bechdel Test, toxic masculinity, manpain, manfeels, mansplaining, marginalized voices, decolonize, de-white, gendered slurs, cultural appropriation, people of color, genderblindness, gender-fluid, etc., etc., etc.

    What does this mean for awards? Last year over 85% of the most important Hugo nominees and all five winners of the Nebulas were activists fully on board with pushing this ideology. That’s based on research, not fat-headed assumptions – quotes.

    Now ask yourself how many people you know use that lingo every day? No matter where I’ve been in this world, whether Rio, Cairo, Malta or Denpensar, it’s 0%. That is the very definition of a cult. These people live in an insulated fucking diving bell.

  138. (Sighs) Clamps, again? Hasn’t he figured out that he defeats his own arguments by showing up wherever one may find Shadowdancer?
    Meanwhile, as to accusations regarding Vox Day and his friend, it’s a little like Hermann Goering complaining about Hamburg and Dresden.

  139. davidelang

    “open and democratic” isn’t referring to how the slate that Brad posted was formed. It refers to the SP3 campaign being carried out in the open and nominating democratically. There was no back-room dealing for who would vote for what in exchange for something. No vote buying occurred.
    ….
    When we finally see the nomination numbers, Chaos Horizons will do their analysis on them and show that the SP folks did not vote as a monolithic block, and you will ignore this and keep claiming that we did.

    Fair enough if that’s what your impression, I’m going by Brad’s statement earlier that “…the shake-up was conducted 100% in the open, democratically, using a democratic process” and how this compares with Larry’s post that “here is what the Evil League of Evil authors came up with in discussion”., and it was “put together by the ELoE being all strategic like

    *THAT’S* something that (unsurprisingly!) I’ve heard of, because it fits in well with the narrative in my usual stomping grounds that SP3 is just Brad and his friends kicking over the tables. As I said in my earlier post, I’m here trying to get a different perspective, and I’m doing it in good faith (poorly no doubt, but in good faith). It’s really hard for me to search or get details that I don’t usually frequent, like Brad’s FB, or MGC, or Baens Bar, which near as I can figure is where a lot of discussions have taken place.

    I can’t force anyone to answer, and at the end of the day, I’m just here, trying to get a more complete picture of this kerfuffle. It’s a different environment, so I behave somewhat differently, and I would hope that I don’t offend- unreasonably or overly anyway.

    Regarding your last paragraph, I agree with you – I think very few people voted straight line SP3. I’ve put my thoughts here in the last comment thread, but basically I agree that SP3 probably didn’t have the adherence level of RP. I am looking forward to seeing the full nomination numbers as well.

  140. No, you don’t offend, Snowcrash. It takes time to measure white privilege, white racism, the patriarchy, misogyny and the heterosexual matrix. We’ll get back to you as soon as we’re finished.

    Meanwhile, why don’t you join Weimer, Ann and Erin and crowdsource what color the sky is, because side effects.

  141. You really are physically incapable of helping yourself, aren’t you Clamps?

    Guess what? It doesn’t matter what Vox did or didn’t do. The simple fact that you are here posting on Brad’s page after being banned so you can harass Shadowdancer is all the proof we need.

    That we have tons besides this is just icing for the cake.

    Protesting your innocence by doing what you’re accused of *more* only makes you look even more pathetic.

    Seriously, you’ve reached the level of protesting your innocence of a breaking and entering by breaking and entering to shout at people that you didn’t do any such thing.

    And the people you’re shouting at saw you do the earlier one.

    Get professional help. Or get bent. Either way, piss off pinche pendejo.

  142. Don’t worry, I’ll be plugging this ruthlessly come August. You’re not just supporting me, but other members of my writing group as well. 🙂

  143. “the Chevalier de Graz says:

    June 3, 2015 at 11:23 pm

    It’s not like she believed him anyway. Vox desperately wants to be manipulative but he sucks at it.”

    Hmm. More projection I see. It’s almost like Clamps is a decade long parody project of a stereotypical misogynist manipulator. In the end maybe he will compile a book of all his quotes and the subsequent smack downs?

  144. @ s1al: “I love when people come to Brad’s blog and act like they’re so reasonable and polite… But then go back to other blogs and rip on him incessantly. And then complain when he doesn’t engage them at their leisure.”

    This times 10.

    Snowcrash: looking at you. Have you captured enough material to go back and shit post at F770?

  145. Hey, Clamps. You obviously skim until offended, because you missed the exchange up-thread where I said that if this ever got to a real war, Vox would end up in jail for war crimes, right alongside a good chunk of the anti-Puppies. I’d defend Stalin himself against the charge that East Prussia justified Barbarossa, while condemning him for the Holodomor.
    Of course, since this is all based on what people have said and done online, so would you.

  146. Note which side has literally scores of people who openly admit to rather serious mental health issues with an anti-social bent.

    As if you needed that confirmation, they react (complete with trigger warnings) to a scene in Game of Thrones, an ad with a bikini, and how the Black Widow is depicted in a film as if it is hate speech.

    They claim the handful of SF magazines 1900-50 acted like an informal Jim Crow for non-whites and women though there was no sign of anything like the culture-wide racially and sexually insulting and supremacist rhetoric (including open support for racially segregated rooms and reviews) SJWs themselves deploy every single day. Since that is all a sham, the call for diversity to counteract a non-event itself is a sham meant to disguise sex and race-hatred.

    This is lapped up like kool-aid by our middle-class SJWs eager to make SFF and the world a better place. The problem there is it was never broken. Now it is. Neil Gaiman is himself racially insulted and put to the question the same way his buddy Jonathan Ross was and bends the knee and takes selfies with his inquisitors. His 2 million Twitter followers could’ve been put to better use. Instead Gaiman does a Scalzi and lends his support, and the last WisCon celebrates by acting like what can only be described as a white hate-fest. Alexandra Erin, a man unsurprisingly pretending to be a women, is WisCon to his core and Tweets with the most viciously anti-white voices from the margins of SFF. He dashes in here to count coup and then triumphantly dashes back to write satire damning to himself because… unawareness.

    These are not people you can take seriously. Even the most sane of them have turned SF literature into shallow novelizations of Jonny Quest. Others write stories dressed up in awful over-literate writer’s workshop prose where Jonny and Hadji switch sides (if not sexes) and declare themselves “edgy.”

    While doing that, SJWs claim to be the literary descendants of Roger Zelazny and Alfred Bester at the same time they reject those writers as privileged cis-whites. It just depends on what SJWs are lying about at the time.

    To say SJWs subscribe to an ideology of pathological falsehoods who can’t be reached by any form of logic ever known to mankind is accurate. There’s not even a strike zone in this Mudville, so Casey can’t even strike out; or do anything really. It all depends on who’s lying about what at the time.

    One of the funniest parts of this is SJWs celebrate the very SF they have turned their backs on: The Three Body Problem. It’s a good novel, but by SJW definitions is nothing more than a shallow act of cultural appropriation of mid-century American SF which might’ve been considered daring at that time. It’s ’60s Norwegian blues music with some Tron thrown in. Does it pass the lesbian Bechdel Test? Who the fuck cares? Diversity.

    http://www.vulture.com/2015/04/bechdel-test-creator-surprised-by-its-longevity.html

  147. In fairness to our resident troll, his work appears to be a reasonably well-made piece, but there’s not much more to recommend it than that.
    (Shrugs) Anyway, it’s immaterial. Two different styles, in two different mediums, and he wants us to call one or the other better?

  148. In fairness to our resident troll, his work appears to be a reasonably well-made piece, but there’s not much more to recommend it than that.
    (Shrugs) Anyway, it’s immaterial. Two different styles, in two different mediums, and he wants us to call one or the other better?

    The fact that he’d compound what could already be criminal violations of cybersecurity laws to attempt to argue for his artistic ‘talent’ is either hilarious or sad.

    I also love his Archer postings as if posting those actually helps his arguments or makes him look sophisticated.

  149. Classic! Clampsy is on a roll today.
    Compared to what? R2-Double-D2 and her fucked up hands?

    LOL! literally. You are going to criticize hands? Have you looked at the hands on your drawing? Her whole left arm is particularly bad. Since you have baited me into it, the nose and mouth need some serious help as well.

  150. I saw no reason to comment on hers, mostly because she didn’t demand comparison. I also didn’t know what she used to make the picture.
    Also, it’s not like I’d use either picture for aid in taking an anatomy exam.

  151. “Her whole left arm is particularly bad. Since you have baited me into it, the nose and mouth need some serious help as well.”

    Correction the left arm from the viewers perspective.

  152. Of course we have reason to complain that you’ve opened the tent flaps inefficiently. We’d have nothing to complain about if you had run a competent campaign to increase Hugo awareness in the ranks of general SF/F fandom. What would we be complaining about?

    Extrapolating from the success rate of SP2, it seemed reasonable to guess SP3 would put one or two—maybe three—nominees on the ballot in any category. (Which, by the way, would have gotten us the same furious denunciations we got last year.) Except at the blogs already associated with the “Evil League of Evil”, there was just about no interest in any get-out-the-nomination campaigns, so the best bet for broadening the Hugo ballot seemed to the same sort of campaign as SP2, only with a more politically-diverse list.

    Oops.

    Next year we can try a different tactic. My personal favorite is the “Let a Thousand Puppies Bloom”, but we’ll see what Kate comes up with.

  153. 101 DangWrongFans, and their attempts to avoid being turned into a coat (or a shield?) by Cruella DeTor.

  154. Which, by the way, would have gotten us the same furious denunciations we got last year.

    This shouldn’t be thrown down the memory hole, either. The line that “Oh, we’re like totally open to other people’s nominations, we’re just angry because SLATE!!!! and LOCKSTEP!!!11!!!” is complete nonsense in light of the comprehensive loss-of-composure event of last year.

    Not everyone’s forgotten, but to read File770 comments and some people’s blogs, you’d think it had never happened.

  155. Lisbet Wilson wrote in response to Brad’s comment that “the market value of the Hugo (as an accolade) is highly suspect”, saying:

    But I’m beginning to suspect that some Sad Puppy authors have more mercenary motives. For them awards are not about honoring achievement or excellence. It’s about dollars and cents. It’s not about recognition of hard work, of risks taken. It’s solely about what the award will do for their careers.

    Which misses the point. An award for Best Story ought to signal “This is Good Stuff”; and if it does, then an up-tick in sales ought to follow, consumers of books being on the perpetual look-out for Good Stuff.

    When Brad et al. point out that the Hugos do not lead to increased sales, they are not saying “they deserve awards because they sold x number of books and made x dollars.” Quite the reverse: They’re saying, “If the Hugos & Nebulas recognized Good Stuff, increased sales would follow awards; to the extent that such sales do not materialize there is evidence that the genre’s most prestigious awards are not recognizing Good Stuff.”

  156. Anti-Puppies: “Larry just wants a Hugo!”

    Larry: “I decline my nomination.”

    Anti-Puppies: “You see? He still wants a Hugo!”

  157. “… you’d think it had never happened” is the key phrase.

    I can tell from the remarks of those people they aren’t really in touch with what’s been going on these last three years. Eric Flint was a perfect example of that. Somehow Grant and Lincoln became on a par with Ann Leckie’s “white straight cis guys.”

    I don’t blame anyone for that. It’s a bunch of nonsense of connect-the-dots that’s so obtuse it’s difficult to grasp at. What I do blame these folks for is speaking with so much opinionated authority about a thing they don’t know anything about. “I don’t know” isn’t a phrase in their vocabulary. They do know. They know everything. They know so much even quotes don’t move them. Probably nothing would.

    In a sense if you don’t know about the hate-fest at the just finished WisCon, then it never happened. The problem is it did happen and the most influential people in core SFF are pushing that hateful ideology into every corner of SFF they can.

    Were I a writer I’d ignore this entire crowd as if they didn’t happen for the simple reason they’re a bunch of fucking idiots. There’s just no other way to describe people so incredibly lacking in even the least degree of civilized sophistication or comprehension. It’s like talking to retarded people. They have no tools of self-criticism whatsoever and so of course, without principle – a thing as old as civilization – there is no “compared to what?” In real terms that means just existing can make you a racist and being a flat out racist can be “social justice.”

    Were I a writer I’d do the Peter Hamilton thing. He has a blog with no politics and his Twitter feed is barely alive. If you don’t Tweet or get on the radar of these insane feminists they can’t get to you. Hamilton has a good career and he is a better writer than any SJW that exists. I don’t mean the casual drive-by’s like GRRM but these intersectional fucks always bitching about whites and diversity.

    Peter Hamilton’s not stupid. I don’t know but he probably looked at a core genre which would actually honor someone like N.K. Jemisin or K. Tempest Bradford let alone talk to them as too stupid to endure. Hamilton has a total of 190 Tweets compared SFF panelist Mikki Kendall, friend to all whites, who has a staggering 176,000 Tweets. She doesn’t write but she bitches about whites a lot so onto convention panels she goes. Meanwhile, this community ignores one of the greatest SF authors of his generation.

    It’s all about the rocket ships and black holes.

  158. @Joel: Ah, but therein lies the rub. For such as the anti-Puppies (subtracting the ones who’ve actually been able to make a living while writing) sales and good writing are inversely correlated.
    It’s a mentality I understand–I’m still steamed over the fact that
    Avatar made hundreds of millions dollars while Serenity barely broke even, if that–but it’s straight-up snobbery.

  159. I will render my judgment of quality on both works of art after a full analysis:

    First my assumptions:
    The first piece of art, I am assuming, is done in a digital medium in the anime/manga style and I will analyse it based on those assumptions.

    The second piece of art, I am assuming, is done in watercolor and pen in a loose ‘sketchy’ style, but is not intending to cross into true impressionism or cubism and will analyse it based on those assumptions.

    In both cases if a different style was intended then the artist needs to re-visit the work.

    First over all:
    Artwork one: This piece of art has successfully achieved it’s style. There are a few vagaries but they are within the range of the style in which they appear to be set.

    Artwork two: This piece mostly achieves it’s style. There are several pieces that seem to be shading towards cubism, but they seem accidental rather than deliberate presentation choices.

    Line work:
    Artwork one: The lines here are thin and unobtrusive and serve well to define the shape without drawing attention to themselves.

    Artwork two: Many of the lines are too sketchy even for the style, particularly around the hand and sleeve to the viewer’s left. The hair also is an area where the line work needs to be cleaned up to clarify the flow of the piece.

    Shading:
    Artwork one: The highlights and shadows are where they belong. The transitions are smooth and appropriate to the style.

    Artwork two: The shading is blotchy. The hair looks intentionally mottled so I have disregarded that. Again, the left arm to the viewer’s left has a streak of red above the wrist. The front finger of that hand and the elbow of the other arm have similar issues. The shadows under the bust and neck are in the right place and mostly do what they’re supposed to do, though I think the ones under the bust-line could use a little more clarity in a sketchy style. There should be some shading on the jacket in watercolor as well as in ink.

    Colors:
    Artwork one: The colors are well chosen and complement one another well. Things that need to be emphasized are, those that don’t aren’t. There are a few spots I think might be programatically added patterns, but that’s speculation (and stylistically appropriate.)

    Artwork two: The hair color seems mottled deliberately but the chosen colors do not blend well and wind up looking muddy. The muddy does not looks ‘wrong’ in that it does not seem to be intended to make it look like she has mud-colored hair, rather that the paint bled together and the colors should have been more pure. By and large the skin is skin colored, the clothing is colored in ways that make sense.

    Clothing
    Artwork one: Very anime. Well executed. I’m curious if the lace was hand done or a pre-made template. I suspect the former but wondered enough I thought I’d mention it. I expected more ‘curve’ in the lace but that may be unrealistic on my part. Over all, I am envious. I wish I could do clothes HALF that well.

    Artwork two: The dress and jacket are recognizable, and the jacket does give the feel of going ‘over’ the dress, at least on the viewer’s left. The bottom of the jacket on the viewer’s right needs more definition, especially where it is overlapping the dress itself. They’re bleeding into each other and that muddies your art. Trying to shade the jacket with the pen was not your best choice, it obscures, rather than defining the garment. The medallion on the dress seems to just be floating. If it’s supposed to be attached to the darker pink point on the collar it needs to be adjusted. If it’s there for some other reason, it needs to be clarified. By and large the clothing has a very ‘flat’ feel like the entire drawing.

    Anatomy:
    Artwork one: The arm on the viewer’s left has a few issues, mostly with the shoulder. It seems more pointed than it should be. Other than that (and it took me several ‘views’ of the image to actually spot that) the anatomy is spot on. I love the face and eyes. The arm on the viewer’s right is not in an easy position to portray. Well done.

    Artwork two: Here’s one of the major issues: The anatomy is painfully off in several areas. The Hand on the viewer’s right is very off. The thumb appears to be nearly severed from the hand. The bones of the fingers are improperly proportioned. The hand to the viewer’s right is a little better, but not greatly so. The eyes are off center and their shape and size don’t really mesh with the rest of the face. The upper and lower parts of the nose do not match and the mouth looks like you were attempting one shape on the viewer’s left and another on the viewer’s right. The features are very mismatched within themselves. The collar bones are oddly positioned, but only minorly so, that is the most minor of the anatomical issues. Also… where are her legs given what her skirt is doing? Either the skirt needs to ‘catch’ on the leg to the veiwer’s left then ‘fade’ (as is done with the blowing skirt to the viewer’s right), or there needs to be leg shown. If the legs move off with the skirt, then you have an even bigger anatomy issue.

    Pose:
    Artwork one: A dynamic pose that draws the viewer into the picture. As with the anatomy I had to look more than once to find anything even just ‘off’. The wrist with the clipboard seems a little off though I can’t tell if it’s angle or something else. It’s a very minor thing, especially with how dynamic the rest of the drawing is. The eyes are drawn to her face and expression which are excellent!

    Artwork two: The pose here is very flat. There is no sense of motion, nor really any sense of true pose. The character may as well be a store mannequin. Even with one hand up the straight ahead face and blank expression seem to be default rather than intentional. I covered the anatomy of that face above. I think a good reference photo could have helped this immensely.

    Overall Impressions/success of the image:
    Artwork one: This is a dynamic and interesting piece of artwork. Definitely something I’d hang on my wall.

    Artwork two: It’s a good start. It’s a solid concept and an interesting character but the execution is still very rough. It is over all very flat. It lacks even the illusion of 3 dimensionality and doesn’t get to the ‘deliberately flat styles’. If something other than a rough style was intended, then there’s even more work that needs to be done. Not something I’d really want to have hanging on my wall.

  160. On the non-SF front, there’s humor to be had with watching the SJWs go after Anne Rice for the unforgivable crime of getting ‘Bully Reviews’ removed from Amazon. I have a feeling that it’s going to end up in much the same way as a drunk person trying to lick a running bandsaw.

    Anne may write vampires, but she knows how to wield a stake.

  161. “Mikki Kendall ‏@Karnythia 23m23 minutes ago I want folks to imagine a week with no fast food, no retail, no caregivers (childcare, orderlies, etc), no ‘unskilled labor’ at all.”

    Imagine an America when teenagers taught Latin did those jobs instead of 35 yr. olds raised in a country where they can’t pass basic English in the college they don’t go to.

    SFF has it’s own version: they don’t actually write anything but they seem to have time to whine about patriarchy in SFF all day on Twitter and then get put on SF writing panels.

    I’d still like to know what the non-SFWA member and then unpublished Sunil (no white man reviews) Patel was doing on a Nebula Awards Weekend panel last year. I mean… I know why: he bitches about white people on Twitter a lot. But I’d like to have someone in the SFWA explain that one to me.

  162. @60guilders – “It’s a mentality I understand–I’m still steamed over the fact that Avatar made hundreds of millions dollars while Serenity barely broke even, if that–but it’s straight-up snobbery.”

    This is something I also noted a while ago with regards to a general attitude among the common commentators at F770. Avatar was a ground-breaking piece of work with regards to 3D work, camera capture, etc. Serenity had a better story and characters, but it was a conclusion to a TV series that required significant background to really grok. They’re two very different works, and one had mass appeal while the other was rather esoteric.

    But frame this in the context of the Hugos and suddenly anyone who prefers the blockbuster work to the esoteric one has poor taste (at best). It’s especially hilarious because their complaints/insults are ALWAYS about style – possibly the most subjective aspect of writing.

  163. Well, to borrow a term from elsewhere, I think Clamps just got rekd. Nicely done wyrdbard.

  164. My mom & I (Firefly flans both) watched Serenity with a cousin who’d never heard of the show before he walked into the theater with us. I’m sure there were character details he missed because of this, but he was able to enjoy the movie—and be angry at Wash’s death—almost as much as we were. (Though the death of Mr Universe affected him more than it did us. Odd, now that I think of it: Joss created as aspect of the movie which long-term Browncoats could appreciate less than could newcomers.)

  165. But frame this in the context of the Hugos and suddenly anyone who prefers the blockbuster work to the esoteric one has poor taste (at best). It’s especially hilarious because their complaints/insults are ALWAYS about style – possibly the most subjective aspect of writing.

    Just looking at the dramatic presentation awards, the number of esoteric nominees (much less winners) is incredibly low. So for movies, the masses have the right style, but for literature, they don’t?

    When Brad et al. point out that the Hugos do not lead to increased sales, they are not saying “they deserve awards because they sold x number of books and made x dollars.” Quite the reverse: They’re saying, “If the Hugos & Nebulas recognized Good Stuff, increased sales would follow awards; to the extent that such sales do not materialize there is evidence that the genre’s most prestigious awards are not recognizing Good Stuff.”

    What matters is that there must be some reason for the disconnect between what the awards voters think is the best and what readers spend their money to buy. It could be a difference in what is considered ‘good’, which is problematic in that what the awards consider ‘good’ becomes meaningless for anyone with tastes significantly different from the awards voters.

    There is another alternative that is equally problematic for the future of Science Fiction: the Hugo and Nebula awards are recognizing Good Stuff, but publishers are unwilling / unable to publicize the Good Stuff to get people to buy the books. People would buy the books if they knew about them; because they don’t they’re buying the authors they recognize. This suggests malfeasance on the part of the traditional publishers to both their authors and their investors.

  166. “The world is changing. It no longer belongs to angry white boys sitting around in their white-wall buzz cuts eating white bread and watching Leave It To Beaver. (I’m not sure it ever did, but they certainly thought so.)” – acclaimed gay feminist author of the Nebula nominated SFF-less but appropriately gay Hildo, Nicolo Griffitho

    http://nicolagriffith.com/2015/05/26/books-about-women-tend-not-to-win-awards/comment-page-1/#comments

    Read the comments. What do you think they vote for awards? Literature? hahahah

    Next up: Nicolo will use her searching analysis to pie-chart military graveyards and ask “Why?”

  167. ratseal

    @ s1al: “I love when people come to Brad’s blog and act like they’re so reasonable and polite… But then go back to other blogs and rip on him incessantly. And then complain when he doesn’t engage them at their leisure.”

    This times 10.

    Snowcrash: looking at you. Have you captured enough material to go back and shit post at F770?

    I think perhaps you’re both conflating me with someone else, as regards to ripping on him incessantly or complaining on his engagement or lack thereof.

    I’m not hiding the fact that I’m opposed to the concept of slates in general, and I realise that puts me in disagreement with a vast majority of people in this particular community. That probably makes me tread more carefully than I do elsewhere.

    Like I said, I can’t force anyone to answer, and at the end of the day, I’m just here, trying to get a more complete picture of this kerfuffle.

  168. At least her character has palms instead of a stub behind extra-long fingers.

  169. Shadowdancer’s emphasis on ass, breasts, and loins makes it creepy.

    The godawful color schemes don’t help either.

    Have some more eye candy to make up for it.

  170. Chevalier, if that’s your real name, I just duplicated the position of her left hand without any strain at all. I couldn’t say why anyone would hold a pen that way, but it’s quite possible to do so. Perhaps she’s about to spin the pen around her fingers?

  171. Upper picture: an elf girl who’s a junior officer in a modern military outfit. Must be an interesting story there.

    Lower picture: a junkie waiting for her next fix.

    I’d much rather look at the elf girl, and I suspect most people would agree with me.

  172. So… Clamps keeps digging. Wonder when a new volcano will form in Massachusetts?

  173. “So… Clamps keeps digging. Wonder when a new volcano will form in Massachusetts?”
    Next time he can’t get the chair to the toilet fast enough.

  174. Michael Brazier-
    Ditto; not difficult, even with my joint pain. No insult to the Vice President, but it appears that some people have picked up his abuse of the word “literally” to mean “not actually.”

  175. And in case anyone thinks that Marston Wiki might be new:
    “This page was last modified on 17 February 2008, at 20:14.” 😀

  176. Apparently the pattern of him 1) stalking women, 2) being freaky, 3) demanding ever more “evidence” and then flipping out when it’s offered is pretty dang long standing.

  177. Let’s see… Shadow’s abilities look to be about as good as current Howard Tayler. Clamps is worse than early Howard Tayler… and Howard hasn’t been stalking people for years. Too busy making an awesome webcomic.

  178. Nope, I can do it, complete with the forearm turned the way she had it, with minimal effort, and I have messed up joints and a smaller-than-normal range of motion.

  179. “May Tree on June 4, 2015 at 4:22 pm said:
    Oh and while I’m blithering about Ancillary Justice (which, if I haven’t said clearly, I think is fantastic), people asking about what a ‘conservative’ is and why some of them have a hate-on for this seriously amazing book….

    “I bring it up because I was reading AJ with half an eye toward trying to figure out why the Puppies hate on it so much, and aside from the I-can’t-tell-who’s-what-gender distress, it occurred to me that the horrifying Radch Empire is founded on the three “moral foundations” that Haidt attributes to conservatives that progressives generally don’t value nearly as strongly: Authority, Loyalty, and Purity.”

    We have said over and over and over again until we are hoarse we don’t hate this book. The actual plot has nothing to do with it. AJ is a signifier. It’s like hearing “gracias” and knowing you’re hearing Spanish spoken. It’s a clue, a brick in the wall as to the origins of SJW ideology. When I hear “performative”… Bingo! “Gender blindness” Bingo!

    It’s amazing watching the folks at Glyer’s talk about Ancillary Justice. Not a single one of them has a clue where it came from. That’s a pretty big insight into their anti-puppy stance. Not only that, they have no idea why we use it as an example. They think we dislike it rather than point to it and say “Bingo, this is why this was pushed.”

    Aside from AJ’s specific issues, which are ironically from Judith Butler’s gender version of post-structuralist gibberish “performative” (we have willed ourselves into heterosexuality by repeatedly telling ourselves we are), many people feel the introduction of poststructuralism destroyed academic literary criticism. Any book can be anything. Doesn’t matter what the author says. Sometimes they’re even told to shut up.

    Leckie’s slumming is straight out of French Queer Theory that says if we stop seeing gender it will largely cease to exist because it’s not derived from nature. Cue the SJW diversity gender-fluid equality movement onstage. You don’t have to be a genius to figure out why gay radical feminists would create such an ideology to explain reality.

    Here is your poststructuralism these people are steeped in:

    “This does not mean that poststructuralism, defined as a politics of the left, cannot fight for causes. It means that the reason for fighting for those causes has to be because they are right at a particular time and given a particular situation, rather than because the causes are cases of a wider absolute and eternal good. The struggle is for these rights now and not for universal and eternal rights. This also means that the poststructuralist political struggle cannot appeal to absolutes and must seek to undermine them as they begin to appear, even in a politics that poststructuralists favour. So, as a politics of the left, poststructuralism cannot depend on certainty and unchangeable convictions.” – James Williams

    Got that? No principles. A given identity at any given time defines morality. Sound familiar? That’s why these people are so convinced they cannot be racists. The problem is this undermines law, fair play, equal protection and even precedents which establish human rights the Left favors. Anything can be anything. There is literally no set definition for hate speech with these people, which is why they refuse to discuss it. You have your anything, I have my anything and we fight. There are no rules. There is only what you can get away with and there is no common sense.

    “… we regularly punish those who fail to do their gender right… the various acts of gender create the idea of gender, and without those acts, there would be no gender at all… Consider that a sedimentation of gender norms produces the peculiar phenomenon of a ‘natural sex’ or a ‘real woman’ or any number of prevalent and compelling social fictions… the action of gender requires a performance that is repeated…. gender is an identity tenuously constituted in time, instituted in an exterior space through a stylized repetition of acts.” – Judith Butler

    If you don’t see gender, you can’t repeat the mantra. That’s what these goofs think. That’s why Liz Bourke and Alex MacFarlane at Tor pushed AJ. Heterosexuality is fake and if you concentrate and ignore it, it’ll just go away; no more binary – no more families either, at least not as we understand them. The difference is Judith Butler is not hateful. But the people using her critiques are nutty and hateful supremacists who regularly write stuff you’ll also find familiar if you’ve been following all this:

    “When did I ever say I support equality?
    Feminism is about anything as half assed as ‘equality.’ Equality for whom? With whom? Who is to be made equal with whom, and at what cost? With white men, the most well off group in our world? But white men only have it so good because they’ve exploited and brutalised the entire world for centuries. Their benefits have come to them at the cost of every one else. God forbid anyone else be equal to them, can you imagine? We need less of that, not more.
    Can’t be done under capitalist patriarchy.
    Feminism is a radical politics that tears down the whole system with all its inherent structural inequalities and beginning anew. It’s revolution. It’s not EQUALITY.

    “I’ve noticed that cis men who insist on being called “feminists” rather than “feminist allies” put their own feelings and need for legitimacy/validation above the actual goals and priorities of feminism.” – from a “feminist blog that strives toward intersectionality and inclusiveness of all people who experience systemic gender oppression.”

    “Retweeted by Natalie Luhrs Fran Wilde @fran_wilde · 17h If you think reframing an eloquent thing a woman said but selectively editing then posting it is ok, you are neither a friend NOR an ally.” – Sunil Patel getting lit up by his handlers for daring to Storify the sacred words of a woman. He abjectly apologized for being a bad “ally.”

    This is a fuck of a movement that will wreck anything it touches.

    “Feminist Frequency @femfreq (Anita Sarkeesian) · Oct 25 Since so many seem confused. Masculinity ≠ male. Masculinity is a socially constructed and performed gender identity…”

    Anybody who thinks these are equal rights feminists are out of their gourd, although they certainly do lie about that when they talk to the general public as opposed to each other. That’s why they don’t like being quoted, but they can’t take their Twitter feeds private and get the same effect.

  180. “Do you believe that women should have equal rights to men? Great! Then you are a feminist.” – Anita Sarkeesian on Colbert

    “We don’t want equality within these oppressive systems.” – Anita Sarkeesian at a feminist symposium

  181. @James May

    “I’d still like to know what the non-SFWA member and then unpublished Sunil (no white man reviews) Patel was doing on a Nebula Awards Weekend panel last year. I mean… I know why: he bitches about white people on Twitter a lot. But I’d like to have someone in the SFWA explain that one to me.”

    I’m not a SFWA member, but I’m at SFWA right now, and they’ll happily take non-members’ money, so my guess would be that you don’t have to be a member to be on a panel, either. (Incidentally, Fred Saberhagen’s widow is a lovely woman.)

  182. “While doing that, SJWs claim to be the literary descendants of Roger Zelazny”

    I certainly wouldn’t claim to emulate Zelazny, nor would I allow children around anyone who claimed to do so.

  183. @Draven, Wyrdbard, Dave, Foxfier, Patrick, Michael – Thanks guys! (If I missed anyone, not intentional, I just woke up.)

    Wyrdbard – that was an awesome comparison, wow. The lace on the stocking is a brush. The piece, Digital Secretary Sophie is a computer avatar for one of my housemate Aff’s computers, which he was entering in a ROG overclocking contest of some kind. He paid me roughly the equivalent of a hundred dollars in takeout lunches and dinners to rush it. Everything except the brushes and lineart techniques there were new ground for me, and the style I was aiming for is not one I do normally. Later on, he gave me an extra fifty dollars – to buy the discount coupon he says I won off me. I didn’t think there was any prizes for the artwork for an overclocking contest, and Aff said well, here you go.

    Regarding the problems with Digital Secretary Sophie; re: the flaws about her shoulder and the hand / arm holding the worksheet data pad, I noticed those only afterward; but the person who commissioned it said he felt they were minor and barely noticeable. To do the hand with the worksheet, I held a transparent clipboard in my hand.

    Yama got what he asked for – a point by point comparison of my art versus his, an objective one too. Inevitably, when the response toward his art was negative, he gets upset, and drags up older pieces of my art, or experimental attempts, or what I call ‘lazy sketches’. I’m sure he’ll drag up the very first attempt I did at a sunset landscape but he won’t bring up better ones. Or he’ll bring up pieces where I deliberately did not care about how well done the anatomy was, because I was practicing things like wet hair, or drawing a beret and the metal things on the shoulder (the elf picture) – and I’ll post them, mistakes and all, to show my progress. Hell, I’ll say outright the sunset landscape sketch was an attempt at speedpainting and the result was pretty bad, but I really liked the little airship I threw in so I posted it. Yama regularly bags on that picture as if it were the summa totalis of my artwork. There are pieces where the proportions are very very bad, but I liked something about it so up it goes. I don’t have any formal training, I never went to art school or classes outside of high school. It’s all learning as I go for me, so every piece, I try to improve slightly, bit by bit, learn something new. I don’t always succeed, but that’s okay. Try again next time.

    I don’t claim to be the best. Hell, I’m still learning. It’s why I don’t regularly take commission requests – I don’t think I’m good enough, and there are much better artists on Deviantart who I feel deliver more bang for your buck. But because someone said they thought my art was better, because there are some people who are willing to pay me to do a piece for them anyway, Yama behaves as though I think I’m the master of all that is art. He took a very bad, exceedingly rushed cover I did and put it on Lousy Book Covers, trying to get people to say bad things about it, under one of his known pseudonyms, Will de/le Fey. That’s what he’s trying to do now. Try yet again, to get people to say my stuff is worse than his. And he takes my crappiest art and puts it up against the best of his, demanding people judge. Then when people like my work better, he gets even more angry, and calls the people who say it’s better idiots or that they have no taste, and more.

    Writing though, I will openly say I think the Eye of Argon is much better than Yama’s drek. At least there’s a recognizable story there, sentence structure, paragraphs. The folks who commented at Jordan179’s blog back then had a look at his work because Yama dragged out my old, old fanfiction, and dared them to compare which was better – mine, or his writing. At one point, we saw that he was lifting livejournal discussions wholesale – discussions usually, about Israel – and shoving them as dialogue into his stories. Objective criticism and telling him where he should work to improve? He throws MASSIVE TANTRUMS. Mark Twain himself could do the critique and Yama would dismiss the advice.

  184. @bearcat, what do you mean by that statement about Zelazny? I get what you’re implying, but I hope you’re mistaken!

  185. Oh, the Gamingforce wiki . . . 😀

    “Easily the most back-biting and cowardly fuck ever to disgrace the boards.”

    “No matter what he tries to tell you through lyrics and quotations from literature, one can easily extrapolate that there is not a single original thought emanating from this frail, hollow shell of a human being.”

    “Once said members grew tired of vapid and out-of-context text passages in their journal comments, they would quickly lost interest (in a matter of minutes in some cases) and either stopped talking to him or banned him from their journals.”

    Yeah, that’s our Yama!

  186. Chris Gerrib said:

    As of today, there are no (zero, none, nada, nyet) proposals to eliminate anybody’s voting rights. None. The proposals on the floor are merely designed to prevent a slate from locking up the entire ballot.

    And who will get to decide which votes are voting “slates” and which aren’t? I suspect that the ones voting the Tor slates will be passed through; the ones voting other slates discounted.

    But that’s okay, because that will simply lead to the Hugos themselves being increasingly discounted. As Vox pointed out to you all, but you’re so dumb that you’re rushing into his trap cheering lustily.

  187. James May said:

    We are aware of how quickly you turned on “ally” GRRM. Crime? Oops! He reverted to a straight white male and forgot to only torture men in his books.

    And for all his opportunism, GRRM is still a giant compared to the others in the Tor clique. That’s why they hate him, really — they know he’s by far greater than them.

  188. @Jordan S. Bassior

    My understanding of the various proposals is that people will be limited from voting for every slot in a category. They do this in different ways, but the gist is that you CAN’T organize an effort to vote for a FULL slate under any of the proposals. I’m not a fan of any of the proposals (and will vote against all of them if I make it to the meeting), mainly because I don’t think ANY award should have rules that are this bizarre.

  189. Caveat – the link Joel gave is me doing fast, lazily drawn comics where the main character is my housemate, relating the dumb things customers have said / done, horrible stuff happening while gaming, or hilarious little things happening RL. I have no art consistency there.

  190. Shadowdancer, I have lots of formal training, including a BA in Film and some time at a traditional art school… and can barely draw people.

    I read some of Yama’s drek. I have notes scribbled in notebooks from high school that are better than him.

  191. Okay… I went over there to look, with my sleep deprived yet uncaffinated brain, and see if this supposed improvement is easier to read than the current rules.

    Short answer: nope. Current rules as per the Hugo ballot printout i have here are easier to read and understand, even for someone like me who has never voted in the Hugos before.


    FAQ’s:
    1. Can you explain the system in plain language?

    The important thing to remember is that nothing changes in how you nominate. If you think a work is Hugo-worthy, then nominate it. That’s all. There’s no need to rank your choices at the nomination stage, and there’s no reason not to nominate something you think even might be Hugo-worthy. All we are doing at this stage is throwing names into a hat. The final Hugo voting system, which actually chooses the winner, is unchanged. We could, in theory, simply put everyone’s nominations on the final ballot, but that would make for a very long ballot indeed. We therefore need to narrow the nomination list down. This system narrows down the list by eliminating the least popular works until only five (under current rules) finalists remain. Here are the basic steps to the elimination process:
    a. You have one nomination “point” for each category that will be divided equally among the works you choose to nominate in that category. So, if you nominate two works in a category, each will get half a point; if you nominate three works, each will get one-third of a point, and so on.
    b. All the points given to each work from all nomination ballots are added together. The two works that got the least number of points are eligible for elimination. One of these works is the least popular and will be eliminated. (We call this the Selection Phase.)
    c. To determine which of these two works is least popular, we compare the total number of nominations they each received (that is, the number of nomination ballots on which each work appears). The work that received the fewest total number of nominations is the least popular and now completely vanishes from the nomination process as though it never existed. (We call this the Elimination Phase.)
    d. We start over for the next round and repeat the process, however, if one of your works was eliminated, then you now have fewer works on your nomination ballot. This means that each work gets more total points, since you aren’t dividing your point among as many works. For example, if one of your five nominated works was eliminated, your remaining works now get one-fourth of a point each instead of one-fifth of a point. If four of your nominated works are eliminated, your remaining work now gets your full point.

    The answer to that should have been “No.”

    Instead the response answers a question that wasn’t asked: “How does your nomination proposal work? What changes?”

    Frankly, this looks like even MORE work calculating the results for the Hugo people, what with all the half-point, and points being divided into fractions of a point, versus the current ranking system, which is straightforward for the voter.

    I don’t actually know how the nomination process goes because I didn’t get to participate in that this time.

    4. How does this system eliminate slate or bloc voting?
    It doesn’t, exactly, nor should a work be automatically eliminated just because it appears on a slate. On the other hand, any slate which nominates a full set of five works will find that each of its nominations only count 1/5 as much. With “non-slate” nominating, some of your works will be slowly eliminated, so your remaining works get more and more of your support. Since slate works tend to live or die together, they tend to eliminate each other until, in general, only one slate work remains. With a large enough support behind the slate (five times as much), the slate may still sweep a category; however, if that many voters support the slate, they arguably deserve to win, and no fair and unbiased system of nomination will prevent that. The answer in that case is, simply, to increase the general pool of voters. Regardless, with SDV-LPE, slates will never receive a disproportionate share of the final ballot, as occurred in the 2015 Hugos.

    What is that I don’t even.

    Trying to read through the rest, it’s overly complicated. By dispersing the points into fractions, versus the rank system, more people are needed to nominate or vote for multiple works in multiple categories, or simply choose a single work per category; ‘this is the only thing I feel is worthy of a Hugo’, which results, I think, in a smaller pool of works for the voters to judge from, as opposed to more.

    The thing is ultimately, the people who will vote on these are the ones who are able to pay more money to actually physically attend, and pay the higher fees, versus the people just nominating, and the addition of people just voting.

  192. And by “female commenters” you mean “you” and you also mean that you are by far the most extremist.

    No, pretty much all the women who commented on my blog. Including the ones who mostly agreed with you at the beginning, because you often have reading (and logic) comprehension problems and assumed that anyone who didn’t hate me and every one of my opinions was EVIL!!! You of course hated the ones who disagreed with you more, such as Oronada, to name one who wasn’t Shadowdancer. I could go through my old blogs and make a list, but I’m working full-time these days and don’t really have the time to obsess about to whom you’ve been obnoxious.

    But you especially focused on Shadowdancer because her very existence offends you. She’s female and nonwhite, so she’s supposed to be an extreme leftist. But she’s more or less on the right. Which meant that she wouldn’t stay in the little pigeonhole you wanted to put her. Also, she’s cute and she totally despises you, which bothered you for other reasons. Because you don’t get that she’s a human being, not a set of randomly-rolled-up attributes with no connections, opinions, personality or history.

    And your hostility toward her particularly offends me these days, because she’s suffered terribly of late. And she’s my friend.

  193. My opinions regarding Vox Day and Markku Kopponen are by far more hostile.

    Okay, I’ll bite: who the hell is Markku Kopponen? And what no doubt virtuous and noble thing did he do to make you hate him?

  194. Shadowdancer:

    I posted over there that the answer to FAQ #1 is “no”, as you confirmed. I pointed out that how the votes are tallied may determine how I nominate, so do not presume that how I nominate will not change. I also suggested the the proposal was doomed to fail because it was far too complicated to explain.

    A kickstarter was, um, kickstarted to send to guy behind it to Sasquan. He’ll be there.

  195. Rory, your crappiest work is better than Yama’s best. When you get sloppy you may get an angle or a proportion wrong, but what you draw still looks mostly like a healthy human being displaying some comprehensible human emotion. Even your bad art tends to be beautiful, and your best is superb.

    Yama draws these hideously deformed and discolored things that if animated would probably give the viewers nightmares. He has this fondness for color schemes that look like feces that someone vomited upon. I shudder at the thought of the implications if “… it was a sketch drawn from LIFE!”

  196. Yama … I’m not Vox. Aff’s not Vox. Rory’s not Vox. We are not responsible for what Vox says or does not say. We are only responsible for what we say or do not say.

    And you are responsible for what you say and do not say.

    Vox could be the most vile and reprehensible person in the history of vile reprehensibility, and that wouldn’t excuse any of your rudeness and cruelty to Rory. Do you comprehend this?

  197. @Viktor – Yeah, the few get to decide how we’ll be allowed to nominate henceforth. It DOES affect how the nomination process works ultimately, and I foresee how this can still result in a slate versus slate war that they think they’re preventing from taking over.

    On one hand, this could result in more money for the organizing body. On the other, the proposal itself feels to me that I am unlikely to get my money’s worth in voting pool choice in the voter’s packet, per the likelihood of a much smaller nomination slate resulting.

    Shh. Don’t tell them how it’ll backfire. It’ll be funny.

    @Jordan thank you, especially for noting that Yama was lying about his behavior towards the women commenting on your blog.

  198. Shadowdancer:

    It would not prevent a slate vs slate war, however it would leave both slates less than fully satisfied. I have no problem with that result.

    If we wanted to preclude slates, then we would have changed the rules years ago. Ignorance was bliss, then.

  199. Yep, but it’s only now that the ‘wrong people’ are doing slates, oh no, the rules must be changed now! It’s not okay when they do it! No to slates! No to campaigns!

    But okay when the Right People do so. (Pinky swear, for reals)

    Yama here provides a convenient example of this double standard practiced – and I should note that he’s quite accepted over at File 770, where he posts as one of his known pseudonyms, Alauda because he doesn’t like Vox Day / any puppies

    Upthread, he complains that Vox Day ‘posted a link’ to his friend’s public youtube video, found through Yama’s favorites, ‘in an attempt to humiliate her.’ That’s evilbadmean because Vox Day did it, and for Yama, this Emma girl is a ‘Human Being worthy of defending.’ (I actually guess that he’s in love with her.)

    I’ve got recorded examples of Yama taking the worst of my art and posting it in places in attempts to get people to laugh at it and make fun of me. He does it to art other people likes, and takes my quotes, removes context, and misrepresents them to people in places like Fundies Say The Dumbest Things, so that people will say the quote is full of ‘internalized misogyny’ or ‘bigotry’, or racist, or homophobic, and the usual list of social justice buzzwords for immediate dismissal – ergo, humiliate me and vindicate what Yama constantly slanders me with.

    That’s not evilbadmean for Yama to do because he has already put me in the box of “Not A Human” and thus, anyone who associates with me should disavow me or be Dehumanized as well.

    This is pretty much what happens to anyone who ‘escapes the plantation.’ We’re fair game, because they accuse us of being bigots, being racist, misogynistic, islamophobic, homophobic, brainwashed by the patriarchy cis-whatever scum neonazi demonspawn. Like that EW article that very quickly got spread all over the world. Like how Brad here is a white hateyhater who is a racist despite being in an interracial marriage of twenty years.

    Like how Larry Correia was slandered by Damien Walter at the Guardian, how people contacted his wife, ‘concerned’ because they had heard the slander that ‘he is a wife beating misogynistic maniac’ and they, good citizens all, wanted to help her escape.

    That was during Sad Puppies 2.

    We’re all ‘old white conservative misogynistic heterosexual cismen’ to these liars, the ‘acceptable target for hatred demographic’ – which is what James May keeps quoting, to not allow you puppykickers muddy the waters with your oh-but-we-just-want-to-help narratives, and expose the hate behind the honeyed words.

  200. “Since slate works tend to live or die together”

    This is wildly misleading, largely because there is no ADMITTED history of “slates” existing prior to this year. Nor has anyone really claimed slate-voting existed before, as opposed to whisper campaigns. On what historical basis could one conclude slate-members in Hugo voting “tend to live or die together”, and how would this actually affect whisper campaigns?

    What will happen in the latter case is: no change. The problem at hand has been people voting in lock-step, both to support (or attack) various works. Their motivations are based less on the works in question and more on who is friends (or enemies) with whom, or which political ideologies are presumably promoted by the works.

    Right now there is a lock-step movement pushing for “No Award” to be voted in all categories, just to spike the Hugos altogether — under this system, such movements would be affected not at all.

    Instead, what this does is DIFFUSE the votes from any given group which does NOT vote in lock-step. If most (or everyone) from Group “A” votes for Novel “One” in Category “Alpha”, while everyone else naturally begins splitting votes amongst Novels “Two”, “Three”, “Four” and “Five”, it’s Novel “One” which will tend to come out on top with an undiluted voting bloc. A small but focused minority can indeed be the “20% which blocks 80%” using this system.

    Thus, it’s my view this policy will encourage slate voting, and of exactly the sort which Sad Puppies’ most ardent critics insist they’d rather spike the Hugos over than allow to stain their glory.

  201. Shadow– Is that second picture of yours he posted inspired by a particular anime or book? Because I would totally watch/read the source for it.

  202. @Chrismouse – no, that’s my online avatar from back in the days when I was playing in the forum RPG Megatokyo: The Clans. I met my husband Rhys there; we were in the same clan, The Church of Miho. That’s the Shadowdancer character; which is why my displayed username is “Shadowdancer Duskstar / Cutelildrow.” – Those have been my constant usernames since I went online back in 1996, back in the days of the Slayers fanfiction mailing lists.

    Damn. Thats nearly twenty years ago now.

  203. “A kickstarter was, um, kickstarted to send to guy behind it to Sasquan.”

    I hope Kickstarter was not actually used, as that would be a violation of its Terms of Service and the funds can be seized on that basis. From the Kickstarter Rules:

    * Projects must create something to share with others.

    * Projects can’t fundraise for charity, offer financial incentives, or involve prohibited items.

  204. Basically the Making Light proposal runs on the same idea which created last year’s nominees: you don’t need collusion in an ideological echo chamber. At least I think that’s the logic involved. One thing’s for sure, they wouldn’t be doing it unless they thought it benefitted their project to cure all mankind with anti-patriarchy literature.

    “Kameron Hurley ‏@KameronHurley Jan 6 There’s no voice more damaging than that of a middle-aged white male who’s well-off and denies your existence.”

    Maybe the Hugos would be happier if we denied their existence, like gender, and willed them out of existence using poststructuralist chanting.

    “I do believe in gender, I do believe in gender, I do believe in gender…” – The Cowardly Lion in The Wizard of Gender.

    Here’s an example of how our feminist SJWs themselves think they should be ostracized:

    http://www.silviamoreno-garcia.com/blog/im-rejoining-sfwa/

    Of course that’s assuming you’re using a normal English dictionary with the word “racist” and not a poststructuralist it’s-whatever-we-say-at-the-time dictionary.

    Comments there from Brad on why he left the SFWA.

    SJWs have ginned up a fake race-gender war complete with a non-existent oppressed population of “PoC” and all women on Earth over something as innocuous as SF because they are weirdoes.

    “This weekend I was on an all-white panel on multiculturalism in SF, and we all agreed it was bullshit and apologized to our audience —- many of whom were people of colour…” – Madeline Ashby

    [That comment and the post from the blog of SFF author Silvia Moreno-Garcia titled “In Which I’m a Potty Mouth” from December 5, 2013 has since been deep-sixed]

    In some ways I’m sympathetic to WorldCon. If they ditch these people there very well be no such thing as WorldCon. The prank voters aren’t actually attending. That’s why I think the better course is to ignore their White Privilege Conference and let them be. It’s no longer a museum of literature but of opposing male whiteness. SJWs say we’ll burn WorldCon but SJWs themselves would abandon it if they didn’t get to play their saving-the-world-from-whitey game. The influx of money and interest from SP has probably bought WorldCon a few more years of existence. Let’s be honest: without SP the nominees would’ve been the same trend from last year, a trend into an irrelevant literature trying desperately to mimic current college campus trends of insanity and trigger warnings.

    “The demographic shifts faced by WorldCon’s largest customer segment are the same ones faced by the Republican Party. Let that sink in for a minute. Really let it marinate. These are the same people who cheered me when I talked about Canada’s healthcare plan, and applauded Mark Van Name when he blamed rape culture for America’s ills. They want to be progressive, but they’re being blindsided by the very same demographic shifts afflicting the most conservative elements of contemporary society, for exactly the same reason: they haven’t taken the issue seriously.” – Madeline Ashby on WorldCon’s demographic issues titled “Memento mori. (Or, how Worldcon’s youth problem will resolve.)”

    It’s all about the rocket ships and rape culture so be more serious about your SF.

    *

    University of San Francisco’s “White Privilege Resource Guide”:

    “Becoming aware of privilege should not be viewed as a burden or source of guilt, but rather, an opportunity to learn and be responsible so that we may work toward a more just and inclusive world.

    “What is White Privilege?
    Evolution of Whiteness
    Pushing Back Against Privilege: Examples of White Allyship
    Take Action: Tips, Training and Organization for White Allies.”

    I couldn’t write a more insane dystopia than that if I tried. It’s Orwell’s 1984 2.0.

  205. What I really dislike about their proposal is that it makes some nominations more equal than others, if you don’t use them all. The current system says you can nominate something once. You can’t put the same thing in all five slots and have it count five times. But under the new system, you can.

  206. I’d be disappointed if you SF writers out there weren’t using this stuff about riding a subway all day with a “burner” phone and praying there wouldn’t be reception and the stuff from the U of SF. It would make an great SF story about an insane America we already live in.

    People have been wondering what Heinlein would’ve made of SP. He’d already answered that question when he made a bomb shelter. Heinlein is the guy who wrote about the Crazy Years. He wasn’t unaware of trends even in his own day. In it’s higher expressions, SF has always been a canary-in-a-coal-mine warning literature. We don’t need to ask Heinlein. Heinlein and his generation were already asking us about the U of SF before it’s new guard even existed.

    Heinlein, Orwell and Bradbury asked “If This Goes On -.” There is nothing like that today in terms of true warning visions. What we have instead is the same conformist visions of a decrepit world of mega-corporations and blah, blah, blah. That is because a dystopia cannot satirize itself. How could that be possible? SJWs have no vision. They ARE Bradbury’s fireman, they ARE Winston Smith’s nemesis, they ARE Heinlein’s astonishingly corrupt charismatic leaders. The Fremen have become the Harkonnens using eternal principles of right and wrong. Using SJWs revolving door principles the Fremen are still the Fremen.

    It’s no surprise Frank Herbert dealt with that exact thing in his series. He had a questioning mind rooted in principle, not one trapped in identity. Paul became trapped in identity. We are not supposed to be. We can do better. Do you honestly think a student at the U of SF could ever write a dystopia? How does a colony of artists which indulges in Two-Minute Hate write a dystopia? SJWs don’t see it that way; I get that. They’re wrong. I get that too.

  207. @JamesMay:

    Darkness, sweet absence of light. Interrupted, one instant to the next, by flickers of the dying, ancient fluorescent tubes which backlight advertisements for products which ceased to exist a decade ago. The subway car is older than my mother would be, were she still alive. Between the sharp, acidic sprays of unwanted photons, I find myself huddling ever-deeper in its steel-and-aluminum womb.

    Rattling of tracks, thumping lightly yet rudely against the soles of my feet where I crouch, tucked into the unyielding rear-left corner, where the same vibration travels from floor to wall to spine, each time the car’s wheels meet the slight gap between each length of track. I measure time in vibrations, now, fearful of my only other means by which to pace it.

    Why won’t this celphone die?

    I didn’t recharge the battery last night. I’ve left it all on day. It won’t just die.

    I could turn it off… but then, my access to social media, my friends, my comrades… no, if one of them needs to contact me, how else but my phone? It’s… it’s been so long since any other way existed for me. Was there once something about a square sheet of blank paper and…?

    No, no, I must be misremembering. It was in my third semester at Yarborough, where I learned the true terrors of life, my Modern Miskatonic! The oppressive nature of phallic objects, the patriarchal nature of color schemes and power structures. Black lead encased, imprisoned, in a penis meant to spread its graphite (graphically) across a Pure White Field of pulped treeheart. My professor had broken my erstwhile student’s-kit across his knee and denounced me to the entire class, and I knew true and rightful shame for the first time in my life…

    Now, I knew only fear, and that this subway tunnel would eventually end. Seconds, minutes, days, did it matter how long? At that moment, I would be open once again to being flayed by hateful bigotry, and harassment, and everything vile in this world…

    …because my Timber account would update, just as quickly as my Faceplate.

    Faceplate was my haven. My world away, where my supporters and friends and maybe-but-not-quite enemies would take me in as surely and swiftly as the darkness I sought betwixt stuttering lampshades of oppression.

    Timber, I only stayed on because of Mom, who knew no other means to contact me except by — ugh — actually calling. A million knives up my left nostril, rather than that! We had nothing in common. But she was still my Mom. So there it was: besides Mom, were hordes of screaming, wailing, uncaring and hateful people. All my real friends said they were, and I can’t afford to lose any friends. If I do, I’ll have to hate them. Everyone says I have to.

    Everyone. I can’t go against anyone, because then I’m against everyone.

    Then the only people left for me will be the Timber Brigades, and how can I related to people I’ve never been able to afford to listen to in the first place? Kitty, the guy from Gender Studies 103, so nice and unthreatening and who would never rape me like every other guy at every college is just waiting to do. Kitty told me how they all hate anyone who’s genderqueer, he even talked to one of them over Snipe once! He knows the Truth, and it’s just what I’ve always been told.

    Maybe… maybe I should burn it all. All my accounts. Start fresh. OHGODNO, I CAN’T! No one would ever forgive me! There is a hot flush behind my eyes, I find myself fighting off the terror, have it almost under control, when…

    …when a speck of light appears at the end of the tunnel. Expanding, widening, rushing towards…

    PLEASE, LET THERE NOT BE RECEPTION!

  208. sounds like it was written by someone that desperately needs to learn that yes, they can put their cell phone down and walk away from it.

  209. Well, let’s see. I didn’t clarify that she has two Moms, so the reader has to infer that or assume I screwed up since her birth mother is dead… could have used a little expansion on a few themes here and there. Mostly, I left a LOT to be inferred, but it was running a bit long and I tend to be a wordy SOB as it is.

    Glad you liked it though! It was really meant to be half-parody (no one would really believe this stuff, right?) and half-reality (yes, I’ve met people who really believe this stuff). Didn’t want to be TOO hamfisted about it.

  210. Thus, it’s my view this policy will encourage slate voting, and of exactly the sort which Sad Puppies’ most ardent critics insist they’d rather spike the Hugos over than allow to stain their glory.

    Exactly. They’re not doing the basic step of “if we change the rules, how will voting patterns change?”, much less “if we change the rules, how can the rules be gamed?”. For any of these, you want to go to your Local Gaming Store on RPG night, and ask to speak to the powergamers or Munchkins; the locals will know who qualifies best. Give them the rules, and ask them to exploit the rules for personal gain as best as possible (bribes of pizza and soda may assist in getting cooperation). Without even doing that, my intuition will be that the Munchkin approach is to campaign for a slate of one entry in each category. All the proposed rules do is give more weight to people that vote for fewer works, whether or not those works are part of slates.

  211. “Kameron Hurley retweeted Maria Popova ‏@brainpicker 12h12 hours ago ‘The white male gaze counts on silence, in aggregate. This time, I spoke up.’ Please oh please support @monicabyrne13 http://buff.ly/1HO34Sy

    Oh, shit. Men again. They must be real jerks. If I ever meet one I’ll slap ’em upside the head.

    You don’t need a slate in a diving bell.

  212. That’s because we’ve read The Top 100 Things I’d Do If I Ever Became An Evil Overlord and assume anyone competent has.

    12. One of my advisors will be an average five-year-old child. Any flaws in my plan that he is able to spot will be corrected before implementation.

    Still, on the safe side, get the Munchkin to look it over after the Evil Five-year-old Adviser.

  213. Sorry, what was that about “white male gaze?” I’d been turning kittens to stone with my White Male Gaze and didn’t quite understand what Kameron Hurley meant by all that …

  214. He has this fondness for color schemes that look like feces that someone vomited upon.

    Do you need a new monitor?
    Because I’m pretty sure Drow’s art has the bad color scheme.

    Two different things but my friend once said this was my best work so far.

  215. Did you call it, or did you call it? “Hell, I’ll say outright the sunset landscape sketch was an attempt at speedpainting and the result was pretty bad, but I really liked the little airship I threw in so I posted it. Yama regularly bags on that picture as if it were the summa totalis of my artwork. There are pieces where the proportions are very very bad, but I liked something about it so up it goes.”

  216. Calbeck: If written in the 1990’s or earlier, that would actually have been science-fictional. It’s good parody of the SJW, anyway. I thought it was pretty damned funny.

  217. Rory’s sunset has energy and vitality to the composition. It’s drenched in light and shows an awesome vista. The figure viewing it could be improved.

    Your picture of that girl (or guy, you still are drawing your women too androgynously, and I think you need to carefully study the differences between male and female anatomy, and I’m not being dirty when I say that because I mean little things about bone structure and fat distribution) is the best thing I’ve ever seen from you. The skin tones are still a bit odd but that could be shadowing. The hands are posed strangely — is she holding something in the original?

  218. The worst “critics” are those whose intent is not criticism at all, but merely attacking a person in order to further unrelated goals.

  219. I like the ruined castle wall best, for several reasons:

    1) The color composition is striking, grays and greens in the foreground “backlit” by vibrantly energetic contrasts.

    2) It tells something of a story. People were here, now they’re gone, and nature continues apace, reclaiming the region in their absence.

    I wouldn’t be averse to having a print of that on my wall.

  220. Totally called it. I wonder at what point he’ll drag out my old Slayers fanfiction again and complain about the speech pattern of a thousand year old dragon? Because he’s totally proving me right over and over.

    Every post he makes in attempts to humiliate me, he shows the double standard I was talking about before, and yet he’ll complain about Vox linking that video.

  221. I like the moss and the wall texture in the second picture, though the wall edge is a little too smooth. The purple foliage provides a nice contrast, but I think the color is a bit too saturated. I’ve been browsing a lot of landscape images lately, and I find myself increasingly drawn to the ones that best make use of colors outside the usual green-brown-blue color palette. I wish I could draw that well.

    When anyone is trying to present a comparison between their work or product and a rival’s work or product, I always assume they are the going to be comparing their best to their rivals worst. I am very rarely pleasantly surprised to be proven wrong, and in this case I am not surprised at all.

  222. @Civilis

    If you only have one work per category on your slate, then you can only get one work per category on the ballot. I don’t think any of the proposals would actually discourage slates, but they all are geared toward preventing a slate from “sweeping” a category.

  223. @Civilis – Thank you, and yes. I was looking at autumn landscape photos myself when I was drawing the background, and I think I actually went back and darkened the purple-leaved tree. It’s a bit of a struggle, I’ll admit, because autumn has such a vibrantly bright riot of colors. I had to pick colors that would contrast against the character who would be in the foreground, since he has a described appearance that I felt would disappear in a green wood. I chose a purple-leafed tree to draw the eyes to the character.

  224. Clamps? Captain Ahab called. He said you were a wee bit too obsessed and you should tone it down.

    Oh sorry, were we supposed to laugh and make fun of Shadowdancer or something?

  225. If you only have one work per category on your slate, then you can only get one work per category on the ballot. I don’t think any of the proposals would actually discourage slates, but they all are geared toward preventing a slate from “sweeping” a category.

    I had considered that, but if the end goal is to disrupt the awards (for a noble or ignoble purpose), the nominations are just a means to an end. What you really want is to lock down the award winners: either my candidate wins, or no one does. I much more fear an organized campaign to pick a winner than an organized campaign to pick a bunch of nominees.

  226. Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand see? Called it again.

    I wonder how much his head would explode if he found out that I co-authored the published versions of the Seda’s Diary series. Not the discarded feeler story that was put out on the forums to see if there was an interest in the series. Because I predict he’ll drag that out and rag on it next. Or make fun of Sparrowind anyway, because vowing never to read it hasn’t stopped him from going on a 300 comment rant at Jordan’s, yelling about how unoriginal he thought it is and such.

  227. Thank you, and yes. I was looking at autumn landscape photos myself when I was drawing the background, and I think I actually went back and darkened the purple-leaved tree. It’s a bit of a struggle, I’ll admit, because autumn has such a vibrantly bright riot of colors. I had to pick colors that would contrast against the character who would be in the foreground, since he has a described appearance that I felt would disappear in a green wood. I chose a purple-leafed tree to draw the eyes to the character.

    I was looking at the image from the standards of looking at landscapes, rather than backgrounds.
    I tend to use landscape images to set mood and setting for RPG campaigns, so I look heavily at the general flow of the terrain and the palette used. You don’t need or want to be that detail oriented when putting something together as a background; superfluous detail would only distract from the character you are trying to highlight. I think the purple foliage is a good choice to background a blue-tinted character.

  228. @Shadowdancer: Re: your artwork

    I thought your piece was great, but I was doing an objective analysis. The shoulder and hand issues ARE minor. I didn’t notice them until about the fourth or fifth back and forth looking for stages to critique. I mentioned them because I was being thorough. I’ve seen errors in professional art (which is why folk like Whelan make the Big Bucks.) so don’t take it as too crazy of a criticism. If it’s your first time in the style, I’m extremely impressed. I’m no where near as good as you, especially in the hand done stuff. 3D I’m decent.

  229. The cover for Outcast was actually a topic of discussion between myself and Aff (who writes under the pseudonym A.C. Extarian) – he originally wanted that I show the whole castle, and show the character at the same time. When I quizzed him about the terrain, the way he had it laid out didn’t work, and I’m constrained by the cover size, and have to consider how it’ll look as a print, and a thumbnail. I told him to leave it with me, and that’s what I came up with.

    Oh, and just to show I wasn’t solely focused on the digital medium – http://cutelildrow.deviantart.com/art/Duo-of-Mass-Destruction-199331647

  230. The problem with evaluating character portraits is that they generally require some background detail about the character to know if the portrait accomplishes the goal of providing a glimpse of the character. For your sketch of the duo, the male’s sly grin and aside glance at the viewer imply something of a trickster, while the female seems to be either infatuated with or intent on seducing the male. For the cover art, all I can do is think of it in RPG terms: fighter type, noble, experienced, good or leaning towards good. Fighter should be obvious: heavy armor with greatsword but no obvious holy symbols. Noble: he’s clean, with fancy bits on the armor. Experienced: looks confident and the sword is might fancy; could just be rich enough to have bought a legendary weapon. Good or goodish: the blueish / silverish palette, especially the gems on the sword. If the background had been a winter scene, the palette could signify association with winter, but with a neutral scene, it’s much more of a pure / noble color scheme. If he’s actually the really evil big bad, he’s doing an excellent job of hiding it.

  231. Dr Mauser: No you cannot list a nominee more than once under the proposal.
    3.8.4: If a nominee appears on a nomination ballot more than once in any one category, only one nomination shall be counted in that category.
    This remains unchanged.

    OTOH, I think it should be changed since the proposal chops up my vote into small pieces, counts them up, drops out the loser, then REALLOCATES my vote to the nominees that remain.

  232. @Civilis – close, especially with the female. We had roleplay story backgrounds for our MMO characters, and these two were Immy (TheImmortal) the Necromancer, and Katheren the dwarven Warsmith.

    From the description, because it’s easier than writing it all up –

    In roleplay, they’re a passionate, violent couple who, to say the least, have a mutual interest in destruction and seeing things bleed and burn. The players are, to say the least, delightfully fun and adorably insane. I love these two.

    They’re a very sensual couple in my art, because I can’t really envision Kath as sweet and innocent. I always draw her with a sultry expression, her eyes half lidded, sexy and alluring; descriptions you normally don’t attribute to Lineage II dwarves. I play on the fact that people probably misattribute that Immy is a pervert with a taste for young looking flesh, and his smirk says he’s well aware of the squick that most people would attribute to the relationship – and doesn’t give crap, especially as since he’s human, she’s significantly older than he is by at least a few decades, if not by a century. The way I draw them together leaves no doubt that they’re very much sexually involved, and enjoying it very, very much. They delight in the discomfort they cause and enjoy playing with that discomfort, like a cat playing with a dead mouse.

    I used to portray Immy as a wiseass, if somewhat innocent and idealistic… until Katheren corrupted him even more.

    Delightfully, hair-raisingly gruesome, aren’t they?

  233. From David Gerrold’s Facebook thread the other day, someone questioning Brad’s motives for not going to Worldcon:

    “Farrell McGovern I don’t know about the US, but in Canada, it is a crime to pretend to be a member of the Armed Forces of Canada. Is this puppy actually serving?”

    Wow, just wow.

  234. …oops. The touchpad on this ‘top clicked wrong.

    As for the cover art knight – yep, on all counts. I tend to think in RPG terms too.

    Good or goodish: the blueish / silverish palette, especially the gems on the sword. If the background had been a winter scene, the palette could signify association with winter, but with a neutral scene, it’s much more of a pure / noble color scheme.

    I hadn’t thought of that. That actually sounds cool! =D

  235. @Chris Chupik – Wow. What part of ‘being deployed’ do these numbwits not understand?

    I don’t really think they should be pretending to respect military servicemen anyway. The first thing they do is question that service.

  236. You know, the bit that’s on the Internet Argument Checklist that Larry Correia made up? The one where it says ‘skim until offended’? Yeah, they clearly just skim till they find something to get pissed off about and data dump the rest. If they read the above post, which I’m starting to doubt, they’d have seen this:

    It might be funny, except for the fact that the whole reason I am going overseas in the first place, is the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. Most folks know them as ISIS, though the Arabic and Islamic nations partnering with NATO and other countries to fight ISIS, call those guys DAESH, which is derogatory towards ISIS/ISIL. DAESH are the charming folks who throw gay men to their deaths, from rooftops. And chop the heads off of innocent women and children.

  237. “Projection level: Motie launching laser.”

    That reminds me, I have to reread that this summer.

  238. Clamps has always been a card carrying member of the Cult of the Sentence despite his own tin-eared writing. While style will always be a consideration, as Tom Simon has said in his “Style is the Rocket”, it is never the sole consideration, and Clamps has been rekted elsewhere for his slavish adherance to style over substance.

    http://bondwine.com/2012/06/08/style-is-the-rocket/

    As for questioning Chief Torgersen’s service, it helps shore up my hypothesis that the Hugo crowd has made the awards more about the members than the genre. Sorry, he’s legally obligated by his master to be elsewhere, under pain of criminal penalty as opposed to the continued derision of the Right People for not being present at a ceremony.

  239. Hm, noticed how Clampsy/Yama/Graz ran away after I said thank you for buying the book; Bias?

    I wonder why. Was he really that embarrassed to let out he bought the book of someone he hates? Well, two people he hates. He hates Aff too.

  240. I hadn’t thought of that. That actually sounds cool! =D

    Not being able to illustrate, I tend to work with descriptive narration, whether as notes or made up on the spot. When I specify something out of the ordinary, it’s usually there for a reason, I had to choose to put it there. I have a knight from a noble background that’s not a particularly good person, and I specify that the armor in question is more of a darker ‘gunmetal’ color (and when I’ve been able to model the character in games, it looks particularly distinctive without falling into the ‘obviously evil black’ category). As far as detail colors go, you can notice what humans naturally react to; blue and green tend to be more calming than red, which we typically associate with alarms or danger. Take a look at the standard Star Wars lightsaber colors. As always, setting trumps general; while white and blue tend to seem more good, an evil cleric of the deity of Ice will use the same color scheme, and there’s nothing to say a clever individual with a sense of style will deliberately choose dissonant colors to throw people off; having the evil mage walking around in red and gold lead off with an ice attack can throw the characters off their game.

  241. Jordan,

    Markku works at Castalia House, Vox’s publishing company. I believe he was a big part of tracking down Clamps IRL, so Marston has some serious hate for him. Hehehe. 😀

  242. They’re not doing the basic step of “if we change the rules, how will voting patterns change?”, much less “if we change the rules, how can the rules be gamed?”.

    From what I saw on the Making Light thread, they did in fact have an expert in voting systems in on the discussion, someone equipped to answer exactly that question.

    The fatal flaw of the Making Light discussion is that they assume Sad Puppies was intended to sweep the Hugos and crown everyone else out, so that’s what they’re trying to defend against. But since we’re looking for broader participation, all these proposals are likely to do is weaken the effect of CHORF groupthink.

  243. People who are supporting this feminist movement that has sprung to popularity with amazing rapidity these last few years need to start understanding these so-called “feminists” are people with crippling and sociopathic mental health issues.

    No one does what these women (and some men) do who is not a severely damaged person. No one sits on Twitter all day, every day and for months at a time disparaging men and whites unless they’re nuts. I mean actually nuts with issues so severe they are unable to understand what it is they do.

    No one has 200,000 Tweets that attack whites for years in a row without missing a day who is not a vicious racist. No one uses terms like “cis-scum” who does not themselves hate men and heterosexuals. No one uses terms like “cis-white dudes” in a serious attempt to portray America as a society unless they are mentally addled. No one singles out an ethnic grouping or sex in an obsessive manner and portrays them in a negative light 100% of the time unless they are a bigoted and intolerant racist and supremacist. No one living a calm, peaceful and orderly life in which they are free to do whatever they want from one minute to the next but who also claims oppression is sane. No one recommends “jazz hands” instead of clapping who is in their right mind. No one goes feral at a bikini ad who is normal. No one uses a genre like SF in such an inappropriate manner unless they have obsessive mental health issues they bring into whatever arena they go to and can’t let go of. No one cries at a TV comedian routinely watched by millions unless they are crazy.

    If you don’t believe me, just look at what Mattress Girl has just done, and look at the wide support for her madness throughout the entire affair from feminists who cried “rape culture” and “male gaze” and lied and continue to lie to this day about rape statistics. Middle class male SFF authors have opened the door to this madness by never saying “no,” no matter how insane the mental breakdowns on Twitter or whining about being under surveillance just by having their hate speech quoted.

    Other SFF authors (through ignorance) have inadvertently recently provided even more cover fire which only emboldens this sick behavior. One of the most famous SFF authors had a chance to strike down someone so obviously sick as to call for a moratorium on reading all white male heterosexual authors. Instead, like the fool he is, he took selfies with what is no better than a KKK which hates him and will never consider him more than an “ally,” a kapo at the camp guarding the other inmates with the “male gaze.”

    Anyone who believes these women are oppressed are so naive as to be useless as human beings in a civilized society let alone artists.

    From the first clinically ill radical feminists like Kate Millet, Andrea Dworkin and Shulamith Firestone, they are people with traumatic grudges against the world around them.

    No well adjusted human being claims “The white male gaze counts on silence…” No normal human being sees their fellow humans – 3.5 billion of them – from such a hostile and paranoid point of view. You don’t even have to be a psychiatrist to understand what a person is saying who feels under the hostile scrutiny and “gaze” of all men on Earth, presumably 24/7 and everywhere they go. No “academic” uses terms like “toxic masculinity” unless they are batshit crazy. They are sick.

    It’s no surprise these sick people claim a special exemption for their hate speech via equally special secret knowledge into oppression no one else not oppressed can truly see. Anita Sarkeesian claims no women can be sexist, other morons make hashtags like #ImaginaryMisandry, still others say they can never be racists. It has the sick self-serving convenience particular to all meticulously constructed fantasies of pathological liars. Yet when these fools cry “social justice” all reason and judgment flees and society says “Oh, you poor little babies. We thought women’s equality and Jim Crow had been defeated.”

    This social justice movement in SFF is a movement that provides cover for hate speech on a daily basis. It is nothing more than a hate movement camouflaged in old oppression narratives that gulls incredibly stupid people. You will never reach these people; that’s because they are mentally ill, and the rest of them are proof a sucker is born every minute. These people openly wave about their “ableisms” like a flag and it’s time to take them and their medicated lives at their word. What in the fuck are some of you people using for judgment?

  244. @Civilis

    But the current dust-up is over slates to pick the nominees. This year, SP3 and/or RP got all five of their picks nominated in several categories. THAT’s what led to the collective freak-out. An organized campaign to pick the winners once the nominees are chosen would have to be pretty obvious in order to truly succeed, just because of the ranking system used on the ballot, and unless a majority went along with it, the voters could rank “No Award” above the beneficiary of the organized campaign.

  245. Frank, I disagree that the success of SP3 led to the freak out, if only because the presence of one or two SP2 nominees per category brought out the exact same reaction last year (sans rules change), including a No Award campaign.

  246. @frank

    4 nominations for 6 slots doesn’t prevent slates, it just prevents lazy slates.

    all you need to do is to suggest 6 items and have them displayed in a different order every time someone views the site. If 100 people nominating will lock up 4 slots with lazy slates, 150 people nominating will lock up all 6 slots with “4 – 6” nominating rules.

    I’m on record as suggesting that Kate suggest more items than nomination slots for SP4 and randomize the order anyway. Not that doing so will prevent accusations of vote stuffing (nothing will), but it lets more good books be recommended for the SP to read and avoids any accidental bias/advantage due to the order that they are listed.

  247. For anyone honestly wondering what we are referring to when we talk about SJW, here is a call to have publishers kill the writing careers of men by not publishing any men for a year (link to TPV instead of the original article to avoid giving them advertising revenue)

    http://www.thepassivevoice.com/06/2015/kamila-shamsie-lets-have-a-year-of-publishing-only-women/

    > It is clear that there is a gender bias in publishing houses and the world of books. Well, enough. > Why not try something radical? Make 2018 the Year of Publishing Women, in which no new titles should be by men.

  248. But the current dust-up is over slates to pick the nominees.

    I’m over-thinking things, as usual. Still, it seems too much a matter of addressing past threats rather than future ones.

  249. Well forget that! There are too many books by men that I am waiting to read for that sort of utter nonsense. These people have lost all contact with reality, haven’t they?

  250. I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again: the way you spot a con game is by what these goofy feminists never have an interest in pie-charting or discussing.

    Why don’t they care 100% of all people I’ve seen working in bitterly cold freezer warehouses are men? Why the lack of concern over virtually entirely male military cemeteries? What about nursing and teaching? Men hog the suicide rate at a 4 to 1 rate. Breast and prostate cancer are equally occurring; guess which gets more money and press? Does Delta Blues music need diversity?

    I myself don’t think of things in that in-group/out-group way which so typifies the bigotry and racism of gender feminists. But when you speak back to them in their own language it reveals what liars they are.

    If I were concerned about violence in Game of Thrones, I’d be concerned with violence, not prick up my ears every time a precious man is killed.

    Eff these people. Eff Kamila Shamsie and her “patriarchy.” Why wouldn’t this dumb broad see immorality only in men? Skiffy can bitch about smashing the cis-hetero patriarchy, but we know what a nut who talked about smashing the homosexual matriarchy would be – someone who’s demonizing all members of an entire group in their millions by pretending they constitute an ideology out to get you. That’s the same way anti-Semites work, and it’s the same way the KKK works. Everybody goes, the entire group.

    By contrast, normal people take out actual ideologies like the KKK, neo-Nazis and gender feminists, each of which are tiny fringe lunatic supremacist groups claiming to represent all whites or women. Eff all of them.

  251. For anyone honestly wondering what we are referring to when we talk about SJW, here is a call to have publishers kill the writing careers of men by not publishing any men for a year

    From a summary of the article on Ace of Spades, this excerpt: “We [the award committee] read what publishers submit to us” supports my contention that the problem could be blamed on publishers.

    Also, “So I asked the Booker administrators how many of the books submitted in the last five years have been written by women. The answer was, slightly under 40%.” I believe that only 40% of new college admissions are going to men, so by this logic. the obvious way to fix this issue is that we must spend a year where we don’t admit any women to college?

    Seriously, this is the logic of group identity politics: women as a group are not equally represented by publishers, so the obvious response is to punish individual male authors (and by extension, the readers that enjoy them).

  252. And again with the projection….
    Who actually sucks at writing, the people who sell their own books, or the ones who only manage to sell books by attacking them?

    The ones who are welcome guests because of the quality of their writing, or the ones that have to illegally circumvent multiple bans to do yet more reality-denying attacks on the people they supposedly feel are stalking them?

  253. @calbeck: I don’t think i’ve seen him go below ‘angry’. I’ve seen him go from angry to raging to frothing to apoplectic. He hasn’t quite keeled over from it yet from what I’ve seen but he keeps trying.

  254. And don’t forget, publishing itself is heavily female dominated. I saw one guy who talked about looking over a bunch of different sites to find agents and noticing it is like 9 to 1 women vs men. So if publishing is really sexist against female authors it isn’t mainly men’s fault, much less male authors.

    (Best numbers I have seen suggest that like 60% of the books published over all are written by women anyway, so I don’t know that the assertion is right anyway.)

  255. Well good luck with the deployment. If your luck hopefully you wil wind up working night shifts. Where I am at it’s already too hot and it’s oly going to get hotter.

  256. @davidelang

    I hadn’t even thought of using a randomization algorithm to “beat” the 4/6 proposal, but what you’re suggesting would probably work. I think the proposed rules changes are all a colossal waste of time. I’m hoping enough moderates show up to prevent any changes to the way it’s done.

  257. @Nathan

    Let me amend that. I think the intensity and breadth of the freak out are all due to the success of SP3/RP this year. I think Larry Correia and Brad Torgersen were both expecting blowback, but they weren’t expecting a wildly inaccurate (though ultimately corrected) article in Entertainment Weekly, and they weren’t expecting so much blowback that they’d have to state things like the fact that neither of them is Vox Day. And they weren’t expecting a spat with one of the most well-known fantasy authors on the planet, which led to an even bigger media storm.

  258. @ frank
    You don’t even need to do the randomization thing if you actually have a set of people who will vote exactly the way you tell them to. Just post three lists and tell people to vote for one if their name starts with one range of letters,…

    all that 4-6 means is that the votes need to be spread across all 6 instead of everyone voting for the same list. It requires more people yes, but is that bump enough to eliminate slates? When it’s taken less than 30 votes to get on the ballot in some categories in the past, and there are 10,000+ people who can nominate next year, changing 30 votes to 45 votes doesn’t make a lick of difference.

    The randomization thing will mean that if people are just voting for the things that were listed without reading them, and vote for the top things on the list (common practice), the votes will be spread across all the candidates.

  259. they weren’t expecting a wildly inaccurate (though ultimately corrected) article in Entertainment Weekly

    It’s worth recalling that it wasn’t just Entertainment Weekly; the same article was shopped to what, half a dozen media outlets on the same day? A coordinated and toxic media campaign. I think they were expecting lies and a temper tantrum, because that’s exactly what happened last year. I don’t actually think the outraged reaction this year is not because “SLATE!!!!!” – that is, because the list included up to five works in some categories – but because the Sad Puppy idea didn’t go away. Dissenters were supposed to be discouraged last year, and never raise their heads again, after their nominees were duly voted into last place (or No Awarded in one case).

    In fact, that’s what they’re supposed to do next year. Having all their nominees come in below No Award this year is, we are told, going to “Discourage the Puppies” and they will all go away sadly, having been taught that there is no place in the Hugo awards for their kind. That appears to be the main reason given for pushing the No Award strategy. I consider this most unlikely to work, but that does seem to be the line given.

  260. Who’s actually buying copies of Seda’s Diary? Nobody.

    Not only is this false, it’s foolish– since the book has not only sold, but been pirated and sold on the black market.

  261. “Having all their nominees come in below No Award this year is, we are told, going to “Discourage the Puppies” and they will all go away sadly, having been taught that there is no place in the Hugo awards for their kind.”

    Let’s see, number 6 of 5 from last year, Vox Day, came back with a vengeance this year. So, no I do not think that the Puppies will fade. I do expect next year to be nastier, though.

  262. How much effect does being a Tiptree Award winner have on book sales? They can go ahead and turn the Hugos into the Travelling Tiptree Annex Award, and Hugos will become that valuable.

  263. But you’re doing such a great job selling them, Clamps. By the way, when are you publishing your first work?

  264. Clamps, I find myself seriously wondering if you have a reading disability. That or you’re so consumed with hate that you can’t see the letters on the screen.

    Yeah, actually my money is still on the latter.

  265. She had a cramped set of bovine teeth arranged like the sails of clipper ships that used to run the old Saipan-Midway route. Her lips were as terse as the sexual advances of an old Cornish fishwife.

    Her ears were tetrahedrons on a squared off head with two c-clamps for eyes.

    Her nose was a pigeon. Her skin had the shimmer of old Maltese armor plate and the feel of frozen lard.

  266. *chuckles* Man, Graz is just a one-dude entertainment console. Gonna pop open this mead and get some roast pork going. Gonna be a great weekend.

  267. @Nathan – That essay on style is a great link. It captures and crystallizes a lot of things I’d been trying to put together for the last few weeks.

  268. Dealing with Clamps is like trying to punish a psychotic Chihuahua for peeing on the carpet. Loud, annoying, unable to actually hurt you and completely insane.

  269. But, something important to remember everyone: Yamamanama has been banned again at an IP level. If he comes back that means he’s using some way of faking his IP (like proxy, ip spoof, etc) to bypass that.

    That’s why his protestations will ring hollow.

  270. yes, and it also means that he is ‘circumventing system security measures in order to make use of system time, on a computer he has been forbidden to access’

  271. And of course he’ll run to the File 770 people and whine that he got banned for speaking ill of Vox.

    What a miserable wretch.

  272. IP is also one of the easiest blocks to circumvent; I have a spare router set up as a 3DS HomePass relay (‘cuz I’m a Wii Plaza junkie). All it takes is a compliant router firmware and a script, and it changes MAC and IP addresses every five minutes to connect to other HomePass users.

  273. Typical of him. What makes that especially hilarious is that many of us can identify him after one post. He never changes.

  274. Good thing he was dumb enough to admit in a public forum how he deliberately circumvents the security of sites he’s banned from.

  275. But Mauser is a Puppy, and everyone knows you can’t trust them. (eyeroll)

    The Stalker post and the Gamingforce article should be spread far and wide, wherever this troll spreads his venom.

    But it’s good that Clamps got into specific detail about exactly how he evades bans. And now that he has, that information could be passed on, say, to those bloggers he constantly plagues, so they can develop countermeasures against him.

  276. Problem being, the most cost-effective countermeasure is vigilance; everything else, up to and including browser fingerprinting or other tracking methods, is expensive, time consuming, trivial to circumvent, or a combination of the above.

  277. @Nathan

    I agree that next year will likely be nastier, regardless of the outcome of the Hugos. I don’t really have any good suggestions for making it better, either. I’m just sad that we can’t get most of the SF/F writers and fans together in one place for a con once a year.

  278. @Shadowdancer: FIrst, those sketch comics of tech support are gold! I haven’t had a good laugh like that in a while. I’m reasonably sure you and Aff have seen “Computer Stupidities” already, but just in case you haven’t: http://www.rinkworks.com/stupid/.

    Second, thank you for sharing your art. Not being an artist myself, nor trained in art critique, I don’t think I’d care to try examining or analyzing your art or wossisname’s, so I’ll let it go with this: Your stuff has a a cheerful vitality to it. His stuff looks dreary and depressed. I realize that there is, in fact, great art that is dreary and depressed, but I’d rather look at the stuff that makes me feel upbeat. Yours wins.

    Last: Having read your explosion, I am making a note to myself to never, ever, EVER piss you off. Piss off the Chief? No problem; I can survive pissed-off chiefs, of both the enlisted and warrant varieties – been there, done that, got the t-shirt. But women… you play for KEEPS. 🙂

    @Christopher M. Chupik – thanks for the quote from whomever it was that implied the Chief was a fake. That person is correct that it is a crime (Criminal Code of Canada) in Canada, and having talked with some folks on the Stolen Valor website, it’s clear it’s a crime in the US. As well as being eminently mock-worthy, too. However, there’s a world of difference between someone like Frank Gervais (charged with impersonating a member of the Canadian Forces, on the basis of photographic evidence that made it clear he wasn’t due to the number of errors in his uniform), and Mr. Torgersen, about whom there is NO evidence he’s a faker, and quite a bit of evidence to the contrary; specifically, people who actually know him. I suspect, though, that this will not inconvenience those accusing him (not in so many words, but certainly in essence) of stolen valour.

  279. @William Underhill

    Thanks for that! I like hearing when people find that lazy, irregular comic funny =D I’m trying to set up the comic so I can post them on the main affsdiary.com site, so that I’ll have a more localized posting setup. =) Look for future posts there! (I actually have one waiting but I gotta fix it up a little.)

    I’m glad you like my art =) Here’s one I drew last year, when I had “Happy” stuck as a looping earworm.

    I also don’t blow up often. I find it too tiring to stay furious, but the needling petty stupid over the past few months… yeah no. The anti-pups work on the assumption that we’re around to answer their questions on demand, then doubt everything we say or do anyway. Fuck. That. Noise.

    Also, here’s proof where it’s Yama, under his LJ username asking Jordan to bypass the registration site for our forums so he can browse it by proxy (you can’t sign up for it with a proxy.)

  280. @viktor
    By my comment, I meant that if you vote one item, it counts 5 times as much because it doesn’t get divided. Effectively, it outweighs the votes of a person who votes 5 items.

  281. Clamps actually looks fairly normal compared a lot of SJWs like Mattress Girl, piggish feminists asking for men not to be published, men pretending to be women attacking men, not reviewing white men, and racists asking the world not to read white heterosexual males for one year.

    It must gall retards like Damien Walter to have 5,000 Twitter followers on a par with Vox Day after all the work Walter has put in shilling for a sociopathic hate movement. Now he has to watch Milo Yiannopoulos add a hundred followers a day to his almost 50,000 and probably can’t figure out Milo actually researches his articles rather than writing “cis, white and male” and figuratively arching his eyebrows while making up scare quotes along with Arthur Chu.

    Every week that goes by makes it increasingly obvious that our worst social justice warriors aren’t just man-haters and racists but mentally disturbed ones. Fronting for them you have happy-go-lucky writers of books about goblins and fanfic weaponized into millions of dollars lying about rape statistics and racial privilege as if they were pets of parrots asking “polyamorous want a cracka ass cracka?” Like Walter, none of them seem to realize how ruthlessly their careers have been used and then thrown aside by opportunists as anxious to signal-boost their sorrow as they are to never actually live among them, preferring white midwestern small town communities to the heady nobility of Baltimore or Nigeria.

    Although SFF has nothing as dramatic as rape fantasy videos and imaginary men created by women exposed as hoaxers and liars, it’s still amazing to me how many people out there don’t understand how many Twitter feeds in SFF are cries for help from some truly disturbed and obsessive people. The fact Mattress Girl can actually graduate from college shows insane people can actually write books, show up for work on time and then go on Twitter to compulsively let us all know how all men on Earth are cis-scum out to suppress their amazing writing about French Queer Theory zombies in space, racial revenge fantasies and bi-sexual nymphomaniac bounty hunters. Nothing says SF like going to the Nebulas and continuing selfies from WisCon with #UnrelatedAsians hashtags cuz white racism after a panel on gender and sexuality cuz rocket ships.

    Now that they’ve turned core SFF into a Tiptree mental asylum of oppressed gay feminists and affirmative action KKK, one wonders what they’ll do aside from selling stories to each other which metaphorically address the inadvisability of being a heterosexual ethnic European man. There is no impulse control in Mudville, or strike zones, or equal protection.

  282. I didn’t say he was sane. I said his lack of impulse control compared to people who daily murmur to themselves about whites and men is a relative thing. Even Yama doesn’t go on about “global whiteness” and “police your whiteness” like the post the lovely anti-racist K. Tempest Bradford just linked us to about being a good “ally” to a pack of yowling WisCon racists.

  283. Every time I view this video I think of Clamps and all the other sad little people like him.

  284. Hey, James May, I think you might need to reassess that bit about Yama’s impulse control. I mean, despite the bullshit they fret about puppies oh noes doxxing over at File 770, if Mike Glyer deletes our comments once or bans anyone, we don’t go back. They have Yama on their side, coming over here, evading bans again and again and again to harass me, and to drive me off of Brad Torgersen’s blog so he’ll ‘stop harassing’ the blog. Maybe.

  285. I am unsure if that is actually his writing. It might not be; it might be Paul Park’s, the author Yama has been getting the names Pieter de Graz / the Chevalier de Graz from. Google those pseudonyms and it turns up a google-readable sample of that person’s work.

    That’s who Yama is attempting to emulate, by the way, in terms of style, in the same way he seems to be trying to emulate Yoshitaka Amano’s artwork (but failing.)

  286. I foresee double standards. If Yama is allowed to dismiss my books based on samples and run a campaign of harassment almost 7 years long now, I won’t be allowed to do the same to his work or that of any author he upholds as good, because (insert excuse by Yama here), but in truth, it’s because I’m Asian, female, and refuse to behave in the way he thinks I should.

  287. There’s no doubt the kid’s nuts. He understands a thing is wrong on some level but can’t actually act on that to control his behavior. He can’t edit his racing thoughts. To him people are microphones he speaks into and when they speak back all he hears is his own words which he feels compelled to repeat over and over again. It is almost literally an echo chamber of insane fixation.

    It reminds me of the Twitter feeds I mentioned. For example, I can understand a woman SFF author wondering why there’s not more women in epic fantasy. I cannot understand that being reworded virtually every single day for weeks and then months on end and then a concluding convo where men may hate woman on some level but not dragons. I mean… the goddam editor of the Magazine of Fantasy and SF said that for crying out loud. What the hell chance do you think you have of having a story sold and who do you think he’s nominating for Hugos – literature? In what fantasy world do all men on Earth hate all women on Earth? I am so tired of hearing this nut factory mumble to each other about the patriarchy. And then they claim there’s no affirmative action even while they never shut up about it.

    These people are fucking crazy. I’d bet money anyone capable of writing “The white male gaze counts on silence” is on some fairly powerful meds.

    These fake “feminists” are amazing liars when it comes to concocting fantasies about oppression to back up their insanity. Dating from Simone de Beauvoir’s book The Second Sex, they’ve had 65 years to perfect their Foucauldian rhetoric which is superficially plausible enough to take in these idiot do-gooders who signal-boost their hokum and gripe about “feminism.” In the research I’ve done, the amount of gibberish they’ve come up with to explain how it’s actually the world that imagines its own fake heterosexuality by repeating the “illusion” to themselves is amazing. Even Anita Sarkeesian Tweets that crazy shit about “performance.” That’s the shit Sarkeesian has read and why she thinks what a human sees in video games will create an actual reality they “perform.” By an amazing coincidence it’s the same reality we’ve been “performing” since the dawn of civilization. Maybe that’s an illusion too.

    These are not feminists. “Feminism” is based on changing law and social customs analogous to law. It’s not based on gender “performativity,” Jacques Derrida, Judith Butler Queer Theory and poststructuralism. These are mentally disturbed sociopaths who’ve fixated on the idea men are at the bottom of all their shortcomings and European intellectual gibberish (which is at the core of Ancillary Justice) is their answer. I’m not surprised such people are so attracted to an ideology whose entire basis is the world is an illusion and anything is anything. Why be surprised Ann Leckie wrote a post about an allegorical restaurant where “white cis dudes” randomly punch intersectional darlings: PoC, gays and women?

    The number of these people who openly admit to ADHD, OCD, panic disorders, anxiety attacks, bi-polar depression and the meds that go along with that is amazing to me. Trigger warnings… duh!

  288. Like a lot of abusers, Clamps knows how to manipulate authority to get unwarranted sympathy. You know that scene in Dirty Harry where Scorpio pays a guy to beat him, so he can accuse Callahan of police brutality? Like that.

  289. And yet, I’m not allowed to have a different opinion or tastes, or styles. Yama seems to believe I exist to make things he likes. Why am I not allowed to make things I like? Or do things the way I want, or have different opinions, or tastes, or likes and dislikes, or adhere to different beliefs? I am Asian, Female and do not want to do things the way he likes, which offends him and he has stalked and harassed me no matter where I go on the Internet, because of it.

    I have found no reason for Yama’s behavior to make sense, except when seen in this context:

    in Yusuf Ali’s English translation of the Qur’an.[53] In other words when women behave properly they are to be treated kindly,
    … The Qur’an states:
    “Righteous women are therefore obedient, … And those you fear may be rebellious (nushuz) admonish; banish them to their couches, and beat them.”[55]

    Why else would Yama think he has the right to demand anything of me? Note too, that he did not deny that this treatment of me stems from my being female, as he clearly has not seen women who he sees as ‘rebellious’ to his liking as worth treating kindly in any form. As I live in another country, this harassment and constant condemnation of my works, my looks, and me is the closest he can get to beating me for the sin of disagreeing with him.

  290. As I live in another country, this harassment and constant condemnation of my works, my looks, and me is the closest he can get to beating me for the sin of disagreeing with him.

    *imagines the result if he was dumb enough to actually try to assault Shadow in person*

    Guess he has some sanity. Women play for keeps. If he tried it on pretty much any of the US based women, he’d get a much quicker death.
    (Or maybe just cowardly– people like him are why the guys on the local SWAT team have already been warned about possible false calls, since about the time Patterico got SWATed. Vox’s legal action did make them take it a bit more seriously, too. Turns out we have good taste in neighbors, former Army range master next door.)

  291. The reason why I quoted that is because that is what is considered correct behavior, thus something that possibly explains Yama’s obsessive need to see me punished for my being ‘rebellious’ towards what he thinks is good and right. He does not see me as an equal human being, thus treats me as lesser, and not entitled to any rights he decides not to grant me. I do not know if Yama is Muslim, but the way he behaves is almost as if he has a religious need to see me humbled, beaten. Thus the constant denigration whenever he has the opportunity, as well as threats to my children in the past.

  292. No, Yama. It’s good expository prose. “Ancient,” “old” and “archaic” are not synonyms; they are words with related meanings. The tradition is “ancient,” meaning “very old.” It is so old that it is “archaic,” menaing “almost outdated.” This is well-written.

  293. Clamps projected with:
    You are so lost in your delusions and fantasies that you can no longer see reality.

    *rotfl*

  294. Yama, Rory’s writing passes the reality test, and yours doesn’t. Rory is able to make money from her writing, and you can’t. This implies that she is a better writer than are you.

    Of course, you do help by running an independent and unpaid advertising campaign for her. Thanks.

  295. Are we really surprised Yama has thrown his hat in the ring with a sociopathic ideology hiding behind “social justice?” It’s a perfect place for Yama’s insanity to look like the opposite. No doubt Yama is a “feminist.” No matter how nuts he acts he’s always right, at least in his mind.

    Equal rights feminism and goofy gender “feminism” have become inextricably mixed together in the minds of the American public, even though they have almost nothing to do with each other. The latter almost amounts to a phobia and even hatred of men, which shouldn’t be surprising considering this movement’s founders. Yama’s found a perfect hidey hole and it’s no surprise how welcome he is at SJW sites. He’s nuts – why wouldn’t he be?

    In real terms misusing the word “feminism” is how anti-Sad Puppies and anti-Gamergaters can get away with lying we are against “feminism” and therefore against equal rights for women – that Gamergate and Sad Puppies are “misogynists.” That is a lie. In this ideology, we are “misogynists” just for waking up via the all-encompassing patriarchy which enforces the “compulsory heterosexuality” quoted from both Judith Butler and Adrienne Rich and in fact is in the title of Rich’s most famous essay. Remember, Liz Bourke’s Tor.com column is named after a Rich quote and she pushed the Butlerian “performative” Ancillary Justice from day one and as hard as anyone. The idea the gay Bourke is an equal rights feminist is laughable to anyone who’s read that woman’s rhetoric. That’s been a dead issue for decades and pretty much everyone is on board with it other than a fringe.

    The truth is what we are actually against is being critiqued and attacked as “men” by this bizarre ideology and women like Leigh Alexander, Kameron Hurley, Laurie Penny, Randi Harper, Anita Sarkeesian, “Brianna” Wu, all of WisCon and a host of others. If someone can tell me how “transphobia” and the 40 yr. old MichFest lesbian music festival being shut down by men pretending to be women is “equal rights” feminism and not gender dysmorphic asshattery and how all that plus the racial intersectionalism now embraced by gender feminists is not central to the “social justice” crusade in SFF I will concede I am wrong.

    The SJW claim they are fighting for equal rights for women is a lie and it’s time we started loudly saying how and why it is a lie when they say that and then link us to Audre Lorde’s gay intersectionalist idiocy about the “gap of male ignorance.” And don’t forget, these people will also say pushing back against a lesbian supremacist fringe ideology to be anti-lesbian or “homophobia” – another lie. It’s the same lie behind the stupid title of the “Women Destroy Science Fiction” anthology. Just read the essays and look at the names. That’s no gals night out. That’s an ideology which claims to represent all women, but “women” are so tired of this trigger warning culture only 18% in America consider themselves “feminists,” a drop of 10% in 2 years.

    You can read about that and some of the fakery in this paragraph at the link:

    “Feminism is not about ending the tyranny of men, destroying masculinity or killing all men so women can rise to power. Rather, according to contemporary feminist bell hooks’ essay ‘Feminism Is For Everybody,’ feminism ‘is a movement to end sexism, sexist exploitation and oppression.’”

    http://depauliaonline.com/opinions/2015/04/12/feminism-continues-to-be-misunderstood/

    The commenters aren’t as big a suckers as the author of that post.

  296. This is slightly off-topic, but amusing. SF reviewer James Nicoll made a big noise after SP3 that he wasn’t going to review any more Baen because Toni Weisskopf allowed herself to be nominated twice in a row. No big loss, since Nicoll is anti-Baen at the best of times. Now he’s rather pointedly doing a review series called “Military Spec-Fic That Doesn’t Suck”. Which can’t include anything from Baen, of course. His most recent in that series was A Bertram Chandler’s The Big Black Mark.

    What he utterly fails to mention at any point in the review or comments, is that this book is currently back in print . . . from Baen. His anti-Baen bigotry is so great, so all-consuming, that he’s done his readers a disservice by not telling them where they can easily find the book he recommends.

  297. Wait a second. I distinctly recall Nick Mamatas telling me on facebook that he is legit a Marxist politically.

    Let me check.

    Yep. All the way back in Pat Cadigan’s monster facebook thread he told me he was Marxist, on March 28th.

    (Wow digging back that far is a pain in the butt, even with your own facebook stuff.)

    Either way, his little bit of creative silliness at best earns him ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ and ◔_◔

  298. So, if we really were Marxists, that would mean that Mamatas would like us, right? 😉

  299. Maybe, but then again, he’s attempting to insult us by insulting his own beliefs. That suggests either to hypocrisy or self-loathing, in a general sort of way, so perhaps he’d like us even less if we were Marxist.

    Honestly, I don’t really care to find out if either of those is true or neither.

  300. I’ve never been able to figure out anything Mamatas says other than he thinks a lot of himself and his nice judgments. He reminds me of Damien Walter: lots of words, nothing actually there. If Walter would get ideas from research and knowledge instead of coming up with some resentment and then reverse engineering nothing out of his head, he wouldn’t be fuming watching Milo take what Walter may feel is his place as the U.K.’s Oscar Wilde of journalism.

    “Damien Walter ‏@damiengwalter Jun 5 Just in case anyone was starting to believe the Sad Puppy claims that they aren’t homophobic.”

    There’s more SJW “logic.” Vox Day barks and we all become gay-hating homophobes. Great journalistic instincts there Walter.

    “Damien Walter ‏@damiengwalter Jun 4 ‘the majority of humankind is brown women, and those artists’ work will be privileged above all others'”

    Here’s more from Monica Byrne’s project Walter quoted:

    “That genre, like gender, is a construct of the past.”

    “That ‘mainstream American art’ is almost exclusively created from within, and to serve, the white male colonial gaze. That is an established fact that requires no further proof or validation going forward.”

    “I’m white. This doesn’t make me ‘objective.’ In a racist society, there’s no such thing as a neutral position. So here’s my subjective position as I understand it: being white means having profound privilege, and for me personally, I intend to use that privilege to redistribute power. I wrote more about that in The Atlantic. If you have any thoughts about this, I would love to hear them at @monicabyrne13 or monica@monicabyrne.org.”

    I can tell you my thoughts right now: f off.

    At some point, perhaps in his old age, Walter will realize the worst sex-hating racists are anti-Gamergaters, gender feminists and SJWs.

  301. “Damien Walter ‏@damiengwalter Jun 4 ‘the majority of humankind is brown women, and those artists’ work will be privileged above all others’”

    So, wait. He believes that some people’s work should be valued more because of the race and gender of the artist? How . . . bigoted.

  302. Irene Gallo of Tor, comparing Puppies to Nazis:

    That’s pretty damn offensive, but even more so on a day that we remember those who gave their lives fighting REAL Nazis.

  303. For those keeping score, Sad Puppies have been compared to: Nazis, Neo-Nazis, wife-beaters, child abusers, North Korea and Marxists.

    Over a literary award.

  304. So Damien’s argument is that the oppressed minority that is also the majority worldwide should have preferential treatment when it comes to publishing?

    How about the ones who write good stories get published, regardless of the incidentals of their genetics?

    Of course, his method or mine he still doesn’t get his (non-existent) book published, so that’s cool.

  305. Here’s the creative director of Tor Books and associate publisher of Tor.com Irene Gallo:

    “Irene Gallo ‏@IreneGallo Jun 1 ‘A lot of the history of literature has been the lie of a non-diverse world.”

    That links us to post at Tor.com about panelists at BookCon 2015 “SFF authors Kameron Hurley, Ken Liu, Nnedi Okorafor, and Daniel José Older.” I already feel hated. You get this:

    “Hurley (The Mirror Empire) recalled having a similar experience when she first read SFF, thinking ‘Wow, everyone’s lying to me’ about space being populated only with white men.”

    Actually that’s called “reality” and no it isn’t Jim Crow. Just reality. Notice how you have two falsehoods for the price of one, including the usual non-racialized demographic spike equals racist ideology. Can I help it Nigeria and Guatemala aren’t in space? That makes me Jim Crow, or a liar if I write that?

    “Irene Gallo retweeted Alyssa Wong ‏@crashwong May 12 I’m so excited that my story, ‘A Fist of Permutations in Lightning & Wildflowers,’ will be on… tordotcom, edited by… MiriamAnneW, next year!”

    Gee, I wonder how a die-hard intersectionalist did that. Just a random slush pile, I’m sure.

    “Irene Gallo ‏@IreneGallo Apr 4 In which I start to practice typing ‘No Award’, the Hugo noms”

    Neo-Nazis, huh? I’ve been writing about the mainstreaming of hate speech by the SJW assery for a long time, and in return I’m usually called a “racist.” These people are so far out of their stupid gourds I can’t get over it. Hurley, Liu, Okorafor and Older are quote-cannons.

    Tor BOOKS, not just Tor.COM is crossing a line here. Why do you hire people who so obviously hate me just for getting out of bed in the morning? Why would I come to despise a publisher of SFF I love? Tor needs to start asking themselves some hard questions about whether they are a business or an SJW commune for gender feminist intersectionalism, cuz I’m sick of the ugly racist and sexual remarks all these people produce on a daily basis.

  306. You know, given how convinced they are that we’re the minority I hope they’re seated when the actual vote totals get released.

    ‘Course, I don’t necessarily think the puppies are the (often silent) majority either, I’m just betting that the puppy-kickers don’t have as many people willing to no award everything as they think.

  307. Heh, Nick Mamatas? Crossed swords with him a LONG time ago, when he tripped over his own definitions of what “anti-gay hate group” meant. He was bashing a group I was involved with as “homophobic”, I reminded him that most of its membership were gay or bisexual, and his response was… I kid you not:

    “The Nazis had gays in their ranks.”

    When I pointed out that, technically, someone COULD use this exchange to suggest he thought the Nazis (like the group I was with) were “gay-tolerant” or even “pro-gay”, he flipped out and ultimately sicced his lawyer on me.

    After I had a nice polite discussion with her, she went back to him — and he retracted his “homophobic” claim from the hit-piece he’d written. Still said he’d sue me if this ever came up again. He’s welcome to try.

    Meanwhile, HEY YAMA! If you need a couple hundred thousand words of fanfic to moan about, have MY LITTLE PONY CROSSED WITH FALLOUT NEW VEGAS! -XD

    https://www.fimfiction.net/story/679/fallout-equestria-new-pegas

  308. It’s a toss-up. Lots of Puppy-kickers loudly announcing their desire to No-Award stuff, but also a lot of new Hugo voters who seem willing to actually judge each nominee on a case-by-case basis.

  309. “That ‘mainstream American art’ is almost exclusively created from within, and to serve, the white male colonial gaze. That is an established fact that requires no further proof or validation going forward.”

    OK, I can’t even figure out what this means. Setting aside the “white male colonial gaze” (am I supposed to imagine that as like a basilisk’s gaze, so white colonial men turn people to stone by looking at them?) what does Byrne think “mainstream American art” is? In the days of the Internet there’s no such thing as a main stream of American art, just a host of minor streams splitting off, wandering in whatever direction pleases them, and occasionally remerging – like a river’s delta.

    If Byrne means the art that receives approval from the New York literati, the statement is nearly the reverse of the truth – to pass their sensibilities art is basically required to offend the “white colonial man” who lives in the rhetoric of vulgarized Marxism (and nowhere else.) But I can’t think of anything else she could possibly mean; the New York literati are the only people around who could ever have declared what the main stream of American art actually was.

    Is there, in fact, any more to this than “White male Americans are evil because they like art that sets off my phobias and will pay lots of money to look at it”?

  310. “That humanity is almost exclusively created from within, and to serve, God. That is an established fact that requires no further proof or validation going forward.”

    Yep, it sounds just as “I dun gotta prove nuffin!” when you swap the subject matter.

  311. “Meredith on June 6, 2015 at 5:59 am said:… When you’re interested in talking to people instead of defeating the mythical SJWs, let me know.”

    I am amazed at the eagerness these people have to talk about a thing they know precisely zero about. Does this woman live in a cave?

  312. @James: who is she talking to? Aren’t the people she thinks we are exactly as mythical as she says SJWs are? Then again, I’m a unicorn. What do I know from mythology?

  313. The funny thing is that if I used Gallo’s logic but actual principles instead of SJW identity morality, then she’d be arguing Tor is a racialist gender supremacist enterprise vunderbarkamp. What a knothead.

  314. Well, Calbeck, look at how easily I come up with hateful quotes the SPLC would take a hard look at if you masked the actual sex and race of the targets and how little SJWs can find from so-called women-hating homophobic Nazis. This is exactly why D. Walter tried to crowdsource hate quotes from L. Correia and came up empty.

    If you masked race and sex and took samples from across the SFF core community, SJWs would lose a hate speech contest by a ratio of around 100 to 2. The fact they see it precisely the opposite way shows what stupid, ignorant and crazy liars SJWs are. They seem to have dictionaries where words float around like lifebuoys.

    The reality is just opposing goofy Mattress Girl-style gender feminism which stars Tor bloggers who use terms like “cis-scum” makes you a bigot. That’s a rabbit hole of stupid.

  315. Essentially, what that describes is “morality by consensus”. Here’s an excellent example of how moronic that is (and one they may be forced to agree with!):

    In the early Bible, there’s a point where the Hebrews are marching towards Canaan. They are described as committing flat-out genocide against more than fifty “walled towns”. In each case, God allegedly commanded the Hebrews to do it.

    So, I have asked diehard religious types: does this mean genocide isn’t always evil, OR did the priests of the day simply claim God told them this and no one questioned them? I was surprised to get a third answer: “Oh, God’s grace was in effect back then.”

    Meaning that since He hadn’t handed down the Ten Commandments, ANYTHING HE SAID TO DO WAS MORAL AT THAT PARTICULAR MOMENT.

    So these SJWs who can’t just say a given thing is good or evil on basis of the act, but only in terms of how they rationalize it from moment to moment? They’re using the same arguments as religious fundamentalist apologists for genocide.

  316. “Let’s run it on down. White males are most responsible for the destruction of human life and environment on the planet today. Yet who is controlling the supposed revolution to change all that? White males (yes, yes, even with their pasty fingers back in black and brown pies again). It just could make one a bit uneasy. It seems obvious that a legitimate revolution must be led by, made by those who have been most oppressed: black, brown, and white women–with men relating to that as best they can. A genuine Left doesn’t consider anyone’s suffering irrelevant, or titillating; nor does it function as a microcosm of capitalist economy, with men competing for power and status at the top, and women doing all the work at the bottom (and functioning as objectified prizes or ‘coin’ as well). Goodbye to all that.” – Robin Morgan, “Goodbye to All That”, 1970

    Notice anything familiar there?

    Robin Morgan edited the seminal “Sisterhood Is Powerful (which) has been widely credited with helping to start the second wave feminist movement in the US, and was cited by the New York Public Library as ‘One of the 100 most influential Books of the 20th Century” – Wikipedia

    “Until the appearance of the brilliant anthology Sisterhood Is Powerful and Kate Millett’s extraordinary book Sexual Politics, women did not think of themselves as oppressed people. Most women, it must be admitted, still do not. But the women’s movement as a radical liberation movement in Amerika can be dated from the appearance of those two books.” – Andrea Dworkin in the introduction to her 1974 book Woman Hating.

    Is there any doubt where this cult gets their ideas from or what they are. “Equal rights” feminists? What a stinking lie. If you’re looking for an analogy to the philosophical space of a neo-Nazi you can just put the word “Jew” in there.

  317. “Damien Walter ‏@damiengwalter Jun 4 ‘the majority of humankind is brown women, and those artists’ work will be privileged above all others’”

    Ok, just because this bugs me too much: ‘brown’ women may be a plurality of humankind, but they certainly aren’t a majority. For them to be a majority, there would have to be more ‘brown’ women than all men and white women combined. This is also assuming you’re lumping Asians in with the ‘brown’ category, which you’d have to because Asians in general are a majority of humankind. Given the history, whether Asians are a member of the perennial oppressed class tends to vary on what benefits the speaker today; certainly most universities don’t seem to think so when it comes to admissions.

    That’s pretty damn offensive, but even more so on a day that we remember those who gave their lives fighting REAL Nazis.

    It’s also pretty clear that she is grouping herself as a supporter of ‘Social Justice’, much to the consternation of those trying to distance themselves from the ‘Social Justice Warrior’ moniker.

    That ‘mainstream American art’ is almost exclusively created from within, and to serve, the white male colonial gaze. That is an established fact that requires no further proof or validation going forward.

    I like this claim that it’s an ‘established fact’; they won’t defend it, probably because they can’t.

  318. “Let’s run it on down. White males are most responsible for the destruction of human life and environment on the planet today. Yet who is controlling the supposed revolution to change all that? White males (yes, yes, even with their pasty fingers back in black and brown pies again). It just could make one a bit uneasy. It seems obvious that a legitimate revolution must be led by, made by those who have been most oppressed: black, brown, and white women–with men relating to that as best they can. A genuine Left doesn’t consider anyone’s suffering irrelevant, or titillating; nor does it function as a microcosm of capitalist economy, with men competing for power and status at the top, and women doing all the work at the bottom (and functioning as objectified prizes or ‘coin’ as well). Goodbye to all that.” – Robin Morgan, “Goodbye to All That”, 1970

    Where to start with this one:

    First, it looks like Asians are white again. Either that or Ms. Morgan has not actually had to breathe Chinese smog and is generalizing.

    “A genuine Left doesn’t consider anyone’s suffering irrelevant” Sure it does when that suffering is the result of leftist policies.

    nor does it function as a microcosm of capitalist economy, with men competing for power and status at the top, and women doing all the work at the bottom (and functioning as objectified prizes or ‘coin’ as well).” Someone sounds like they need a few courses in Economics not taught by a Marxist.

  319. OH! THAT’S who Nick Mamatas is! The dick jumped in on the discussion I was having with another Puppy Kicker on Moshe Feder’s FB and started calling me stupid because the word “Slate” MUST mean that SP3 is Political.

    Janice Gelb’s logic about how you must recommend MORE than 5 to not be an evil slate is also mind-boggling.

  320. That word “reactionary” seems to really bother a lot of people. And yet, who is defending their Citadel from the encroaching hordes?

    Also, does Irene Gallo actually word for Tor-the-Publisher? OMG. Of course, most of us have known for decades that if you wanted a career in the industry you had to go deep undercover. Helpful pros would talk about this quite openly. Such a *small* community and they all talk to each other, you know? So if you wanted a career you had to be very *very* careful.

  321. Clarification: Gallo’s remark was made on May 11, not today.

    It’s STILL an appalling thing to say.

  322. Of course being called reactionaries bothers them–if they’re reactionaries, then they’re not progressives, and their whole identity is bound up in that.

  323. “Reactionary” merely means “anyone who is reacting”. It’s only an insult in terms of the concept of a “Glorious Revolution” (meant absolutely straight-faced with no sarcasm). Because of this, its literary baggage doesn’t allow for tolerance. One who is “reacting” in opposition to a “Glorious Revolution” is harmful to humanity and must therefore be neutralized.

    There’s no other reason or basis by which someone would or should use “reactionary” as an insult, and there’s no reason to use it except as a call-to-arms for like-minded people to shout down this threat to the Glorious Revolution (feel free to now add sarcasm to taste).

  324. What I find most surprising about this SJW movement is how much they seem to have read the same material. Even 45 years apart the sameness is rather stunning, even sometimes down to almost the exact same oddball sentences. And then there’s their equally odd vocabulary with “cis,” “privilege” and “patriarchy” which marks them right off the bat. I suppose they get a lot of it by talking to each other but it’s just weird how much like a cult it is. That’s not including the shared sheer hostility for whites and men. But the oddest thing of all is how a cult dedicated to opposing group defamation is actually so unaware that is exactly what the centerpiece of everything they say is. I just find that stunning.

    I really don’t know what to make of these shared lapses of judgment. What common denominator makes people so miseducated you wouldn’t dare bring them around polite company? Are they really the great unwashed – ill-bred but arrogant riffraff who just don’t know any better?

    Whenever I read K. Tempest Bradford, Daniel Jose Older, Kameron Hurley or John Scalzi and a ton of others I get the impression they were raised by cats. They lack any critical reasoning skills or awareness most people I meet take for granted. I’ve met people living in shanty towns in Rio or running a small store in Abu Simbel who are more sophisticated and have better breeding. I’ve met a ton of people from the Sudan and I’ve yet to meet even one as ill-bred as these folks. I have never met one person from the Sudan who talks smack about colonial whites.

    I know it sounds like I’m just being insulting but one just doesn’t run around publicly taking out entire ethnic groups or an entire sex as immoral. It just isn’t done. I personally have never met anyone in any part of the Third World I’ve been to so lacking in civilized manners. This entire cult talks about whites and men like neo-Nazis talk about Jews and the KKK talks about blacks.

  325. “their equally odd vocabulary with “cis,” “privilege” and “patriarchy” which marks them right off the bat”

    As opposed to “org”, “clear”, and “thetan”?

  326. Petru Groza says:
    June 6, 2015 at 8:23 am
    The fact that you’re a shit writer has nothing to do with your Asianness.

    Hey, look – Clampsy has a new alt.

  327. “You are so lost in your delusions and fantasies that you can no longer see reality.”
    Oh Marston, your projection is as strong as ever. You’re such a sad little gamma rabbit.

  328. “*imagines the result if he was dumb enough to actually try to assault Shadow in person*”

    Clamps wouldn’t dare do it himself, as he’s confined to a wheelchair. He’d have to somehow get someone to do it for him. That’d be a problem, considering that 1) he has no friends, 2) no job to speak of to pay for it.

    Yeah, that’s part of what made Vox actually pity him.

  329. The latest conspiracy theory from File 770:

    “At this point, it seems quite reasonable to posit that the campaign was about Brad Torgersen wanting various people to feel that they owed him a favor for getting them Hugo nominations, at least in some cases in exchange for future unspecified considerations. Quid pup quo, as it were.”

    The truth is out there . . .

  330. Even more projection from those folks… because that is how they would do it…

  331. Clamps is a stark example of how receptive a sociopath like him is to the generally sociopathic ideology SJWs have adopted for their own. I’ve never thought of this recent culture war in SFF as liberals vs. conservatives. To me it’s a culture of sociopathic resentment vs. people who basically live and let live and want to be left alone.

    Were SJWs true liberals they never in a thousand years would brag about a banhammer and disemvoweling. That is a thing conservatives do because they are not open to change and ending debate helps to prevent change. It was conservatives who enacted the Hayes Office film censorship codes in the ’30s and forced the comics industry to self-police itself with a comics code in the ’50s, not liberals. Liberals were bitterly opposed to that. The comic publisher most affected – E. C. Comics – fought tooth and nail to have a story published which featured a black man before the code was enacted, although that was not an issue with the code per se; it was the sex and violence. It was liberals who championed and ushered in the new era of ultra-sexual, in your face and violent pop culture.

    Look at what it is SJWs do: it’s not enough they are content to benefit from the wisdom of their own personal explorations via diversity, they insist that be culture wide and that you participate as well. By an amazing coincidence those diversity initiatives are only for white and male cultural expressions – no other. They are opposed to violence and sex in pop culture, unless it’s their own gender-fluid sex. Otherwise it’s “sexism.”

    The other thing SJWs do is another thing liberals are desperately against, and that is group defamation. I see SJWs as a culture of two people: one is paranoid, mentally ill, hateful, jealous, resentful, ill-bred and lazy. The the other is stupid, ignorant, unsophisticated, arrogant, naive but for all that fairly compassionate, hard working and wanting to do the right thing. It is the classic radical chic mau-mau/flak catcher scenario described by Tom Wolfe. Racists and their useful idiots.

    The anti-SJW isn’t really a conservative per se but conservatives push back the most because they are the most prominent targets of SJWs. The reason for that is they are seen as the bastion of homophobia, anti-women’s rights and racists that they see as having typified the fake Jim Crow/feminist movement SJWs have brought up from the ’50s. Anita Sarkeesian and Brianna Wu are not progressive liberals but high-strung, paranoid, easily offended authoritarians in love with censorship who refuse debate. In other words the classic Nixon profile. Liberals in the ’60s loved open debate and were crucial in opening up talk shows and things like Meet the Press.

    The bottom line is SJW is today indistinguishable for an intersectional gender feminist, itself a sociopathic and suicidal lesbian ideology that can neither survive on its own or reproduce. In what world does a lesbian ideology side with Muslims and the Third World against the West and survive without the West? For all of intersectionalism’s talk of the wonderful non-Western Third World, it is the one place they would be brutally suppressed and which they come from but do not go to. The do-gooder liberals which embrace this sick movement is itself a suicide cult determined to import the very Third World which doesn’t work, is brutally unsophisticated and doesn’t particularly like us.

    The pure essence of political correctness is to not only pretend we couldn’t militarily defeat 20 Brazil’s but act on that. That is a suicide cult built on a guilt and shame of its own success and helped along by a pack of yowling feminist racists with congenital low self-esteem.

  332. So, the Nebula Awards are tonight. I expect at least one winner or presenter will make anti-Puppy remarks.

  333. “So, the Nebula Awards are tonight. I expect at least one winner or presenter will make anti-Puppy remarks.”

    If I were a betting man, I’d put everything I had on the Over.

  334. @Christopher

    The latest conspiracy theory from File 770:

    “At this point, it seems quite reasonable to posit that the campaign was about Brad Torgersen wanting various people to feel that they owed him a favor for getting them Hugo nominations, at least in some cases in exchange for future unspecified considerations. Quid pup quo, as it were.”

    Well, to provide a bit of context, it’s speculation arising from a sequence of details from Nick Mamatas, that the author cites here, but as it’s Mamatas – who in these circles is conceived to be slightly more reliable than John Scalzi, if I read the mood correctly – that may not be relevant.

    Personally, of more interest to me is the following quote from Michael Z Williamson in the same thread:

    Brad asked what I’d published that might be Hugo eligible, and I mentioned “Wisdom.”

    . Again, this seems to go against what the narrative here is (that SP3 was a set of recommendations, pooled from various sources in an open and democratic manner) and more in favour of the narrative from Correia’s post that I cited earlier (that this was assembled by a much smaller pool – either the ELoE or just Brad himself).

    Again, I’m aware that the general response here is along the lines of “asked and answered, so piss off”. Let’s take it for granted that I’m then terrible and incompetent at research and that my google-fu is weak. Would it really be that harmful to SP3s aims for someone to provide me with specific links to those places that the questions have been asked and answered?

  335. “SocialInjusticeWorrier on June 6, 2015 at 6:13 pm said:
    “@snowcrash

    “The last I checked, Teddy Beale seemed to fit fairly comfortably into the neoNazi demographic, despite his efforts to squirm away from his previous activities and utterances. There may be a silent group of Puppies who disagree with the racism, homophobia and misogyny evident in some of their most vociferous self-proclaimed spokescritters, but they haven’t done much to shut down their reprehensible brethren.”

    If I don’t share their ideology how can i be their bretheren? Being mutually targeted by a pack of anti-male, anti-white goofball female supremacists, racists and their naive dustbuckets doesn’t make anyone my bretheren except to the extent we’re all told we listen to Fox News and Rush Limbaugh and are ourselves racists, homophobes and misogynists. “Bretheren” is in their fucking minds. What they mean is white, straight and male and not bowing down to asshole intersectionalists.

    *

    Here’s a bang your head against a wall statement that could be the outline of an Orwellian SF novel of a future society’s doublethink:

    “Chris Hensley on June 6, 2015 at 9:43 pm said:

    “‘I’m not going to personally opine on his views, but plenty of demonstrated misogynists have wives, mothers and sisters that think they are swell people. Plenty of overt racists have a friend who is a person of color. These things are not get-out-of-racism/sexism/misogyny-free cards.’

    “I agree with you. The problem is that Torgersen, and even Vox Day, don’t. From their own statements it is clear that they believe racism to be about knowing and willing animus towards people because they are a different race from you. From that definition, they have built quite the logical artifice.”

    Can anyone interpret that? So “cracka ass cracka” isn’t racism and being unaware and innocent and marrying black women is? Is this counter-instinctive racism-not-racism-racism? What human being could ever escape guilt from that black hole of stupid? Is this invisible privilege theory racism? What is “logical” in this world of dumb?

    *

    “Ann Somerville on June 6, 2015 at 11:32 pm said:
    ‘They would tell the rapist not to rape rather than provide women with the means to protect themselves’

    “Well yeah. Because trying to protect yourself from rape when rape is socially acceptable is impossible without excluding yourself entirely from society.”

    In what world has rape ever been socially acceptable outside of Genghis Khan? You don’t have to be a genius to figure out how people smeared as privileged misogynist homophobic racists for 3 years as an entire ethnic group by “anti-racists” become right wing neo-Nazis for pushing back. Heck, we were right wing Nazis just for waking up in the morning via Orwell’s dipshit privilege theory. You cannot escape SJW logic because anything is anything at any given time.

  336. “At this point, it seems quite reasonable to posit that campaign was about Brad Torgersen wanting various people to feel that they owed him a favor for getting them Hugo nominations, at least in some cases in exchange for future unspecified considerations. Quid pup quo, as it were.”

    Problem: every basis Mamatas has for suggesting this is equally applicable to Tor Books’ editorial staff and previous Hugo Awards. Indeed, that’s rather been the point to begin with for several years now — quid Tor quo, as it were.

    If Mamatas’ musings are basis for anyone on the other side of the fence to reach conclusions, then it serves only as moral justification for the same basis on this side, thus effectively condoning everything the Puppies have done to date.

    Thank you, Nicholas.

  337. @Snowcrash
    Let’s take it for granted that I’m then terrible and incompetent at research and that my google-fu is weak. Would it really be that harmful to SP3s aims for someone to provide me with specific links to those places that the questions have been asked and answered?

    Hmm. Let me see. You’re asking for someone here to do your research for you.

    Which is, go back to the posts of the start of the year, across several blogs and probably facebook posts, and go through the posts AND comment streams of those blogs moving forward in dates- bearing in mind that Sarah A. Hoyt’s and MHN’s blog posts can have comment streams of several hundred comments regularly… to give you the answers to your questions, taking probably several hours at minimum, to several days, to sift through thousands of replies and comments and posts…

    and present you the evidence you are ‘requesting’ to ‘prove’ the honesty of Sad Puppies 3…

    That’s supposed to be a reasonable request?

    “Go fetch, Puppy!”

    Worse, whenever we’ve answered questions, our honesty has been doubted, the evidences dismissed or questioned, or ignored entirely, or a different set of demands and questions set for us. Goalpost moving each time. When the accusation of us puppies as racist / misogynist / blahblah evilist was proven to be wrong, your side retreated to the accusation that none of our chosen stories are worthy, mere plebian entertainment. Yet the tastes for that run similar to the Long Form presentation category, a category the Puppies didn’t have a lot of selections for. Answer one question, argue it to defeat, a different accusation crops up.

    You’ve already proven that no matter what we do, no matter what we say, no matter what proof we present, nothing will ever be good enough.

    Your side beats us over the head with Vox Day, but you have here in this thread alone, you have Yamamanama, who posts at File 770 as Alauda, posting here again and again bypassing Brad’s ban, as well as advising others at File 770 how to ‘prevent’ being ‘doxxed’ by using proxies and disposable emails – the method by which he bypasses the ban.

    You want us to ‘take responsibility’ for Vox Day but refuse to do the same to the ugly on your side, examples of which James May regularly quotes.

    We see very clearly the double standards you are applying, and it’s the Puppies being ‘unreasonable’?

    REALLY?

  338. Snowcrash we obviously see things with the white male colonial gaze you can’t see. There is no way to explain our unique vision.

    Plus we can peer into the fourth dimension. See: whiteness.

  339. “Because being a victim of people with bad intent definitely proves that you’re a loser.

    — P Nielsen Hayden (@pnh) June 7, 2015”

    The Hugos were a victim of their own stupidity in aligning themselves with a racist bigoted ideology that considers critiquing all white people in America and all men on Earth a valid criticism. That is the same criticism as the KKK uses. Go to KKK parties and don’t be surprised if your car’s tires are flat when you come out. People who party with dipshit racists who whine about “white dude parades,” “Anglophones” and the “white gaze” are in fact losers. We simply applied highlighter. These same uplifted uneducated morons were taking #NotYourAsian selfies at the Nebulas because whites mistake Asians for each other because whites are stupid racists.

    I sense more flat tires coming on. Give your boorish affirmative action “marginalized” who don’t know how to behave in an artistic movement more awards nominations and check your tire pressure. Meanwhile I’ll make sure I learn to be a good “ally” to “anti-racists” like K. Tempest Bradford, the unsophisticated lard sandwich at a sushi buffet.

    By the way, I’m not buying any more books from your company until it gets a dictionary with the words “racism” and “bigotry.” I’ll buy that. Until then… no.

  340. @Shadowdancer
    Hmm. Let me see. You’re asking for someone here to do your research for you.

    No.

    What I’ve said is that thus far, what I’ve seen (ie Larry’s post, and MZW’s comments) tends to supports the premise that SP3 was a list curated and selected by either Brad or the ELoE. Additionally, I don’t see how Brad keeps calling it open, democratic, and transparent process from start to finish given that there were a source of nominations (ie, emails) where it’s not known what they recommended, or how many recommendations the final slate works received.

    So I’m asking for someone, especially in a group that keeps reiterating that the question has been asked and answered – Show me. I’m not seeing what you’re seeing. I can’t find what you’ve all found. So please, show me.

    Like I said earlier, I’m keenly aware that many of us exist in our own bubbles of reinforcing media narratives and like-minded people, and as such our views become a little bit of an echo chamber. One of the reasons I’m here is to try and get that *other side*, because in my bubble the narrative seems to be “We keep asking Brad how exactly this was open and democratic, but he keeps refusing to provide any proof or details”,

    Which is, go back to the posts of the start of the year, across several blogs and probably facebook posts, and go through the posts AND comment streams of those blogs moving forward in dates- bearing in mind that Sarah A. Hoyt’s and MHN’s blog posts can have comment streams of several hundred comments regularly… to give you the answers to your questions, taking probably several hours at minimum, to several days, to sift through thousands of replies and comments and posts…

    Yes. And that’s why I think I’ve been unable to find it. But then, there are repeated claims – within this thread, and the prior fisking one – by people that this has been asked and answered . I’ve been told – again within this thread – that “five minutes on Google” will answer my questions. So suddenly when you tell me that it’s *really* hard to find those details, I have to admit to some level of surprise and disappointment. However, I’m hopeful that some of the others may find it easier. Or heck, that Brad himself may answer this, if he’s got the time or the inclination. If he doesn’t, it’s entirely his prerogative.

    You want us to ‘take responsibility’ for Vox Day but refuse to do the same to the ugly on your side, examples of which James May regularly quotes.

    On this, and much of the latter part of your post, you’re confusing me with someone else. Or many someone elses. I think I’m more than capable of getting into trouble with my own words, and would prefer not to have someone else’s positions mixed up with mine.

  341. “Ann Somerville on June 6, 2015 at 11:32 pm said:
    ‘They would tell the rapist not to rape rather than provide women with the means to protect themselves’”

    Did she seriously say that? or agree with someone saying that? When Larry taught how many women the concealed carry course?

  342. Yes, Shadowdancer, Vox saying unpopular things is bad evilthink, while Andrew telling them how to commit a felony is perfectly ok.

  343. The ditzy Somerville means men should be taught not to rape rather than teach women to protect themselves. First of all, men don’t rape, criminals do. Society already “teaches” not to commit crimes by jail time. Secondly, men don’t generally need the threat of prison sentences not to rape women anyway. They just don’t. Anyway, why would any of that preclude teaching women to protect themselves from criminals? Should I leave my windows open and doors unlocked out of stubbornness? Nothing these weirdoes say makes any sense unless you understand they have a grudge against men.

  344. You’ve already proven that no matter what we do, no matter what we say, no matter what proof we present, nothing will ever be good enough.

    Snowcrash demands specific proof from Sad Puppies while being willing to smear GamerGaters with no proof whatsoever. I think that about shows where his biases lie.

  345. Aaaaaaaaaaaaand Snowcrash proves my point. “Oh wah, you won’t do my research for me, IT IS SO HARD for you to take the time to acquiesce to my ‘reasonable’ request even when what you’re basically asking someone here to… do your research for you and take those hours, if not days, to go fetch like a puppy, because it ‘should be easy’.” (and the cute implication there is if we don’t, then we MUST be lying and making stuff up.)

    @Draven The lie that Larry Correia is a rape apologist, woman hating wife beater and homophobic asshole was a lie they spun during SP2. Larry outright said that he taught both women and gays the concealed carry course, and taught plenty of them self defence techniques and allowed them to practice with pretending that he was an aggressor, because they needed to learn what to do right, and he rather get hurt being punched or kicked than them being hurt for real. And that they would CELEBRATE successful instances of his students successfully defending themselves against being assaulted or being raped, or mugged, or such.

    Oh and the whole ‘Call up Mrs. Correia because we can get you to safety from your husband!!!’ yeah, the same Mrs. Correia who knows how to shoot too.

    That also came up when he openly agreed with that Miss America candidate for her saying that she believed that women should be responsible for their own protection and carry guns.

    Naturally, thinking that women are capable of protecting themselves or teaching them how was somehow being rape apologists to EVERYONE WHO AGREED. That was a long, stupid ass thread with the emotional hostage taker who beat everyone over the head with disagreeing with her as being a rape apologist.

    Oh and the whole ‘it’s rape if even if it’s not prosecutable as rape because consent was given.’ And a year later on, we have Mattress “fuck me in the ass” Girl and the Rolling Stone Rape Epidemic On Campus lie.

    Totally fine for these guys to cross lines and make unreasonable demands, and commit crimes, because GOODTHINK AND RIGHTFAN. Christ on a pogostick.

  346. I read most if not all of Larry’s posts before the notification system broke… I am aware.

  347. “She’s a brilliant essayist” – Tor Books creative director Irene Gallo on Kameron Hurley

    Hahahahahaha. Let that sink in real deep how any moron who uses illogic and tears apart history is “brilliant” as long as they go after the white colonial male gaze for a hobby.

    It is perfectly legitimate to describe someone as sharing a philosophical and intellectual space with a neo-Nazi. But first you have to do two things:

    A.) Have a definition in principle of what that is. To me that definition would be a member of an ethnic group or sex who is supremacist in regard to their in-group and engages in group defamation and demonization/dehumanization theories against another ethnic group or sex in a manner which is obsessive and ideologically organized.

    B.) Make a case for a person occupying that intellectual and philosophical space via quoted persistent rhetoric.

    Now, if you look around the core SFF landscape, it’s pretty clear if you dispense with all the bullshit and lying about “punching up” and power/privilege theories where only a certain race and sex can ever act like a neo-Nazi, there are plenty of candidates. Before you can get to any Sad or Rapid Puppy you have to address segregated rooms and anthologies, segregated reviews, racially and sexually boycotting convention panels, calls to not read or publish a race or sex and repeated racial slurs. No one on the SP side has repetitive theories how Three Body Problem is Asiansplaining and culturally appropriating Western SF. That is how SJWs operate, not us. In short, if SJWs aren’t lying they’re not awake. They are a cult of fuckery.

    Irene Gallo doesn’t know what the fucking hell she’s talking about because she has no principles whatsoever by which to understand jack shit; not a Constitution, law, equal protection or human rights.

    I can’t imagine ever boycotting an SFF publisher but I won’t be buying anything from Tor Books as long as that doxy women works there. I am sick of venues like Publisher’s Weekly employing fuck racist supremacists who say white men need to come with trigger warnings and then calling me an “internet-racist” when I object. Fuck these absurd people and their absurd intersectional cult of white-hatred and man-hatred. Go look up Heidelberg University 1933-5 and then tell me these shit-asses aren’t operating in the same way. That is not Godwin’s Law, that is an intellectual and philosophical space and attitude of intolerance and hatred based on race and sex.

    “The white male colonial gaze”? Really? What’s the Jewish gaze. Certainly if there is such a thing as white privilege where whites value themselves vs. other races then there is such a thing as Jewish privilege within SJW intersectional orthodoxy… in principle. But you’d first have to have principles to understand how dangerous intersectional rhetoric is. What SF writer or editor can actually produce SF literature who doesn’t grasp these things? All that will emerge is a politburo literature of “brilliant” bigots.

    Jews don’t buy books from neo-Nazi, blacks folks don’t buy books from the KKK and I don’t buy books from people who light me up for being white and male and then call me a neo-Nazi for objecting to that even while they’re promoting the very people lighting me up. Forget that con game. I’m not buying any shares. I’d no sooner read Kameron Hurley’s blatherings about my shortcomings as a white man than I would sandpaper my eyes.

  348. I’ve done this before and I’ll do it again.

    Transparent (definition): able to be seen through; easy to notice or understand; honest and open; not secretive

    How have we not been ‘honest and open’ about what we’re doing? We’re caught in a classic paradox. Because we’ve been upfront about what we’re doing, you know that something was done and then can complain that we haven’t been upfront enough. Meanwhile, because we can’t provide concrete proof of an intentionally secretive process (the backroom dealmaking) , you’re free to deny it has ever existed. Sad Puppies is certainly easy enough to notice.

    Democratic (definition): of, relating to, or favoring democracy; of or relating to one of the two major political parties in the United States evolving in the early 19th century from the anti-federalists and the Democratic-Republican party and associated in modern times with policies of broad social reform and internationalism; relating to, appealing to, or available to the broad masses of the people; favoring social equality; not snobbish

    A get-out-the-vote drive, which Sad Puppies is, is by it’s nature both favoring democracy and appealing to the broad masses of the people. By challenging the status quo, which we believe is held by a narrow range of gatekeepers, one can readily argue that Sad Puppies is also favoring social equality (as opposed to ‘social justice’).

    A reasonable neutral observer should be able to conclude that the Sad Puppies supporters honestly believe the campaign to be transparent and democratic.

  349. @Civilis – Always worth reposting again and again because clearly, people who won’t bother listening aren’t going to.

    http://monsterhunternation.com/2015/04/06/a-letter-to-the-smofs-moderates-and-fence-sitters-from-the-author-who-started-sad-puppies/

    And yeah, Snowcrash is happy to trash Gamergate and gamers with no proof whatsoever. REALLY shows where his biases are, and aGGros have been mostly crazy as hell and unreasonable beyond belief.

    As a female gamer, #NotYourShield #SodOffaGGros

    Your side has Brianna Wu, who single-handedly brought the attention of Gamergate to the Sad Puppies, which Daddy Warpig, Larry AND Vox failed to do. I saw the original retweets in the GamerGate hashtag, which I would browse through when idly reading, and they were pretty much “What’s Sad Puppies?”

    So yeah, that’s on you aGGros, not Sad Puppies, not Gamergate. All on you.

    And THAT post? 857 comments.

    I like how Snowcrash is completely unwilling to do the hard work of clicking through every single Sad Puppy related blog, facebook, twitter, and articles, starting from oh, maybe mid-December? – you know, click ‘next post’ or ‘next’ on every single one of those pages.

    The posts you can easily find on Google are starting points. Work your way from there if it really is that important that you get your answers.

  350. Oh and for all the statements that the EW article is ‘corrected’ …
    http://www.ew.com/article/2015/04/06/hugo-award-nominations-sad-puppies

    And I quote: Writer Philip Sandifer wrote on his blog Sunday, “The Hugo Awards have just been successfully hijacked by neofascists.” Sandifer’s post, which is worth reading in full, addresses what this disaster means for the sci-fi world:

    So they’re letting the negative slant stand. Really? Neo-Fascists? REALLY?

  351. And let’s not forget these three Tor.com bloggers:

    Alex (Daffy) MacFarlane uses terms for heterosexuals like “cis-scum” and “cis-peeeoooople.”

    I get lit up as a homophobe for objecting to that.

    Justin Landon has written SF is “a genre predicated on white cis men doing hero stuff.” When a Kickstarter had an all-white Table of Contents Landon remarked “All white. Really? And zero people of color. Just saying, there’s not going to be anything new here.”

    Imagine me writing Asians or blacks are racially boring or bring special qualities apart from whites… like stupidity.

    And here is the writing of the man-loving Liz Bourke which includes a quote from lover of all whites N. K. Jemisin:

    “‘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.)”

    Again with this fuckery about white male power. It’s not just SP and RP who are neo-Nazis, the entire white male side of the Western world is a troop of neo-Nazis intent on withholding their fantasy literature from sub-human, immoral and degenerate gays, women and non-whites.

    All three used to leave sympathetic comments at Requires Hate’s viciously anti-white anti-male web site. Fuck all three.

    We’ve had enough Tor.

    We’ve had enough of this fuck supremacist intersectional gender feminist movement which lies about imaginary oppression in order to give themselves a free-fire zone to express their paranoid hatred of men and whites.

    You want a term for neo-Nazi? Try “intersectionalism.”

  352. (Blinks) What?
    Vox is bonkers, but he’s not a neofascist. One might be able to make the case for Kratman and Wright if you took some things they’ve said and written out of context. OTOH, we could make the case on that basis that Sandifer and crew are outright Stalinists, so that doesn’t help them at all.
    Correia’s libertarian, so is Hoyt, and Torgerson is…something or other, but I’m pretty sure he’s somewhere not in the authoritarian line.
    However, the people throwing that around are the same people who think the UKIP is fascist. So…yeah. I’m not impressed.

  353. http://www.nyrsf.com/2015/05/the-puppies-of-terror-editorial-nyrsf-320.html#more

    Some more libel:

    “This group, which I think of as Panzergroup Asshole, is reactionary, virulently anti-woman, and racist whenever it suits them. 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. 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. They are terrorists—they want people, especially women, to be so afraid of drawing attention that they just sit silently.”

  354. And from the comments at File 770:

    “Not to mention the implications of all those deleted blog posts by fearless truth-teller Puppies Brad and Larry, who can’t imagine why anyone would find their claims of innocent ignorance of Teddy Beale’s views completely incredible. Not exactly the behavior of people with clean consciences, is it?”

    Bullcrap. What deleted blog posts? Prove it, CHORFs, or shut the hell up.

  355. Nebula nominee Kate Elliott: “So tempted to respond: You mean the good old days before racism and sexism were invented?”
    Bourke: “And good old boys didn’t need to worry about criticism. Well, bless their hearts.”
    Elliott: “Course they didn’t have to worry. They EARNED it.”
    Blogger Cora Buhlert: “And of course all the books worth reading just happened to be written by straight white cis men.”

    *

    “1. Natalie Luhrs ‏@eilatan Jul 16 SFF peeps, kindly look at this list and the archives and tell me if you see what I see, alley-cat vulgarity aside? …mystgalaxy.c.m/Reviews-Patrick
    2. Kate Elliott ‏@KateElliottSFF Jul 16 @eilatan that’s a trick question. RIght? 😉
    3. Liz Bourke ‏@hawkwing_lb Jul 16 @KateElliottSFF @eilatan @jennygadget So. Are we all seeing a BAG OF DICKS?
    4. Kate Elliott ‏@KateElliottSFF Jul 16 @hawkwing_lb @eilatan @jennygadget Diversity now means ‘lots of books by different men.’
    5. Ann Somerville ‏@ann_somerville Jul 16 @KateElliottSFF @CoraBuhlert @hawkwing_lb @eilatan @jennygadget do any of those authors even have a tan?”

    *

    “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…” – from a review by Liz Bourke

    *

    No, I don’t see any common denominator resentments there that run daily and all year. I guess I missed all the comments about women, gays, Arabs and Latinos… because equality. When they Tweet “they” they really mean everyone on Earth and not the colonial white-gazing patriarchy. There’s no such thing as SJWs fighting the good fight against the patriarchy, whites and men. There’s no intersectional-worship squatting at the heart of virtually every institution in core SFF. 10,000 quotes are all taken out of context and everything’s my imagination cuz Rush Limbaugh. And at awards time they all vote for the best work cuz there’s no affirmative action they bitch about 24/7 in quote after quote.

    You don’t need a conspiracy in a diving bell with one anti-male anti-white brain cell.

    Just pretend they’re talking about black folks and then imagine they think of us as racist Nazis. Really? WHERE’S THE QUOTES? SJWs take one joke Brad made and ignore the torrent of mansplaining, whitesplaining, cis-dude bags of dicks cracka ass cracka sour dough-faced toxic masculinity.

    Gee, I wonder what a bag of womensplaining polyamorous c__t homo-toxic femininity would sound like Tweeted every day and then sat down on convention panels to discuss “diversity” and “inclusion” and oh here’s an award?

    Apparently Miss Gallo suffers from some analogy to disemvoweled-vision where she can only see words from certain people and others are all mixed up and can’t be read.

  356. Well, Brad does delete Clamps, and so does Larry, I think. (They aren’t referring to deleting Clamps’s posts, are they? Deleting Clamps as evidence of a bad conscience? Er… They’re talking about something else, right?)

  357. Always worth reposting again and again because clearly, people who won’t bother listening aren’t going to.

    I’m here because I believe there are people out there who will come to threads like this one without having preconceived notions who need to see this.

    Brad says “For God’s sake, if you’re going to have a cause, shut your flapping (digital) mouths and put your bodies where your talk is. Get involved. Do something measurable. Concrete. Pursuing a quantifiable objective.” In the past, I have, though nothing like what Brad has done. For me, this is what I can do right now.

  358. If you’re describing something in the present historical context as fascist, Nazi, or some variation thereof, I’m going to demand that you both explicitly define the term in both present and historical contexts and then relate the definition to the current situation directly. If you can’t do that, then you shouldn’t even be attempting to use those terms in a debate.

    “Not to mention the implications of all those deleted blog posts by fearless truth-teller Puppies Brad and Larry, who can’t imagine why anyone would find their claims of innocent ignorance of Teddy Beale’s views completely incredible. Not exactly the behavior of people with clean consciences, is it?”

    Likewise, I’m going to demand anyone referencing things Vox Day is alleged to have said provide both the quote from Vox Day and a link to the source so we have the full context.

  359. That and we aren’t claiming ‘innocent ignorance of his views’ we are saying we are not responsible for the personal views of others. I don’t frequent his blog because of those views and haven’t bought any of his books. Conversely, I haven’t bought or read Ancillary-whatever-it-is-this-year… for the same reason.

  360. Man, I wonder if they’re talking about all the Clamps posts that got deleted as “proof” that Brad is “hiding” something.

    That wretched little man is nothing but grief.

  361. By the by… according to Utah laws, Clamps has committed both ‘hacking’ and ‘cyberstalking’…. just sayin…

  362. “Can you see why I call him Janus Scalzi now?”

    That’s actually his middle name. First name: “Hugh”.

    Sorry, I couldn’t pass up a straight line like that.

  363. (Having read through the latest comments thread at File 770, I don’t think the person who said that was talking about Clamps; they seem to have been talking about posts by the authors, not comment posts. Although I’m not sure what “deleted posts” they mean.)

    (Now I’m off to take a shower.)

  364. If they ARE talking about Clamps being constantly deleted over here as ‘proof’ of ‘Brad hiding something’ then they obviously believe that Clamps isn’t a bad person, despite the behaviour he displays here, and the evidence of his behavior gathered over oh, seven years. That’s stuff that has NOTHING to do with Sad Puppies, or the Hugos, but everything to do with Clamps stalking and harassing people everywhere they go for their politics.

    Larry’s right. They’re TOTALLY welcome to him. Clearly they approve of his harassment because it’s done against the people they think should be harassed.

  365. Milo Yannopolous is “looking into” the Irene Gallo debacle. 🙂

  366. Brad did delete one post almost immediately after posting it about a month ago. Larry hasn’t deleted any of his old posts that I’ve seen, and I’ve been revisiting some of his older posts which relate to the current controversy.

    I guess the fevered search of Brad and Larry’s blog archives for incriminating evidence didn’t go so well. 🙂

  367. I know I’ve gotten the WordPress copies of blogs in my email a few times and the link to the “original blog” doesn’t work– it’s a WordPress thing, because it’s happened over a range of blogs and all you have to do to find the blog post…which you have a copy of, because subscriber email… is go check the main page.

    IIRC, usually the problem is that wordpress used their number-address, instead of the title-address. I say “usually” because once I figured out why I couldn’t find a recipe I really wanted to get clarification on, I didn’t care enough to check every single example. It’s wordpress.

  368. Sooo, pretty much, it’s ‘we can’t find it therefore they must have deleted it so we couldn’t find it now they have to prove it’s never been deleted so they have to find it go fetch Puppies!’

    And yeah, Foxfier. It’s WORDPRESS. Ye gods.

  369. Jonathan LaForce did a post on MGC calling for a Tor boycott. Now his Facebook page has been removed.

  370. @Civilis at 7.25 am – That’s a strange misreading of our prior conversation regarding GG. I thought we went up to a point where we agreed that there were no sources that the other would find convincing.

    And no need to do much investigation regarding my biases – I’ve been fairly clear that I’m not a fan of slates, and that I’m not a fan of GG either, to put both of those mildly. At no point have I ever tried to claim otherwise. They’re not views seen often here, but they are out there, and I feel no reason to hide that.

    @Shadowdancer at 7.25am – You know, it may be better if you based your response on my actual words, instead of your mental image of what my post was. Give it a try, it’s just there at 6.52am. As I said there, others – not you – in this thread have said that the information is easily found. So I’m hoping that those people may help out, and put an end to this altogether.

    @Civilis at 7.45 am – I’m not sure how dragging out dictionary definitions, and then saying that SP3 is meeting them – without actually addressing the countervailing evidence, or providing any proof – counts as proof of anything, other than some weird child of circular reasoning.

    In any event, how is something “open and democratic” when for all intents and purposes, it’s either a cabal (the ELoE. as per Larry’s post cited previously) or a single person (Brad, as per Michael Z Williamsons post at File770) deciding on who becomes a finalist? How, when there were a source of nominations (ie, emails) where it’s not known what they recommended, or how many recommendations the final slate works received?

  371. Wow. Surely _that_ won’t backfire at all.

    It’s like they’re looking at all the stupid things the aGGros did and said “this time it’ll work.”

  372. @Snowcrash
    Let’s take it for granted that I’m then terrible and incompetent at research and that my google-fu is weak. Would it really be that harmful to SP3s aims for someone to provide me with specific links to those places that the questions have been asked and answered?

    Hmm. Let me see. You’re asking for someone here to do your research for you.

    Which is, go back to the posts of the start of the year, across several blogs and probably facebook posts, and go through the posts AND comment streams of those blogs moving forward in dates- bearing in mind that Sarah A. Hoyt’s and MHN’s blog posts can have comment streams of several hundred comments regularly… to give you the answers to your questions, taking probably several hours at minimum, to several days, to sift through thousands of replies and comments and posts…

    and present you the evidence you are ‘requesting’ to ‘prove’ the honesty of Sad Puppies 3…

    That’s supposed to be a reasonable request?

    “Go fetch, Puppy!”

    Snowcrash: Show me!

    Uh huh. Go on and pretend I’m imagining what you’re ‘requesting’ of us here as ‘reasonable.’

  373. “Do you have any documents that show when you quit beating your wife, Senator?”

  374. OK, Snowcrash, let me spell it out for you.

    You come in here and play nicely, but apparently your comments elsewhere indicate that you have no real concern about what we think on anything. Your biases are in place and you have no interest in learning where we come from on much of anything. So please, tell me why we should have to do the research for you? To find complete listings will take days, but a quick Google search will show you a fair glimpse of what happened.

    You’re going on about emails Brad got? Really?

    Plenty of folks on your side of the fence have admitted that the way things used to work was reaching out and shooting emails to all your friends and family and getting them to nominate something. How was that open or honest? I hate to break it to you, but that was a slate as well, just hidden so that no one can critique it.

    Where was your outrage on that?

  375. Oh, and this was mentioned somewhere…

    http://girlgeniusadventures.com/2014/01/29/a-tale-of-two-tors-be-warned-im-annoyed/

    TL:DR – TOR agreed to publish Girl Genius, the contract states the Foglios can’t publish competing product for five years… and don’t publish.

    I mention that we’ve been selling graphic novels fairly well for quite awhile, and that we’d cheerfully give them pointers. However, if they just can’t wrap their heads around it, which seems obvious since after three years they have yet to sell through the initial print run (We’d have done it in 16 months- and that’s with no advertising, which is a fair comparison, as they did no advertising either), then we’ll just sing a chorus of “So Long, It’s Been Good To Know You”, and then we’ll publish them ourselves, because if there’s one thing we know how to do, it’s publish and sell Girl Genius graphic novels.

    But we can’t. Because our contract with TOR says we can’t publish “a competing product” for five years. Okay, what can we do about this? But now, Mr. Patrick Nielsen Hayden has apparently decided that we’re too much trouble.

    Silence.

    No, seriously. You don’t want the series. You can’t sell it. We’ll even buy the remainder sitting in your warehouse. Talk to me. Talk to my agent. Prove you’re not dead or fired.

    Silence.

    The only conclusion I can come to, is that Mr. Patrick Nielsen Hayden has decided that he can ignore us. Eventually, we, like many other confusing things that he cannot make money from, will go away. It may take five years, but really, who cares?

    Personally, I think that the problem is that we’re this little studio alllll the way out on the west coast, and thus, easy to ignore. If you have stayed with me all through this screed, then I would like your help. Mr. Patrick Nielsen Hayden has a Facebook page. So does TOR Books. Here is his old e-mail address; pnh@panix.com (I say old, because as far as I can tell, it’s been deactivated). We very rarely ask our readership to do anything other than enjoy the strip and purchase the occasional book (Hey, TOR, your first lesson in marketing. And it’s Free!) But if some of you would write to let the folks at TOR know that we’d like to take our book and go home now, we’d appreciate it.

    direct quote from the post itself.

  376. you came back in here without decontaminating first?!?!?

    Oh, don’t worry – I spent ten minutes in the UV chamber before I came back in, and disposed of the Tyvek full-coverage bunny-suit. It’s just been hot here this weekend.

    😉

    Shadowdancer, that Girl Genius post was dated a while back… there’s a later post that seems to have better news. (Not that that’s any excuse for ignoring one’s house’s authors, but this doesn’t seem like it needs current action, just in case anyone was thinking of emailing The House of TOR.)

  377. i’ve mentioned many times that the crucial thing that makes an SJW is they have no idea what principle is. That’s why the term “SJW” is a sarcastic reference to their wrong-way anti-bigotry bigotry. Without principle, one can’t use metaphor or analogy or make even the simplest comparisons.

    “Meredith on June 7, 2015 at 11:50 am said:
    “‘Confused. Isn’t this the same crowd that said it would be wrong to boycott Orson Scott Card because Boycotts, that it’s wrong to no award anything automatically because it’s “puppy,” and that it’s wrong to hurt writers’ livelihoods based on perceived politics from their publishers and/or voters?’

    “Its funny how they only believe that when those things would hurt them, but once they think it might hurt someone they dislike, gosh, those things are righteous.

    “My ability to give them the benefit of the doubt just took a serious knock, and it was never very robust. Confirmation that any principled stance they took was self-serving is… Disheartening. I hope we see some Puppy statements disagreeing with the reaction so far.”

    *

    There, Meredith quotes another commenter and then agrees. The first problem is Scott wasn’t lying and making stuff up out of his head. He had a religious opinion and objection. We are not angry at Gallo simply because she is anti-Puppy and third, Gallo wasn’t merely expressing politics. She was making stuff up out of her head. Let’s remember that Gallo is on board with the intersectional ideological defamation of all men and whites. Defamation isn’t politics no matter how much you chant it. It is an analogy to a blood libel. Her mindless enthusiasm for Kameron Hurley’s factless assaults on men and whites via the book of Hurley’s essays Gallo was promoting is proof of that, calling Hurley “brilliant.”

    What Gallo said wasn’t political, it was the same citationless assertions we saw Hurley herself make at The Atlantic where she ludicrously and without proof asserted “many of the people block voting these (Hugo) awards are the same ones sending death threats to women and people of color,” by which she meant Gamergaters.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2015/04/the-culture-wars-come-to-sci-fi/390012/

    Equally ludicrously, Hurley quotes Abigail Nussbaum without mentioning Nussbaum openly admits to racially and sexually prioritizing her Hugo voting, NOT US. Got that? NOT US. They say we do what they openly admit to doing but it’s NOT US.

    “I need a manifesto for it to be clear that I want women, PoCs and progressive themes on the ballot?” – Abigail Nussbaum

    Let’s use principle and see what happens. “I need a manifesto to make it clear I want men and whites on the ballot?”

    We don’t do that. Nevertheless, that’s what gets us made into neo-Nazis while SJWs get a pass. A world without principle is a world of lunacy and that’s why we say SJWs always lie. They do. They have no principles.

    After talking about diversity Hurley writes “Some aren’t happy about that. For the last three years, Correia has led…” You get the picture. Factless and citationless. Innuendoes. There’s your “brilliant” essayist – a demagogue. That’s how we become right wing neo-Nazis. We oppose the entry of women, gays and non-whites on the mere word of intersectionalists like Hurley and many others. Meanwhile, a lesbian supremacist ideology based on the idea whites and men are morally and spiritually inferior somehow becomes the opposite of supremacy, but which is exactly what neo-Nazism and intersectionalism is. But no principle, no nothing.

    “There’s no such thing as sexism against men. That’s because sexism is prejudice + power. Men are the dominant gender with power in society.” – Anita Sarkeesian

    There’s not a chance in hell we have a principled argument which turns Hurley consistently and obsessively negative remarks about men and whites into the group defamation they so closely resemble. Again, Hurley never EVER makes her stunningly insightful mass takedowns in regard to gays, women or any non-whites. It is a white male territory exclusively. Why? Because in principle it would be racist and sexist to treat non-whites, gays and women like that, except Hurley’s loose grasp of principle takes her only so far and no further. There is no equal protection in the world of Scalzi, Hurley nor that of any intersectionalist. In its place they have race and sex; the right and wrong race and sex.

    Meredith’s comment is important because it is what we see from intersectionalism over and over again; these lapse of simple judgment about what is and isn’t racism for example. Had John Scalzi spent just one minute thinking of how “Jewish privilege” sounded, he may have never supported this whole bizarre cult. As always, in the case of Scalzi, you can always tell as much about an intersectionalist by what they never say as what they do say. No matter how true, no SJW will ever discuss black, Asian or Arab privilege in those respective societies with the same force they do white privilege. They will cry about a white Table of Contents the way they never would a black blues anthology music album. They will never call for diversity in any non-white, non-male entity anywhere in the world. SJWs have no principles.

    Principle is crucial in any society for communication. Like law it is the only way we have to take the measure of each other and attempt to ensure fair play. Principle is the rule by which games are played. No rules, no game.

  378. TOR dinked around with a book by a local author for 5 years (out this summer, finally). Maybe anyone entering into a publishing contract with them should insist on fines and penalties for the publisher to be paid out at intervals if they don’t manage to get the product on the shelf in a timely manner.

  379. Re: deleted posts.

    Brad deleted one just hours after he posted it and almost no one had commented on it, because some dumb thing happened (it could have been the Entertainment Weekly thing, but maybe something else) and he replaced it with something longer and more… crabby. So the implication that something was regretted and hidden is a LIE. And I don’t think that Larry has deleted any posts whatsoever.

    Puppy kickers lie. SJW lie. It’s what they do.

  380. Here’s more almost stunning idiocy:

    “Lori Coulson on June 7, 2015 at 10:55 am said:
    Irene Gallo holds up a generic villain’s cape, and now Mr. Torgerson is claiming said cape was cut to his measure? My eyebrow rises as I murmur: ‘Fascinating.’”

    Moral and mental retardation is indeed fascinating in America in the 21st century.

    “Extreme right-wing to Neo-Nazi groups, called the Sad Puppies and the Rabid Puppies… they are unrepentantly racist, misogynist and homophobic.”

    That’s pretty “generic” all right. I thought Gallo was broadcasting pell-mell and could’ve meant almost anybody.

    Some moron read an aphorism and didn’t understand it.

  381. “Chris Hensley on June 7, 2015 at 9:47 am said:
    “‘I know SJW isn’t remotely as inflammatory as neo-Nazi.’

    “Both John C. Wright and Vox Day have been pretty liberal in equating to SJW’s to Nazis.”

    Whether through naivete or bad intent, SJW is in fact a term interchangeable with radical intersectional gender feminism. The social justice movement within core SFF is founded solely on the paranoid and hysterical goals and theories of radical intersectionalism regarding patriarchy, heterosexuality as a fake social construct and white privilege and supremacy and no other ideology. It constantly uses the radical feminist terms peculiar only to that movement.

    Only radical feminism originated and promotes the idea of “rape culture” the falseness of gender, lack of “agency” and “compulsory heterosexuality” as oppressions. Radical feminism has been the single greatest source in America of the concept of “white privilege” since 1970. Radical feminist Peggy McIntosh’s “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack” is widely quoted in SJW circles and is a crucial influence.

    I regard intersectionalism as a racist, sexist supremacist cult, so the comparison to neo-Nazism or the KKK is apt. Anyone who uses or supports phrases like “The white male gaze counts on silence” is speaking a language analogous to anti-Semitism or white supremacy. I know of not one single SJW who criticizes such language. On the contrary, they support it one and all.

  382. I’m not sure how dragging out dictionary definitions, and then saying that SP3 is meeting them – without actually addressing the countervailing evidence, or providing any proof – counts as proof of anything, other than some weird child of circular reasoning.

    In any event, how is something “open and democratic” when for all intents and purposes, it’s either a cabal (the ELoE. as per Larry’s post cited previously) or a single person (Brad, as per Michael Z Williamsons post at File770) deciding on who becomes a finalist? How, when there were a source of nominations (ie, emails) where it’s not known what they recommended, or how many recommendations the final slate works received?

    Where to begin with this? Read the definitions and tell me where I am not being accurately using them. Seriously, in an era when the president can get away with saying “This is the most transparent administration in history”, continuing to deny that we’re being very open about what we’re doing (ie, being transparent), and doing our best to mobilize people to vote (ie, being democratic) because we can’t be bothered to track down how each and every recommendation got on the recommendation list is asinine and deliberately obtuse. At worst, people deliberately chose to trust Brad’s recommendations, and in doing so they are responsible for the nominating ballots they submitted. How is that any different from any other democratic vote?

    That’s a strange misreading of our prior conversation regarding GG. I thought we went up to a point where we agreed that there were no sources that the other would find convincing.

    First, when someone mentioned the anecdotes of backroom dealmaking you demanded absolute proof (which, because it was conducted in an opaque fashion, we couldn’t provide). Then you stated that the main body of GamerGaters revel in dirty tactics, and when challenged, you provided links that indicated something happened, but not the source of what happened or that such behavior was ‘reveled in’ by any number of GamerGaters, so it’s hardly evidence, let alone proof. When challenged on this, you attempted to end the fight by declaring that you wouldn’t believe my sources and I wouldn’t believe yours. It’s obvious based on who you demand proof from and who you don’t that your bias is not merely because of slates; your bias is ideological, and having an ideological bias itself isn’t a crime, but it does mean that your judgement can’t be trusted to be fair.

  383. Both John C. Wright and Vox Day have been pretty liberal in equating to SJW’s to Nazis.

    As always, demand quotes. What people need to get into their heads is that language matters. From what I can tell, Messrs Beale and Wright are incredibly careful about what they say, not how someone may misinterpret what they say. Fascist and Nazi have specified meanings; if you use them and you aren’t careful about it, especially to describe an opponent, you normally end up looking like an idiot. It’s much more likely that someone was compared to a Nazi, not called a Nazi. There’s a big difference between me saying ‘John is a Nazi because he believes in eugenics’ and ‘like the Nazis, John believes in eugenics’. Comparing the modern day group identity socialist Progressives to Nazis is a lot more apt than saying they are Nazis.

  384. Typical: “You’re objecting because the accusation is true!”

    Alright. I therefore accuse all anti-Puppies of being alien mandroids from Planet X.

  385. “There is no word whose power to move is more implicitly trusted than ‘progressive’.” – Weaver, R.M. (1985). The ethics of rhetoric. Davis, CA: Hermagoras Press: pg. 211, quoted in “’Nazi Gods’ and ‘Jewish Devils’: The Dehumanizing Rhetoric of Nazi Propaganda, Kelly M. Sutter, A Senior Honors Thesis Submitted to the Department of Communication of Boston College, May 2008

    “It is therefore evident through Weaver’s definition of god terms, that any rhetoric involving a greater truth, knowledge, or existence will ultimately have a greater persuasive strength than any other rhetoric.

    “Alternatively, there are also devil terms. Weaver (1985) explains that these terms serve as the adversary to God Terms, making them repulsive simply by their opposition:

    ‘There seems indeed to be some obscure psychic law which compels every nation in its national imagination, an enemy. Perhaps this is but a version of the tribal need for a scapegoat, or for something which will personify “the adversary”. If a nation did not have an enemy, an enemy would have to be invented to take care of those expressions of scorn and hatred to which peoples must give vent. When another political state is not available to receive the discharge of such emotions, then a class will be chosen, or a race, or a type, or a political fact in, and this will be held up to a practically standardized form of repudiation.’

    “By this definition, devils terms would include unprogressive, dishonest, and primitive. Furthermore, any rhetoric that uses devil terms would suggest a hindrance of progress and lack of truth.” – Kelly Sutter

  386. Latest drool from Salon is that they should retcon Magneto and make him African American.

    That’ll go over well.

  387. There are more posts about nebulae in space than the Nebula Awards today. What does that tell you?

  388. @snowcrash – “what I’ve seen (ie Larry’s post, and MZW’s comments) tends to supports the premise that SP3 was a list curated and selected by either Brad or the ELoE”

    What have you seen which supports this? You do understand that we cannot (nor should be expected to, as a matter of basic logical fallacies) prove a negative?

    Now, on the flip side of that coin, Puppies HAVE alleged that Tor editors have selected and curated nominees for past Hugos, and THEY have presented support for their arguments. You might not consider their evidence fully damning, but at least they have some.

    Your argument? Has none.

  389. For those who say Puppies want a “return to bygone eras of conservative white supremacy” in their respective fields, I have to point out something that should be obvious.

    Forget Campbell, Asimov, Zelazny, Saberhagen, all those “old white dudes” you say should be left in the past. Let’s assume you’re absolutely correct on that point. The reality is, if Anne McCaffrey’s “Dragonriders of Pern” were published for the first time in today’s market, it would be attacked right off the bat for being “militantly fascistic”, “reactionary”, even “backwards-thinking”. One of the most successful and feminist science-fiction writers of all time would be thrown under the bus.

    Here is a recalcitrant Holder refusing to pay tithe to Benden Weyr, arguing that there’s been no need for dragonriders for most of a millenium. He’s ultimately threatened to comply by military force — FASCISM!

    Here is an abused young girl, fleeing from her abusers into a deadly and dangerous world, slashing her feet on sharp, rocky terrain — TORTURE PORN!

    Here is a strong Weyrwoman, who cannot succeed in her goals without using her sexual leverage in Weyr society — INSTITUTIONALIZED RAPE!

    Every important theme about military readiness against known threats, about individual courage, about finding love and humanity and hope even in the face of possible human extinction, these would all be missed by professional grievance-mongers. All of that would be squashed under a hundred reviews by people who barely read any of the books, but instead took cues from the outrage of their more dullardly (and yet somehow influential) friends.

    That would be something to make any puppy sad.

  390. Jewish people are PNG with SJWs; for whatever reason, the Upholders Of All That IS Right And Good are pro-Muslim (Treating women as chattels is *part of their culture*, and don’t you dare say anything against them…), which means Jewish people are ‘White’ for Oppression Point purposes.

    Therefore Black people are higher in the ‘Oppression Stack’ – Jews aren’t even on the board.

  391. @Orgell – Maybe that explains their interest in the games industry. They want to rewrite the rules for society so they can game it to advantage… in their view, equality is just a word for suckers.

  392. It’s interesting to read the comments at Glyer’s for the simple reason stupid is a thing which explains itself. They seem unaware that what kicked all this off was the sudden flood of attacks on whites and men by feminists and their helpers about 3 years ago when Twitter became incredibly popular and interacted with inflammatory blog posts to create a feeding frenzy of oppressions and trigger warnings. Naturally what must follow the discovery of a heretofore unknown Jim Crow in SF is to promote diversity for those locked out by straight white men for 100 years

    Those events are not some imaginary thing but a matter of record and the affirmative action quotes also a matter of record. Are we to believe after all that talk the fact all women except one have won the last 2 Nebulas at the same time by an amazing coincidence the SFWA started to produce increasing rhetoric like WisCon? How dumb and dishonest are these people? They stare straight at their own defamation, the results of their affirmative action, and their own AA quotes but somehow can’t put 2 and 2 together. Let’s see… hmmmm… we attack men, launch AA initiatives and women win awards. Hell, these are the morons giving carfare to PoC to attend conventions and have their own writing grants but that’s suddenly invisible.

    One thing these simpletons can’t figure out is that when you attack a certain group it is that group most likely to respond. Instead these fools see that as confirmation it is straight white men that oppose them. This is a self-fulfilling prophecy, the same kind Anita Sarkeesian and Brianna Wu experience. They throw rocks only at squirrels and of course only squirrels are going to get angry, not a blue jay in the next tree. So that is considered confirmation squirrels are angry and not blue jays. In short, the attacks themselves create the demography in similar way to how Jim Crow created segregation and anti-Semitism created the Jewish Anti-Defamtion League.

    Then people like Kameron Hurley can go to The Atlantic and write white men oppose diversity when in fact it is the opposite that is true: the diversity movement attacked white men on the spurious claim SF is a white male conspiracy in action. There was never any rhetoric SJWs could show that was true in any ideological sense any more than it was true Field and Stream was purposefully white and male.

    That brings us to today, and SJWs can’t figure out why the women, gays and non-whites they never attack and in fact protect with loving arms are mostly on their side and not Sad Puppies. That is highlighted by the fact this movement was mostly created by a miniscule number of gay non-white women who came along, called themselves “”intersectionalists” and started to raise hell about white male privilege. By an amazing coincidence, one of the crucial founders of that movement no one knows by the name of Mary Ann Mohanraj was at the Nebulas handing out an award while her “sisters” were taking selfies and posting them with #UnrelatedAsians as a knock on whites the same way they had just done at Wiscon.

    Meanwhile, are there any white men self-identifying as white running around GenCon taking selfies and posting them with #UnrelatedWhites, or is the truth more like others identifying people as white and male and therefore racialist supremacists but who actually have no interest in such labels? Who was putting “white” and “male” in their rhetoric before these asshat feminists came in? But wait… our privilege and “centrality” made that unnecessary. We ruled and were content in our KKK.

    That also brings us to today and Irene Gallo remarking on a right wing neo-Nazi cult SJWs made up out of their heads 3 years ago and placed us in without the slightest bit of proof any such movement existed now or in the last 100 years of SF.

    I call all this “Scalzi’s Squirrel Theory,” where he attacks white men, white men get angry and then Scalzi writes this Orwellian sentence of self-fulfilling prophecy about “how to get across the ideas bound up in the word ‘privilege,’ in a way that your average straight white man will get, without freaking out about it?” That’s like saying “how can I get n-words to realize they’re n-words?”

    My answer is not to engage in group defamation using shit theories created by wacky gender feminists who have a hard on for white men in the first place. Gee, how can I shoot only squirrels and not have only squirrels get angry?

    Scholar of Orwell Scalzi later wrote “This annoyed many a straight white male…” Really? How the hell did that happen? Is that by an amazing coincidence the same annoyance Jews, blacks and Poles feel when you direct racial slurs at them? A mysterious mechanism; who can figure out Scalzi’s Squirrel Theory? I think it probably works something like Lovecraft’s ode to an N-word poem but that’s just a theory. So why wouldn’t blacks not want a World Fantasy Award bust of Lovecraft or I a Nebula?

    These are not the most sophisticated people we’ve seen enter the field of SFF. They should be hosting their awards in a dollar store or Dr. Who-themed bowling alley.

  393. @T.L. Knighton (& @calbeck) You come in here and play nicely, but apparently your comments elsewhere indicate that you have no real concern about what we think on anything. Your biases are in place and you have no interest in learning where we come from on much of anything.

    That makes *no* sense whatsoever. If I had no interest, why I am here again and again asking the same questions, but – with one or two exceptions – getting some very blatant dodges (ie, it’s suddenly too difficult to find; the meaning of open and democratic; the open refers to the fact that an announcement was made, not how the slae was assembled; etc)?

    Look, I’ve been fairly clear from the outset, here and elsewhere, that I’m not a fan of slates, and that as such I disagree with the approach taken by SP3. I’m very obviously someone who’s not part of the groupthink here, but I am here in good faith to try and get a broader perspective.

    You say that a quick Google search will show me a fair glimpse – fine. What is the search I should be running, that will answer my questions?

    I don’t see how Brad (and others) can call SP3 open / democratic / transparent from start to finish given that there were a source of nominations ( the emails you mentioned, which Shadowdancer was kind enough to provide a screencap for reference) where it’s not known what they recommended, or how many recommendations the final slate works received.

    Additionally, there are comments by both Larry Correia (“here is what the Evil League of Evil authors came up with in discussion”., and it was “put together by the ELoE being all strategic like”) and Michael Z Williamson here in File770 (“Brad asked what I’d published that might be Hugo eligible, and I mentioned “Wisdom.”). I’ve provided links to the citations earlier.

    Given that, that’s why I’m saying that from what I’ve seen thus far is that SP3 was a list curated and selected by either Brad or the ELoE, and had very little correlation with recommendations outside that particular group.

    Look, I’m asking because I really do want to know what you’ve seen that I’m unable to find. If I “had no real concern”, I wouldn’t be here.

  394. That makes *no* sense whatsoever. If I had no interest, why I am here again and again asking the same questions, but – with one or two exceptions – getting some very blatant dodges (ie, it’s suddenly too difficult to find; the meaning of open and democratic; the open refers to the fact that an announcement was made, not how the slae was assembled; etc)?

    If you consider having to resort to dictionary definitions to explain what should be obvious to anyone approaching this without preconceptions a ‘dodge’, you’re never going to get the answers you want. And if you expect us to believe you can’t come up with another possible reason for you being here besides just ‘asking questions’, you must think we’re pretty naive.

    You’ve admitted you’re biased against Gamers (and so biased towards the Social Justice Activists) in the ‘Gamers vs Social Justice Activists’ controversy. Now we have another group, the Sad Puppies, somewhat allied with the Gamers, involved in another controversy where they are opposed to the Social Justice Activists. You show up in a Sad Puppy-heavy forum and repeatedly demand to your satisfaction that they prove what are ultimately subjective claims about their side of the debate. You also claim that the only reason you are against the Sad Puppies is their tactics and not because they are opposing the Social Justice Activists you have admitted that you are biased towards. It shouldn’t be hard for anyone to come up with plausible reasons for your behavior besides ‘just asking questions’ and to doubt your sincerity and reasonableness.

    To those people in the audience that are sincerely looking for answers, we have been upfront that Brad made a list of recommendations based on his personal favorites, conversations on this blog, on other blogs, and from other sources such as email. There was no attempt to document all the sources for his recommendations, but failure to do so does not make the process transparent to a reasonable observer, especially when compared to the backroom dealmaking documented in anecdotes from people familiar with the process in the past. The list that resulted was diverse except only in that it consisted of works that Brad found worthy, and we wouldn’t have it any other way; if he’s recommending works he didn’t find worthy, he’s not doing it right. The result is democratic in that he encouraged each of us to read his recommendations and then vote for works we enjoyed whether or not they were from his recommendations, which by and large people did.

  395. How about, ‘we were there, Brad mentioned them, we knew that there were emailed nomination suggestions. That’s proof enough.’

    You are adhering, stubbornly, to a single definition of democratic, while we are adhering to a different set. You’re tediously demanding ‘puppy go fetch so we can say good puppy, nice puppy, you don’t get kicked – oh wait, actually yes you do.’

    More than one of us remembers the mentions of the emailed suggestions. That’s not good enough for you. Frankly, I’m starting to suspect the real reason why you want the emails as proof, is so you know who those people are, versus the list of people who openly commented. And frankly, that’s probably one of the reasons why some folks emailed in, besides not having a WP/Gravatar etc account to comment with, or wanting to use one that your side can bitch at them for. For all your supposed fears of doxxing, outside of a furious Tom Kratman, who I feel was rightly enraged, can you honestly say there have been threats or doxxing from our side?

    Given that you believe outright that GamerGate is a hate group and you have shown that nothing will sway you from that position, why are we supposed to assauge your suspicions? You don’t think our word is good enough anyway. So why are we supposed to trust you?

    Hell, I’m freaking pissed off that what you took away from that screenshot is ‘oh see, Brad lied’ as opposed to ‘Brad never hid that there were people emailing in.’ You have shown, that way, that you are wholly incapable of seeing any of us in even a remotely forgiving light, since you’ve already got a bias against us as a group. You can’t even acknowledge that we were honest about it all, and the behavior your side has displayed gives good reason for people to want to participate without a name being attached for you lot to constantly question, doubt, slander, and beat on.

    So no, Puppy Will Not Fetch, at least this one won’t. You’re not willing to put in your own legwork, and the last time I responded, your response wasn’t in any way forgiving, or acknowledging of the things we HAVE been saying. Nope, instead, you saw it as reinforcing of your biases. You burned your own credibility and frankly I’m not interested any more in helping you out because you used what I did find to beat on Brad some more.

    I consider Brad a friend, and I will not let you use me to hurt my friends.

    Fuck you and your ‘blatant evasions.’ I was honestly trying to answer you and got stabbed and hurt Brad in the bargain. I should have known better than to try deal with someone from your side honestly, because you sure as hell fucking didn’t. It doesn’t matter what we say, or what we present. You’ll see it through your own perspective, and ignore us anyway. Hell, I’m sure all you’ll take away from this is ‘giving excuses.’

    And that’s the last I will address you, tedious, entitled concern troll.

  396. @snowcrash, following up Civilis – The process is, and was, as transparent as reasonably it needed to be. Honest to Christ, Mr. Torgersen’s not running the federal elections here. He was putting together a slate. He called openly for recommendations in various places and via various means, and he put together a recommendation list. “I think these are worth nominating”, he said. “Read them and if you agree, nominate them,” he said.

    From the increasingly strident tone of your posts, it sounds to me very much as though you’d like to know exactly who nominated what, and when, and via which medium? Do you demand the same of the electoral process for government? Do you demand to know who voted for which candidate, who voted in advanced polls, which ones are ex-pats voting, etc? Or do you accept that the scrutineers and the electoral commission (or whatever it’s called in your neck of the woods) are doing their jobs. without you personnally getting to examine each ballot?

    “The entitlement is strong in this one.”

  397. Correction. He was putting together a list. He called for recommendations, etc. I used the word ‘slate’ when I ought not to have. A ‘slate’ implies “No variations permitted”, which is not the case with Mr. Torgersen’s situation. I apologize for the incorrect usage.

  398. From the increasingly strident tone of your posts, it sounds to me very much as though you’d like to know exactly who nominated what, and when, and via which medium? Do you demand the same of the electoral process for government? Do you demand to know who voted for which candidate, who voted in advanced polls, which ones are ex-pats voting, etc? Or do you accept that the scrutineers and the electoral commission (or whatever it’s called in your neck of the woods) are doing their jobs. without you personnally getting to examine each ballot?

    Often in elections, I have no idea what the differences between the candidates for local offices (like school board members) are, so what I do is I read recommendations by people that know more about the candidates and issues addressed by those locals. Those recommendations are often compiled into a slate. Some recommendations I accept at face value, some I accept if they are communicated well, and some I will often vote opposite the recommendation. That’s the way democracy works, and in the US, at least, it’s a democratic process which is also transparent even if I don’t know how those recommendations are arrived at.

  399. What Snowcrash wants is us to spend our time hunting for every scrap of data possible, knowing that we’ve already said these discussions took place all over the internet, in hopes we’ll miss something all with an eye towards an “GOTCHA!” moment.

    He’s biased, and admittedly biased, which is fine. However, he’s also made it clear that he won’t use any gray matter he has between his ears and just google “Sad Puppies nominations” or similar strings.

    Whatever. I think he can be safely ignored as just another of those who pretends to be civil when there’s no other choice (like coming here), but gives it up where he doesn’t have to. Luckily, I’m no longer pretending to be civil to him and his ilk.

  400. @Civilis: “admitted you’re biased against Gamers”

    1. Gamergate is not the same is Gamers. 2. Admitted? I’ve never hidden that I don’t look upon GG as favourably as many of the people here do. Does that mean I’m biased against everyone else here, or that I just disagree with them? I leave that to you. Also, ask if you’re biased against me (or another non-Pup, say Eric Flint?) because of my views, or do you just disagree?

    @Shadowdancer (as well as @William Underhill): Frankly, I’m starting to suspect the real reason why you want the emails as proof, is so you know who those people are, versus the list of people who openly commented.

    Since people seem to not only conflating the words of others with mine, but also forgetting what I’ve already said, I guess I better repeat myself. Again. From my post here June 3, 2015 at 9:03 am: …there were a source of nominations where it’s not known what they recommended, or how many recommendations the final slate works received. (note, I’m not asking for names or details of who recommended what obvs – just something in line with what the data Hugos organizers release)

    @Shadowdancer: For all your supposed fears of doxxing, outside of a furious Tom Kratman, who I feel was rightly enraged, can you honestly say there have been threats or doxxing from our side?

    Lou Antonelli comes to mind. Or is his doxxing attempt (sending a threatening email as well as a phone call) excusable to you as he too was “rightly enraged”?

    Anyways, to drag this back onto my main point – as per my post at (June 8, 2015 at 7:13 am), Brad keeps on saying that SP3 was open and democratic / transparent from start to finish. According to commenters here, start to finish doesn’t actually cover how the slate was assembled, but that there was an announcement and that people were free to vote as they wished with regards to the slate.

    As such, based on what other like Larry Correia and Michael Z Williamson have said, and in the absence of countervailing evidence, it’s likely that SP3 was a list curated and selected by either Brad or the ELoE, and had very little correlation with recommendations outside that particular group.

  401. @TL Knighton: However, he’s also made it clear that he won’t use any gray matter he has between his ears and just google “Sad Puppies nominations” or similar strings.

    Tell you what TL. You try Googling that phrase, and tell me which one’s answer my queries? I’ve gone through the first 20, and none of them even come close to addressing them.

    I have to ask, what do you think my questions were?

  402. 1. Gamergate is not the same is Gamers. 2. Admitted? I’ve never hidden that I don’t look upon GG as favourably as many of the people here do. Does that mean I’m biased against everyone else here, or that I just disagree with them? I leave that to you. Also, ask if you’re biased against me (or another non-Pup, say Eric Flint?) because of my views, or do you just disagree?

    Yes, I’m biased in favor of those who’s primary motivation is to depoliticize Science Fiction in general and the Hugos in particular. I’m biased against those that seek to politicize the fun out of my hobbies, because I’m a gamer, and the Social Justice Activists are opposed to things I like, and have been so since long before GamerGate. I’ve been biased against Eric Flint for quite some time (well before Sad Puppies) for his political views, but I still recommend many of his books because I believe they are worthy of recommendation because I find them enjoyable; I can recognize and work to overcome my biases. I’m increasingly biased against you (the anonymous internet persona), because I have to repeat the same thing over and over: Sad Puppies may not meet your perfect standards of transparency and democracy because those are subjective terms, but based on the objective definitions, one cannot deny that Sad Puppies supporters honestly believe those criteria to be met. I do my best not to let my biases control my behavior and be patient and civil with everyone, but I am human and fallible. To be biased is to be human.

    One of the roots of the whole problem is that Social Justice Activism is fundamentally built on claims that they can overcome the effects of bias, so they need to deny their own natural biases to present themselves as the only ones able to provide a just solution to social issues.

    Justice (definition): the maintenance or administration of what is just especially by the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or punishments; the quality of being just, impartial, or fair.

  403. Snowcrash,

    It is not our job to prove innocence, it is your to prove guilt, beyond a reasonable doubt. Since you apparently are trying to convict him, after all.

  404. It is not our job to prove innocence, it is your to prove guilt, beyond a reasonable doubt. Since you apparently are trying to convict him, after all.

    Unfortunately, this isn’t a court of law; he can and will continue to believe what he wants. But we’re not obligated in any way, shape, or form to meet his standards.

  405. Wow, Snowcrash, you tried really, really hard, didn’t you? First link ON THAT EXACT STRING brought up a post here. Scrolling down, and this link was there.

    https://bradrtorgersen.wordpress.com/2015/01/07/announcing-sad-puppies-3/

    Not overly difficult. Or, you could have used any number of similar strings (you know, like I suggested) and found it directly. But no, you want to be spoon fed everything, despite your biases being clear enough for everyone to see that nothing we provide will be enough for you.

  406. SP3 hasn’t worked out as well as was hoped. Part of that was the slap-dash nature of how the nominees were assembled. Most of it was the lack of a mission statement of what SP is for and what it is against; something people on both sides can gather around and clearly debate, rather than this confusion which swerves from Marxists to radical feminism or even something as stupid as writing styles. Writing styles didn’t produce “no white men won an award” and “I don’t review white men” and “don’t read white men.”

    Pushing back against that is not conservatism or anything like it. Stop letting these people get away with that. If you’re going to get together and bomb a target at least let it be the same target for maximum effect and efficiency. Debating bullshit saps time and energy and the original point is buried in derailing and pedantry.

    I would point out something obvious: Marxists suffer under the theory of “rape culture.” Liberals suffer under the theory of “white privilege.” Leftists suffer under the theory of the “colonial male gaze” and “patriarchy.”

    You are not up against Marxists, liberals and Leftists and haven’t been these last several years. Claiming you are alienates people who are not your enemies and who suffer hate speech right alongside conservatives. It also confuses the debate. For example, almost no one at Glyer’s are what we call SJWs race-gender crusaders, yet they think we feel they all are. There’s no reason for that.

    My suggestion would be to write up two short mission statements about what SP4 is for and against and crowdsource changes to them the rest of the year so they are representative of the people doing the voting.

    Mine would look something like this:

    “We are for genre and art trumping all other considerations. We wish nothing to be dragged in from outside and made to be more central to the genre literature than itself. “Central” is the key word here, because of course SFF can deal with anything. That doesn’t mean an obsession with transportation or economics trumps the genre itself and replaces it.

    “We are against group defamation and hate speech based on race and sex and against the promotion of SFF literature on that basis.”

    Over the course of several months those would be altered by consensus.

    SJW definition: radical intersectional gender feminist or confirmed booster.

    Were those the mission statements of SP3, the stupidity at Glyer’s and many other places wouldn’t be happening. The focus would be on what created the SP movement, and that should be painfully obvious by now. STRAIGHT… WHITE… MALE.

    Everything else is a sideshow really. You can’t create SP4 out of a sideshow, which is what SP3 has devolved into, helped along by people like Glyer and Eric Flint who apparently never read Book Smugglers and the round tables about Queer Theory poststructuralist “agency” and white colonialism, a “Diverse Editor’s List” of clownish victimization or any of the other most ardent asshat feminists who created this whole stinking debacle from lit org presidents on down. Silence is golden, quotes suck, bullshitting about people listening to Rush Limbaugh and joining a neo-Nazi movement becomes reality. On the other hand, whatever you think of Glyer, Flint or Mamatas, they aren’t really part of the problem. They don’t use hate speech or generally signal-boost it. I think we know what we mean by “SJW,” but a lot of people on the outside aren’t clear about that.

    I’m not saying there aren’t other issues, but take away radical intersectional gender feminism and there is no SP movement. In any event, being on the same page as much as possible would avoid having to answer moronic questions asked over and over again. Just point to the mission statement. But terms like “far-left” and “far-right” have no place in this debate. They exist, but they are not central to the issue. It’s like arguing what kind of movies anti-semites and racists like. To Jews and blacks, it doesn’t matter.

    To limit SP4 to a solely artistic or political issue means you have no moral highground. Without that you got nothing. There is no subjective legitimacy there.

    Just remember this: the perfect intersection of gay, non-white and woman got a Nebula nod this year for a story written at a writing workshop and has another at Tor next year. No slush pile for her. Her identity is her art. Tor.com is intersectional affirmative action central, and so is the Nebulas. WorldCon hiccuped this year but is essentially the Tiptrees. Identity is art. Race is art, sex is art. What genre is that, Frankfurt am Main?

  407. “Tor Books ‏@torbooks 3h3 hours ago Happy Monday! We appreciate your comments & would like to remind you that the views of our employees do not reflect those of the publisher.”

    Who wrote that? Gallo. Hayden?

  408. As always, demand quotes. What people need to get into their heads is that language matters. From what I can tell, Messrs Beale and Wright are incredibly careful about what they say, not how someone may misinterpret what they say.

    Pyotr, quote exactly what happened, please. My suspicions are you’re referring to the well-documented case where Mr. Beale cited the SFWA directory to prove that someone was still a member.

  409. “Tor Books ‏@torbooks 3h3 hours ago Happy Monday! We appreciate your comments & would like to remind you that the views of our employees do not reflect those of the publisher.”

    Must have gotten an earful. Good.

  410. There was one incident in which he tracked down a woman who wrote a negative review and posted her address on his blog.

    Do you have any kind of a source or link from any side on this? I’m sick and tired of out-of-context allegations being thrown around.

    There are probably many more.

    Then you should have no problem presenting them as evidence.

  411. Oh look, Clamps has found another proxy and changed his IP again.

    Really, Marston, did you think we wouldn’t know it was you? The first things out of your mouth are “VOXXXXXX DAYYYYYYY!!!!!!!” and “SHADOWDANCERRRRRR ISSSSS EEEEEEVILLLLLLLLLL!!!!”

  412. Happy Monday, Tor! We appreciate your comment & would like to remind you that the views of your employees are indistinguishable from a mentally ill ideology which thinks the world has connived to oppress women since the first white supremacist misogynist discovered the chains of compulsory heterosexuality along the Tigris and Euphrates. We encourage you to implement a health plan which includes regular mental health check ups by an all-male team of white heterosexuals trained in logic and principle.

  413. “Let’s be fair, Vox Day is exceptionally fucked up.”

    Lets be fair, Vox didn’t make the rules others are playing by, he just uses them better than anyone else.

  414. It’s official: political correctness is killing authors… because they feel so guilty about being white males that they are starting to drop out of creating literature to “make way for PoCs and women”.

    Death of a poet, right here.

  415. Welcome to your local alley:

    “K Tempest Bradford ‏@tinytempest Jun 4 Use the #POCBet hashtag. Whoever is mistaken for the most other POC wins a prize. Also most ridiculous mixup gets a prize. #Nebulas #SFWA”

    “Alyssa Wong ‏@crashwong Jun 4 @tinytempest I would like to submit to the jury, being mistaken for @alayadj #POCBet”

    “K Tempest Bradford ‏@tinytempest Jun 5 @john_chu the most important question is: which Chu is @crashwong? She must be a Chu because ASIAN. @alayadj”

    “K Tempest Bradford ‏@tinytempest Jun 4 @crashwong @AndreaNLam @alayadj Clearly someone needs to run an emergency game of How To Tell POC Apart”

    “Shareef Jackson ‏@ShareefJackson Jun 4 @tinytempest lol I love the hashtag so much”

    “K Tempest Bradford ‏@tinytempest Jun 4 @ShareefJackson I forgot who came up w/ it, maybe @jhameia! We use it at WisCon.”

    “Shareef Jackson ‏@ShareefJackson Jun 4 @tinytempest @jhameia yeah that’s where I first saw it at the POC dinner at Wiscon”

    I have another game: can you tell what an actual racist supremacist looks like, Miss Gallo? We get treated like these people though we play no such idiotic low-rent games. Wake the fuck up.

  416. @snowcrash – I can’t speak to the democratic process of the Sad Puppies/Rabid Puppies slate-creation process, because as a #GamerGate member, I wasn’t involved in any part of the nomination process. Extremely few of us had heard of the Sad Puppies, and in order to maintain our focus on ethics in games journalism, we have a saying which most of us adhere to rather religiously:

    “We’re not your damn army.”

    We’ve had other people try to enlist #GamerGate to fight other battles for them, thinking we are exactly the “reactionary right-wing” group so many in the press have classified us as. We have never taken that bait.

    Not even now. What mobilized some of us to join WorldCon is simply this: YOUR SIDE OF THE AISLE ACCUSED US OF RIGGING THE GODDAMN NOMINATIONS. All because one or two people who are opposed to you happened to be regulars in the #GamerGate hashtag on Twitter.

    You’re conspiracy nuts. But that’s not what bugged us. It’s that the same press which has been ignoring reality to lap up anything negative told about us took your bait and spread it around uncontested, making a bigger mess for us to clean up.

    You idiots shit in our backyard, and now some of us are here with the pooper-scoopers.

    Even so, none of those who have taken up the SP banner have done so apart from gamers who also happen to have deep interests in science-fiction and fantasy. What do you think informs so many of our games? Hell, before video games were such a huge industry, the young-adult section of my local library was my main haunt; it was where my core values found root and spread. I can’t speak for every other #GamerGater who now has a voting packet on their hard drive, but my concepts of honor, justice and courage come from novels like “Pride of Chanur”, “The White Dragon”, and even the Thieves’ World anthologies.

    The race and gender of the author has never mattered to me. Why should it? That’s stupid.

    So you guys wanted to pick a fight by siccing a press we were already fighting against us on a second front? That’s just fine. Our sleeves are rolled up and we are elbow-deep in graphic novels, short stories and epics.

    MAY THE BEST WORK WIN.

  417. So I checked Pyotr’s link, and yep, it’s out of context. While Beale DOES say he “posted her address” on his blog, the link he himself gives for that outing in fact states nothing but her name and the city she lives in. This is not even on the level of what one can find in the phone book.

    He also documents this person as being one of the Amazon trolls who likes to drag book scores down with faked “reviews”… you know, the sort Anne Rice recently took issue with, which dragged her peripherally into #GamerGate’s demesne since the person making the harassing attacks on her books ALSO happens to be a major organizer of harassment versus anyone she believes is connected to #GamerGate (which led her to name Kentucky Fried Chicken as one of the “biggest harassers on Twitter”).

    Pyotr stands in defense of trolls against even the slightest real-world identification by name and city. Can’t have that! After all, Jay and Silent Bob might show up at their door and punch them in the face for saying nasty things on the Internet!

    * For the humor-impaired, this last bit is a scene from “Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back”, so if anyone wants to scream about encouraging real-world violence over Amazon spats, kindly direct it to Kevin Smith, who I’m sure will be delighted to address your concerns in the appropriate fashion.

  418. Oh, gad, not the attempt at redefining doxing to include clicking on someone’s handle and looking at the publicly available data there, again.

    I’m not sure if that’s stupider than the “Watching public youtube videos is stalking” claim, but it’s definitely an annoying cousin.

  419. “Oh, gad, not the attempt at redefining doxing to include clicking on someone’s handle and looking at the publicly available data there, again.

    I’m not sure if that’s stupider than the “Watching public youtube videos is stalking” claim, but it’s definitely an annoying cousin.”

    It’s Clamps. Rationality is not his strong suit. Or any suit of his.

  420. Hey look, it’s Faith-Based Allegations all over again. Yay! I’m sure we didn’t get enough of that in the Middle Ages. -:D

  421. Let’s be fair. Yamamanama aka Clamps is exceptionally fucked up creepily obsessed and has some of the most screwed up double standards on the planet.

    That’s why the Stalker Sticky and Spewdonym List need to be circulated far and wide to warn the whole Internet of how demented he is. It’s got proof, not faith-based allegations!

    Y’know, I wonder if Yama’d been hoping to court this Emma person and Vox torpeoed his chances of her ever considering to date him because she was made aware of Yama being a psychotic stalker.

  422. “Y’know, I wonder if Yama’d been hoping to court this Emma person and Vox torpeoed his chances of her ever considering to date him because she was made aware of Yama being a psychotic stalker.”

    Heh… that would certainly explain some of his mindless, white-hot rage. 😀

  423. Clamps once again shows he’s not really any nuttier than the goofball paranoid fem brigade which says looking at Twitter feeds is creepy stalking. If your feed isn’t private, that’s presumably because you want strangers reading your very interesting posts about the sandwich you just made and a storm coming in over the North Sea in between your racist posts bitching about men.

    Clamps, my advice is to take a writing class. Then, write an SF novel that was interesting in 1922. Then write a post about white privilege and signal boost it to all the nuthatches who fear patriarchy and the male gaze. You career is assured. A sex change wouldn’t hurt. Or going transblack.

  424. What would you know about friends, Marston? You certainly don’t have any here. Or anywhere, for that matter. How many bans from just this site in the last week? 2? 3? But please, keep circumventing them and digging your own hole all over again!

  425. *cracks up laughing* “Friendship” Clamps says. The guy who stated flat out that he thought that I’d ‘spread my legs for someone else’ when he found out that Aff was my housemate. Bahahahahahaha Yama’s the guy who believes that merely being housemates = a male who is a housemate of a female means that the male gets sexual rights to the female’s body.

    I find utterly hilarious too, the empty insinuation that I don’t have friends.

  426. We don’t have to skim to find you offensive, Marston. It’s right there in your first posts. Pretty much all of them, for that matter.

  427. By the way, note that link that Yama gave up there. That .de append is proof he’s using a proxy to evade the ban here. Google assigns what country it thinks you’re browsing from. Thus, if you’re in the US, you’ll see blogger.com or blogspot.com. If you’re from Italy, it’ll add .it. Since I’m from Australia, I’ll see .au

  428. Decent people, when they find out that a female is friends with a known serial stalker of women who makes threats against children and publicly brags about unlawful activity, will try to warn the person.

    This does involve contacting them.

    Doesn’t change that watching public youtube videos is not stalking, just because you dislike the results, Andrew.

    Neither is it harassment, to jump to the next stage of your DARVO attempts.

  429. Hahahaha, oh God, you really went for deflection hard on that one. -XD

    “It’s not about me, it’s about you HITLER-LOVERS!” Oh man, I’m rolling here… time for another glass of this lovely cabernet sauvignon, to savor as you flop around like just another standard troll for my entertainment. Although you COULD try coming up with routines that aren’t as old as USENet, it’s nice to see such energy put into them.

  430. I didn’t write Britetown Races, Clamps. I sculpted it out of a massive block of butter using a chainsaw, which is normal procedure here in the undersea kingdom of Atlantis.

  431. Oh, I don’t know… I’ve got a masochism streak going this afternoon. Hey, Pyotr/Clamps/Yamallamadingdong, lay some of your writing on me. I bet a round twoit it won’t hold up.

  432. Meh, being a crappy writer or not doesn’t invalidate his views and claims.

    His views and claims do that all by themselves.

    *current soundtrack: the Beach Boys’, with “409”

  433. @T.L. Knighton: Wow, Snowcrash, you tried really, really hard, didn’t you? First link ON THAT EXACT STRING brought up a post here.

    https://bradrtorgersen.wordpress.com/2015/01/07/announcing-sad-puppies-3/

    TL, this is why I asked if you even knew what my question was. I’m aware of that post. In fact, I provided the same link, and a summary of the recommendation numbers from it in my very first post here, at June 1, 2015 at 9:00 am.

    The question I had at that time was – hey, Brad says SP3 is open and democratic, as well as transparent. but the number of recommendations from that thread don’t correspond to the final slate

    Shadowdancer was kind enough to point me to a quote by Brad where he noted that there were other sources – I know she regrets it or that I took it as an ah-ha! moment, but it was literally the first time I had seen it, and I’m grateful for the assist.

    However, my original question remained – how is SP3 is open and democratic, as well as transparent, given that there were some recommendations came through emails etc, where the (anonymised info of what ) numbers and what they recommended were not made visible. Additionally, how does this tally with what people like Larry or MZW have said (also cited earlier by me in this thread)?

  434. I think it’s more important to note that even bearing Snowcrash’s concerns in mind, this remains a matter of comparing a blemished apple to one already half-rotted. However, if Snowcrash is willing to assist in making Sad Puppies 4 even more open and democratic than it already is, that would be greatly appreciated by all involved.

    Except by people who hate Puppies, who will immediately denounce him and begin claiming all he does in relation to the matter is somehow related to the newest compilation of Vox Day’s Greatest Hits.

  435. FYI–the current set of posts at File 770 covers the Tor/Irene Gallo controversy and, more importantly, has the movie preview for “The Martian”, which looks pretty badass.

  436. Snowcrash:

    You’ve seen what I have, yet I’m fine with the description of SP3 as open, democratic and above board. Most here are. You’re not. You’re now playing word games. There will be no magical data dump for you.

    Perhaps take your objections to Kate Paulk and talk to her about SP4? The SP3 ship has sailed.

  437. “Send your mentally disheveled concubine in as a spy,” said Perloton, turning to Ferle-Criptis. “She can work under the guise of a dancing slave girl. I will gladly teach her to dance using my spark-strap, then sell her into slavery to enhance the deception.”

    “A good idea,” said Cro-Cro. “Once she has gathered information, I can cause her tongue to detach itself and fly here to me so I can read it by divining its nodules.”

    “And what of Syl?” said Ferle-Criptis. “I am sure she has other uses in mind for both her freedom and her tongue.”

    “A nominal sacrifice,” said The Magst. “Our appreciation will be its own reward.”

    “Syl would no doubt feel such a reward would be so highly abstract and symbolic as to cancel out its intended effect,” said Ferle-Criptis.

    “You comment on the merit of appreciating higher abstract thought is straight to the point,” said Perloton. “Since she is so clearly lacking in such merits, I vote we substitute our own moral ethos to supersede hers.”

    “Quite right,” said Cro-Cro. “Your privy-maid’s brain is in disarray, if not sub-normal. We are more fully capable of appreciating her sacrifice than she is herself. We will act as surrogates. Justice will come full circle and balance achieved.”

    “Here are your salads, o mighty wizards,” said a voice. “Will you need your tongues to eat them, or may I act as a surrogate and put them directly into your stomachs for you using this knife?” Syl placed a large tray of salads onto the table in front of the wizards. She then stood back and crossed one arm under her breasts. She supported the elbow of her other arm in her palm and held up a knife, gently tapping the blade against the side of her forehead.

    “A gorgon such as yourself has few real-world uses,” said Perloton. “We are exploring ways to expand the meaning of your life.”

    “I’m not surprised a known termagant would object to noble causes,” said Favelou Harn. “You put the people of Flattery to some hard uses over nothing, notably with yourself in the role of a monstrous pettifogger.

    “‘Gorgon’ is it?” said Syl. “‘Termagant’? ‘Over nothing’?”

    “Serve us wine with our salad and save us your hard looks, stupid facial expressions, and droning mimicry,” said Perloton. “We would hire a troupe of minstrels if we felt the need to be entertained by satirical impressions and piebald ribaldry. My globe of repulsive gas always stands ready. It would be a perfect fit for your equally repulsive head, if you miss my meaning.”

    “I do not miss your meaning, Sir Creature,” said Syl. “Your wine will be served as soon as I am done fermenting it in my bowels.”

    “That won’t be necessary, Syl,” said Ferle-Criptis with a sideways glance at Perloton. “Serve us the sealed Corianad in the chill-box. We’ll pour it ourselves, thank you.”

  438. Pyotr is certainly a familiar-sounding, and apparently familiar troll. 😀

  439. Dude, James May did you write up that hilarious mockery of what Yama thinks is good writing? I have to say, you write better than he does by several orders of magnitude, because that was readable. You can’t read Yama’s dreck and hope to find the semblance of a plot or remotest characterization in there.

    @Calbeck – do you have twitter? DM me @rkmodena – I’ll have something amusing for you and advise that you not drink wine while you do.

  440. (Since Clamps is once again slagging on everyone else’s writing, it’s only fair to remind him of some of his own howlers, as I did above)

  441. Anti-Puppies were happy to link to Eric Flint when he was criticizing Sad Puppies a while back. They aren’t too eager to link to this:

    http://www.ericflint.net/index.php/2015/06/08/in-defense-of-the-sad-puppies/

    “And applying the term to the Sad Puppies is simply slander, pure and simple. I have no objection to calling either Brad Torgersen or Larry Correia “right wing,” because they are—and say as much themselves. If you want to add the term “extreme” because it makes you feel better, so be it. For whatever it’s worth, coming from someone who has seen extreme right-wingers a lot more up-close and personally than I suspect Irene Gallo ever has, I think applying the adjective to either Brad Torgersen or Larry Correia is not accurate. ”

    See? You can disagree with someone’s views without resorting to libel.

  442. Oh look, Clamps is back under yet another pseudonym and still giving away his true identity with his obsessions.

  443. @viktor et al

    I think the debate with @snowcrash hinges on whether or not you’re talking about (a) the construction of the SP3 slate versus (b) the voting for the suggestions on the slate as part of the nominations process. The relevant quotes (from the main page) are: (1) “Especially when the shake-up was conducted 100% in the open, democratically, using a democratic process.” and (2) “Sad Puppies 3 was a thoroughly transparent operation.” I’d call that an accurate description of how SP3 dominated the Hugo nominations this year. But based on what Larry Correia and Brad Torgersen have said, it’s not really an accurate description of the generation of the actual SP3 slate. Yes, it was public knowledge that the SP3 slate was being generated, and yes, it was public knowledge that anyone could send in suggestions for it, but everything I’ve seen written by both men suggests that the final SP3 slate was ultimately determined by Torgersen, in consultation with a small group of others, including Correia. I see absolutely nothing wrong with the way this was done, but I think it’s inaccurate to say that this process was “open”, “democratic”, or “transparent” (particularly when it’s described as “100%” for the first two and “thoroughly” for the last one).

    This distinction here may seem like petty trolling to you, but keep in mind that this is the go-to website for information about SP3 from its actual creator, so the language is very important. Inaccurate (and in some cases libelous) descriptions of SP3 are some of the main complaints I’ve seen from the SP3 side. If one of the key complaints in this whole controversy is the accuracy of what’s being said, then I think people should be as clear as possible in terms of what they’re actually saying. Here, I think this is a case of someone saying something that probably could have been worded better so that there was no ambiguity about what was being discussed. Many people may not realize that Mr Torgersen is currently serving in the military and can’t answer every blog comment within 20 minutes of it being posted, which is likely why he hasn’t clarified his statements. That being said, this forum is where a lot of Hugo voters are likely to come in order to educate themselves about SP3, and what I think they’re likely to see is snowcrash asking a reasonable question and being largely dismissed by the other commenters here. I don’t think that’s the impression that you want to leave them with.

  444. 60guilders:

    What’s fascist? It’s come to mean not a lot more than “you’re a doubleplusungood bad thinking thoughtcriminal and you’re unfairly using facts and reason in an argument with a progressive.” By that marker, both Wright and I are _clearly_ fascists, since we do both. Indeed, we do both regularly and reliably. (And I’ll toss in an occasional bit of literary viciousness for spice, where I think it warranted.)

    Of course, what those who would accuse us of fascism on those grounds are tacitly admitting to – rather, insisting on – is that fascism is facts- and reason-based. (Funny how they never seem to catch that; at least I haven’t seen anyone who tosses the charge around whenever someone won’t roll over for the latest lefty piety see what he was doing.)

    This, however, is horseshit. As Mussolini seems to have understood it, if I understood him correctly, fascism is a recognition of the essentially unreasoning and emotional in man (see Jonathan Haidt’s The Righteous Mind for evidence of how true _that_ is), and is an attempt to foster greater unity, greater productivity, greater domestic peace, and greater security from foreign threats by tapping into those unreasoning emotions. That’s why those who want to define it as the symbols and the militarism, the parades and the banners, are wrong; those things are just tools but not the core of the thing.

    However, even by that, to be a fascist one has to believe those things can work to the overall good in the longer term, I think, and there both Wright and I fail.

  445. A brief word on Snowcrash. Yes, he can be incivil. Meh? More importantly, yes, he can decide to cut off the whos and whens of a thing, as in “when did who lie about whom or accuse whom of being a liar?” I don’t think anyone with a straight face can call him a friend to SP or RP, and he’d be deeply insulted if someone tried.

    But, all that said, unlike about 99 and 44/00ths of a percent of social justice types, he can be reasoned with. Why not treasure that rare quality, and try to make some use of it, to his benefit and your own? He just might be willing to meet you part- or even halfway

  446. And observe, if you will, the comments section for the Flint article. Almost immediately, it turns into “Vox Day saw fit to let this loose now instead of when it happened (a month ago) because EEEEEEEEEVIIIIIIILLLLLLLLL.”
    Now, here’s the deal. I am perfectly willing to accept that Vox Day would do it that way.
    I don’t care. Would any of those people accept that sort of excuse making if one of us had said something like that about the recent Duggars scandal? Or Dennis Hastert? Or Bob Melendez? No, and rightfully so. Color me unimpressed.

  447. Hey, Andrew, have you trapped any beads of brilliant golden sunlight in icicles, in factories devoid of life, but only for the night, twice, lately?

    Eye of Argon II; it’s the gift that keeps giving.

  448. @Frank

    I will quote Eric Flint from the abovementioned post:

    I’m taking the time to deal with this for two reasons. The first and simplest is that people I know have been unfairly and unjustly accused and I will therefore defend them.

    My other reason is more pragmatic. The debate/argument/brawl—call it whatever you will—that we are now having over the Hugo Awards is one that I would like to end. I’ve been mostly arguing against the Sad Puppies not out of animosity—several of them are friends of mine and none of them are people I dislike—but because I am trying to persuade them that their analysis of the situation is faulty and the course of action they’ve adopted is futile at best.

    I will continue that debate. But I can’t possibly succeed in my goal, or even make any significant progress, if the people I’m arguing with are not only convinced that they’re being slandered but actually are being slandered. Under those circumstances, people stop listening to anyone except those already supporting them.

    So do I. So do you. So does everyone.

    Snowcrash burned through his goodwill with me as I explained above with regards the screenshot. He continues to persist, and as I said above, I have no interest in being further used to vilify my friends. Further, I had actually been dealing with him honestly in prior posts, but his responses make clear he is looking for evidences of his own beliefs and biases, which support only his narrative, and refusing outright to even try see things from our side at all. When I first started responding to his questions, I treated him as if he were upfront and responded as I perceived. The last straw was how he responded to the screenshot of Brad answering, as he always has been, about how the suggestions for the nomination list were obtained.

    Snowcrash is also adhering strictly to a specific definition of terminology, which Civillis has repeatedly refuted, but he continues to pretend that what she’s saying has nothing to do with his questions. As we are clearly discussing entirely different things there is no point in discussing with him further. No matter what we do, every action and statement we make he is going to use to reinforce his biases anyway, regardless of what we are actually saying.

  449. Clamps vs. Kratman: Ban “Pyotr” if you must, Brad, but leave this up.

  450. @Tom Kratman – is it time yet again to bring about dramatic readings of Nocturne? Beads of captured sunlight in the middle of a dark night! Chickens that don’t lay eggs and somehow reproduce, and instead of eating the chickens, his people are so desperate they eat roast ghoul, outside of a well stocked restaurant filled with food!

  451. Do you have the original, from before we advised him what was wrong with it? Well…the first level of what was wrong with it; there was too much to go into great detail. I’ve saved it on my comp under Eye of Argon II. I will gladly make it available to anyone who wants a laugh?

  452. The grim struggle for survival has never looked so stylish! 😀

  453. Perhaps it would bear asking the question: what if the worst of Snowcrash’s fears are confirmed, and Sad Puppies was less than “100%” in being open and transparent? Compared to the preceding system of domination-via-insider-cliques, how is this not a marked improvement regardless?

    Rather than casting aspersions on the process which is now over and done with (none of the nominees would be yanked, even if someone showed absolute proof Beelzebub himself personally took over the list for nefarious designs), would it not be better to proffer suggestions for a MORE open and transparent process for Sad Puppies 4?

    Note to the readership: this is why I tend to stay away from using absolutist terms, there is almost always something you didn’t think of, and someone will almost always use it to say “Aha!”.

  454. I’ll have to see if I had the screenshots of the time when he demanded I find something wrong with his writing. The question would have been more easily answered by “What was right with his writing?” I don’t keep actual copies of his work, and I think Aff deleted his copy because the presence of it on our network seems to degrade CPU performance from the sheer undiluted concentrated crimes against the English language and it’s structure contained within.

    Sure, since y’know, Clamps has been dragging out everyone else’s writing, and calling it bad, and demanding we judge between my artwork and his, may as well be fair and show off his writing as well, y’know? There’s a lot of folks here who haven’t had the misfortune of Clampsian purple prose.

  455. Spread the misery, then, Duskstar; spread the misery even unto to the ends of the factories lit only by captive beads of brilliant golden sunlight, at night, where said factories are devoid of life, but only for that night.

  456. You know… in courts there’s this thing called STANDING. The only people with STANDING to complain or fuss or *demand* about how Brad’s SP3 list of recommendations was assembled are those involved as Sad Puppies. That’s the only people he’s got to answer to.

    If we’re really going to word-lawyer the crap out of this for no purpose… because you know, there is no purpose… then lets by golly word-lawyer the crap out of it.

    Snowcrash, you sir, have no standing. If someone was betrayed it was not you. If someone was led astray it was not you. The creation of Brad’s list concerns only those who considered themselves alienated, despised, and ignored by capital F Fandom and who felt an affiliation with the crusade to end Puppy Sadness, and who therefore considered his recommendations. Again… not you.

    Please move on. Certainly, lets take Tom’s words to heart and give you a fair shake. No doubt you’ve something to contribute on some issue where you DO have standing. I can’t imagine what that might be but go for it.

  457. @calbeck

    I would argue that the process isn’t over and done with. Some people are just now getting to their nominees packet. The “No Award”ers don’t appear to getting much traction, which I think is a good thing, but we’re still in the middle of the Hugos voting. There is the very real possibility of one or more categories being “No Award”ed. There’s also the very real possibility of the SP3 candidates being down-voted just for being on the slate. I still want to see the best nominees win Hugo Awards.

  458. Snowcrash? You’ve beaten the horse to death and the bones of the corpse are showing through.

    Meaning no matter how much you try and get the answer you say you’re trying to get, that ship has sailed. If you want to do the progressive thing right, what you’d do is what has already been suggested. You’ll offer your services to Kate to help her see to it that all of the i’s are dotted and the t’s crossed on making it totally transparent.

    You see, none of us are politicians, so keeping perfect records never entered into anyone’s mind. Why should we worry about that? What we all want to see is more fiction with the story taking precedence over the message. Yes, most modern fiction has a message, but the most entertaining for most of us on this site is that where the message doesn’t drown out the story.

    It’s become really obvious that only SJB’s and their sympathizers want to see the “transparent” nomination process. It’s just garbage to create a scene. Those of us that support Sad Puppies are satisfied.

    Its time to drop it, snowcrash. It’s old news. If you want to talk about something else here, you’ll probably find receptive people. Then you can compare notes with the folks on file 770.

    I’m not being snippy. I recognize there are some folks that like to investigate matters from as many viewpoints as they can.

    But its time and past time to drop the nomination process of SP3. That was months ago. It’s time to look forward to the Hugos, and afterwards, SP4.

  459. Andrew,
    It’s been over eight days and your ip address has been banned at least twice in this post and you are still going on and on and on.

    Take a hint and give it a rest.

  460. The three of us holed up in an abandoned factory devoid of any life for the night

    Icicles held captive beads of brilliant golden sunlight.

    “Stay quiet,” I warned Ava. Her response was little more than a sullen glance. We were in a long hallway filled with junk and fallen chunks of the concrete roof. Icicles held captive beads of brilliant golden sunlight. ”

  461. Shadowdancer wrote:
    There’s a lot of folks here who haven’t had the misfortune of Clampsian purple prose.

    …this is going to be like that excerpt from The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy regarding very bad poetry, right? Will I have to chew my leg off to escape?

  462. And, Andrew? Your legions of as yet unmustered but surely to be devoted fans _demand_ that you accept Vox’s offer to publish your work _exactly_ as you write it. You simply must.

  463. @Frank – The process in question — nomination — is done and over, and yes, we are into the voting process. I strongly doubt that anyone already considering a “No Award” vote cares at this point how pure or stained the nomination process was, because the discussion has shifted away from that.

    The reason it’s shifted is because the original goal of that discussion wasn’t to find a better nomination process; it was to attack the existence of SP/RP slates as inherently bad and “gaming the system”. Few have actually argued that the process wasn’t above-board, they just don’t like the results or the implications.

    Thus, calling the nomination process “less than 100%” at this point serves only one purpose, even if unintentionally: providing people with an excuse they can cite to their friends (other than pure spite) for voting “No Award”. It’s a fig-leaf reinforcement, even if, again, that’s not what you mean it to be.

    In practical terms, then, this sort of discussion must look to the future, because it’s not going to change the past or help the present.

  464. @Pyotr – Because I likely have a larger readership than you do, and you could learn some pointers… or just something new to rage about? -:3

  465. @Pyotr/Clamps/Yamallamadingdong:
    You prefaced the quoted material with “You said:”, which is patently untrue, because I didn’t say it. However, given that you actually attribute it, I have reason to believe that it’s not your work. So let’s see a sample of your stuff. If you’re unwilling, I suspect Shadowdancer might have something of yours on tap.

    As for myself – I’m not a writer, so my ability to write is not at issue. Though if you care to scroll through comments I’ve left previously, I like to think I can manage the grammar-school basics of spelling, punctuation and syntax.

  466. @Pyotr – Because I likely have a larger readership than you do, and you could learn some pointers… or just something new to rage about? -:3

    Goodness, I probably have a larger readership. On the blog I haven’t done a real post for in…um… two years, I think; switched over to using it to share interesting blog posts from elsewhere.

    I sure don’t have to evade IP bans and stalk people to get folks to read what I write, anyways.

  467. @calbeck

    I think you’re assuming that everyone’s already made up their minds about this year’s noms. I don’t think that’s likely the case. Worldcon is STILL registering significant numbers of people who can vote for this year’s awards. I think those people are very likely persuadable in terms of how they’ll be thinking about their votes. I’d like to try to persuade them to vote on the current noms based on merit, without regard to whether or not a particular work was on the SP3 and/or RP slate(s).

  468. Well, I will say this for the man of a thousand names. He does not claim work that is not his–even when it would benefit him to do so.

  469. @Frank – I think it’s reasonable to assume a large enough proportion have made up their minds, regarding the legitimacy of the nominations, that continuing to pore over the finer details doesn’t matter to anyone — except as an excuse by which they can justify NOT bothering to read or engage without just slapping “No Award” on various categories.

    If you disagree with that assessment, you’re welcome to.

  470. Drow’s prose is clear. I can actually understand what she’s talking about. This is important, especially when you’re writing about an unfamiliar world.

    Clamps/Yama/Alauda? All I get is overdressed women with no personality calmly wandering around war zones, yakking about the made-up politics of an overly-complex yet strangely lifeless world.

  471. Someone tried to give him good advice on this: “sorry if i come off a bit strong, but it’s not working if a reader has to ask you what the point of your story is after reading 10pages of it. you have to hook the reader right off the bat, either with your voice, your character or your plot. it’s just how it is.”

  472. So, Shadow there warned me not to drink another glass of wine while reading Yama’s stuff.

    I haven’t read stream-of-consciousness nonsense like this since… well, a long damn time. It’s VERY reminiscient, in its structure, of “CHRON”: a short-lived stab at sci-fi I collaborated on with a friend in high school back in the ’80s. We wrote it on one of the Scottsdale Public Library’s TRS-80 computers, and after *one chapter* we realized we had no idea what we were doing.

    This mess? Does everything we did wrong, and keeps right on going. Hell, there’s a THIRTEEN-SENTENCE-LONG paragraph where a secondary character nutshells the colonial geography and politics, a performance that if it were in a movie would have the audience yelling “GET ON WITH IT!”.

    Thank God this cheap-ass zebra-pattern throw rug only cost $30. But that was some decent wine, dammit.

  473. I did not try to comment on the run on sentences. I would have run out of room to put the red arrows and my red-text remarks.

    Here’s a bit of my writing, posted by me for a change. (yeah, it’s a picture. I was doing some pictures for a post and it was handy.)

  474. I read Mr. Doherty’s… disclaimer, I guess I’d have to call it, disassociating Tor from Ms. Gallo’s comments. I read her apology, wherein she apologizes if anyone’s feelings were hurt. I did not anywhere in her words see an apology for uttering untruths. That is not an apology as I was taught to make as a boy; it’s condescension, pure and simple. As I’m a Sad Puppy supporter and not one of the SPs themselves, it’s not for me to accept or reject her soi-disant apology. But if I were one of those tarred with that very broad brush, I don’t think I’d be inclined to accept it.

  475. *cue Palpatine voice*
    Good… Goooooood, Clamps… let the whinging flooooowwwwww….
    *end Palpatine voice*

  476. Nice opener, there. It’s a premise I’ve seen before, and the prose isn’t anything new, but it’s well-executed and has me curious as to what happens next.

  477. Welp, since we’re all flogging excerpts of our respective fanfic magnum opuses… my turn for shaming and blaming!

    Rango’d also said he had no way out of town if he couldn’t get past the gangers.

    I’ll give him credit: he tried. When it became obvious that no one in Goodsprings seemed much interested in doing anything but hiding or running, and most of the Mite-ys were busy chasing after their entertainment, the little dragon cracked open the door of his fuel-station hideaway and tried to slip out of town. I don’t know if he was too dumb or proud to throw a dirty blanket over his bright orange scales, but he never made it to cover — a Stampede-fueled buck with a sledgehammer broke off from chasing a local filly to run him down instead.

    Four thundering shots from a three-fifty-seven magnum revolver would’ve taken down most ponies, but a body on Stampede doesn’t feel a hell of a lot of pain. Even as he bled and staggered on a crippled leg, the blood-red buck locked fury-reddened eyes on Rango and slammed the big iron hammer down.

    The cracking noise heralded a shattered collarbone; Rango went over with a groan. The hammer fell again, pulping one of the little dragon’s tiny arms, this time bringing his scream out. Somehow he found the strength to roll over, shove the revolver into the buck’s chest, and pull the trigger once more. Powder flash burned a wide ring around the deep, fresh wound.

    It barely seemed to slow the buck down. Third time was the charm; Rango’s head stove in like an old rubber ball with half its air gone. Lost in rage, the pony began smashing the dragon’s body with a strange work-like rhythm, as though he were back hammering spikes on the railroad gang. Cob, watching from down the street, screamed triumphantly and yelled something about burning the whole town to ashes.

    That was his first major tactical mistake: giving Goodsprings a damned good reason to fight back.

    Every window facing the street, mostly being those of the general store and saloon, sprouted one or more rifles apiece. In the ensuing fusillade several Mite-ys found themselves dancing the final rites, while the rest skittered for cover in the culvert bordering the ruined houses and vacant lots on the opposite side of the street. As soon as they had some cover, they began lighting and throwing sticks of dynamite at the wood-planked buildings opposite.

    I’d never seen a duck, but I’d heard rows of them were easy to shoot. From my perch laying atop Doc’s roof I had perfect line-of-sight straight down on the length of the culvert. Cob’s second big mistake had been not checking his flanks.

  478. Christopher M. Chupik says:
    June 8, 2015 at 9:47 pm

    Drow’s prose is clear. I can actually understand what she’s talking about. This is important, especially when you’re writing about an unfamiliar world.

    Clamps/Yama/Alauda? All I get is overdressed women with no personality calmly wandering around war zones, yakking about the made-up politics of an overly-complex yet strangely lifeless world.

    In reply, Pyotr/Clamps/Yamallamadingdong replies with opinion:

    pyotr says:
    June 8, 2015 at 11:16 pm

    Drow’s prose is clear. I can actually understand what she’s talking about. This is important, especially when you’re writing about an unfamiliar world.
    But it’s boring.

    As I said, in your opinion. She had me when she mentioned that the person who wanted to be a knight in shining armour was, in fact, a dragon. She’s taken a standard childhood fantasy and stood it on its head with her protagonist. She did this in three paragraphs.

    Pyotr, I tried, I really tried… but following the link you provided, I have no idea what’s going on in the world you created. You ask, in a subsequent post, if someone has ever played “Final Fantasy” (you ask three times, in fact.) No, I’ve not played Final Fantasy. I get the impression, though, that your work is assuming a familiarity with something, and I’m not familiar with it. You’re losing me. Further to that… I’m sorry, but your writing comes across – to me – as very stiff. In fact, it puts me in mind of the sentence structure of a young man who was in my section, who spoke four different languages, with varying degrees of fluency… and English was his fifth language. His first? Cantonese. His written and spoken English was HARD to work through, because he was, in essence, constructing his sentences in his head in Cantonese and then transliterating them to English. Your writing style gives me very much that impression, so much so that I am compelled to ask if English is your first language?

    Shadowdancer’s writing is short, simple and to the point; it gets to the meat of things swiftly. Yours… sorry, but not so much.

  479. I think it’s important Snowcrash ask the same question for the 19th time.

    Y’know Snowcrash, here’s what I do: If I want to make a case, I do my homework and then present it. I don’t go to John Scalzi’s blog and ask him to produce proof of where he got his nutty ideas about intersectionalism from 18 times.

  480. “Fallout: Equestria” is a near-perfect translation of the Fallout game series and lore, as though it had happened to the universe of “My Little Pony” instead. Given that the newest iteration of the IP doesn’t condescend to its audience, it’s surprisingly malleable into more mature themes.

    Fallout itself is quite grimdark, with a sense of humor. Themes of lost innocence, horror, violence and hope all mix strangely together with these colorful equines. So much so, that it’s spawned a massive sub-fandom of its own, and the original (plus one or two spinoffs, now) have been published in hardback.

    As I mentioned before, my “sidestory” is “New Pegas”, intended to mirror and subvert the theme and atmosphere is “New Vegas”, which is largely done as a gritty western. So you get scenes like this:

  481. We’re a plague and pestilence upon the Internet, man. Just accept that between us and the Whovians, the world’s going to be divided up at some point.

    Except that there’s a Doctor Whooves with his own minifandom *COUGH*

  482. I saw a really nice looking young man of, oh, about 25, filling out a Dr. Hooves t-shirt a few weekends ago on base.

    Cough, indeed.

  483. Also “canon” to the show, now. At one point, Doctor Whooves and Roseluck go trotting by in the background, the Doctor wearing 3D glasses.

    But really, that’s nothing compared to a couple seasons ago when The Dude, Walter, and The Jesus all made appearances.

    Yep. My Little Big Lebowski. John Goodman Pony nearly gets creamed by a flying bowling ball.

  484. This was the worst blog post ever. So boring. It was about real issues. Made me think. Therefore: not good. I go to blogs to be entertained. SJWs, like you, ruin blogs.

    Where’s the car chase? If there was a car chase, I’d nominate it for a Hugo.

  485. Actual questions:

    1. Has there been or will there ever be a black writer interviewed on this blog? Or a gay writer? ACTUAL question that I’m posing to a “non” racist, “non” homophobe, such as yourself.

    2. Please also tell me about a single book you’ve read by a black writer. There are about 250 million blacks alive today — surely there is one black writer whose work you’ve read. A prolific reader, like yourself? You’ll have this down pat. ONE name is all I ask.

  486. Thomas Sowell. I don’t think about the skin color of the author when I read their books. Or their sexual preferences. Not important to me.

    That’s important to you CHORFs though for some reason, over their skills.

    And your previous posts here have been rather trollish.

  487. I just finished a new short story Clamps. It’s called “Ifkitz Kobbleploz,” and it’s all about Ifkitz.

    Where did you come up with “250 million blacks alive today”? There’s that many in Nigeria alone and another 40 million in America.

    And no we don’t have to roll out black folks on a dolly to prove jack shit to you. And I have one name: “psychopath.”

  488. So, Philly, how about those whiter-than-white past Hugo Awards? Got a problem with persons of Hispanic descent on the SP lineup mucking that up for you, or do you ONLY count PoCs of one particular race? -:)

  489. “If that would keep a leash on her aggressions in a way that diverts them from ourselves, that would be appropriate,” said Cro-Cro. “As handsome as she may be to you, I will not tolerate any more of her mischiefs towards our group based on a set of wonderful feminine geometries. May I remind you that were it not for us, you would still be chirruping like a cricket in the bottle she buried you in deep in the forest.”

    “I will speak with her and make matters plain,” said Ferle-Criptis. “As for you, Favelou. You are prone to unnatural appetites whenever you are in that lizard-form. Please consider a shell more appropriate to the endeavors at hand. Syl is not part of the pantry, no matter how much her life-force excites you.”

    “All is not as before,” said Perloton. “I sense a diminution of our status. Perhaps turning your ambitious dust-maid into an old hag would circumvent her amazing curves from exciting you. Your judgment is in question.”

    “I said I will speak with her. Let that precede any transformations to her basic form.”

    “Talk with this female menace immediately if you don’t wish to see her legs disappear down Cecy’s gullet.”

    “Perloton has a point,” said Cro-Cro. “You’d be better off turning this woman into a draft animal and giving a draft animal the curves of a sprite. It becomes a question of temperament and compliance.”

    “Ardor consists of something more than mere form over content,” replied Ferle-Criptis.

    “Does it?” said The Magst. “In what way? Have you cultivated an addiction to rhetorical gibberish?”

    “Consumating a relationship with a cow shape-shifted into a odelesque is neither a question of rhetoric nor a definition of success,” said Ferle-Criptis.

    “I disagree,” said Perloton. “You should embrace a more expansive set of horizons.”

    “Since that would essentially involve embracing a draft animal, I decline the honor,” said Ferle-Criptis.

    “Your thinking has devolved into parochialism,” said Cro-Cro.

    “As you say, then,” said Ferle-Criptis. “On our next excursion into town, rather than visiting the women-shops, we’ll take a turn around the stables. You can provide the magicks, and I’ll provide some incense for ambience.”

    “Your comments lack that cogent touch which would indicate virtue,” said The Magst.

  490. Hm. IIRC, Steven Barnes is a black man and I have a few of his novels.

    Does that buy me some sort of grace on the SJW Checkbox of Diversity, or am I doubleplus ungood for reading it because I found the story interesting and not to appear “enlightened” about race et al?

  491. …I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.”

    I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.

    I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

    I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

    Does he count too? I believe in that dream, so … why are we the ‘racists’?

  492. The only people I have ever heard speak in direct opposition to the Dream of Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., are racial grievance-mongers of one stripe or another… people whose livelihood, or sense of authority and empowerment, is threatened by the concept of every single human being as one segment of the same rainbow.

  493. Such as Time Magazine’s choice for World’s Most Influential Feminist for her work in the Gaming Industry, Anita Sarkeesian, who recently vouched for the value of segregating our schools by race and gender:

    https://archive.is/hegey

    That’s the archive. The original tweet is still up too:

  494. The irony common to this turdish cult of feminist man-hatred is that Gallo belongs to a movement that is itself a pitch perfect rendition of racial supremacist clownishness like the neo-Nazis. That is no libel but a simple matter of defining what it is that constitutes racial or identity supremacy and then letting the quotes roll. And they do roll, and in their thousands. Modern feminism is a supremacist movement by any standard ever invented, but most importantly, by their own standards of what constitutes sex-hatred, genderphobia and racism.

    So the reason it is so easy to gut SJWs is because it is SJWs themselves who have defined hate speech, and their definitions are so paper-thin they are the one’s who leave themselves most exposed. They are the ones who never shut up about race and gender. That’s aside from the fact hate speech has been well-defined in cultural custom and practice for at least decades.

    And let me give you an example of another rhetorical trick common to people trying to sell you a one-sided con. I have mentioned before you can always tell when you’re being sold a bill of goods as much as what people talk about as what they NEVER talk about.

    A person writes “Beale likes to use William Buckley’s old tactic of insisting the problem isn’t an ‘inherent’ defect in black people but simply the fact they haven’t been civilized long enough to have a culture equal to that of white people.”

    In other words that person claims Beale is hiding behind a claim Beale has REASONS; reasons based on a fake claim to neutral and impartial observation Beale is in fact using to hide his disdain for blacks.

    Here is a common thing in SFF:

    “I do in fact believe that straight white males have an undue amount of power and influence in our society.”

    Even in the midst of a flood of anti-white comments in SFF, that person is claiming REASONS; reasons based on a claim to neutral and impartial observation of a real event.

    But here’s the rub: there are other EVENTS in this world and they merit neutral and impartial observation as well. And here’s where we come to the Brooklyn Bridge and swampland for sale: you never see these people write “I do in fact believe that straight Arab/black/Asian males have an undue amount of power and influence in China/Egypt/Nigeria.”

    NEVER!

    And the wonderful thing is one cannot squirm away from such nonsense, because it is that person themselves who have set the standard for what rhetoric is permissible and what is legitimate “observation.”

    That doesn’t stop them from trying to squirm away; and they do try. Some quotes are set in concrete and obvious, others fly around on wings so you can never pin them down cuz context. There is power/privilege and punching up theory. In other words, talking about Arabs, Asians and blacks in the exact same way the politically correct talk about whites is “racism.” By their own words and standards the politically correct are therefore “racists,” especially when you place their remarks in the larger context of non-stop attacks on white males from within SFF and what they otherwise forbid themselves to talk about. China, Egypt and Nigeria are taboo – off-limits. Whites? Fair game.

    When is obvious obvious and when does one run out of amazing coincidences talking out of one side of one’s mouth and then the other? The solution of course is amazingly simple: don’t talk about ethnic groups or a sex as if they were one single immoral criminal.

    It’s all a con game and semantic and rhetorical gibberish that is usually called “lying” in plain English. I have to laugh at man-hating feminists who use a hashtag like #ImaginaryMisandry. They are either straight up liars or too stupid to uphold a human rights-based society with a Constitution like America.

    SJWs are clownish and not too bright magicians full of smoke and mirrors. Gallo is her own worst enemy and the monster she seeks. She’s just too stupid too understand that. Like all SJWs, she has no principles that would allow her to.

    Let me give you an example of the tools of self-criticism and perceptual shifts that used to be common in SF and have now disappeared:

    OLD MAN (to a lazy youth}: If everybody had what they wanted, who would work? Nobody.
    YOUTH: Not I, depend on it.
    OLD MAN: And you’d be the first to cry out in anguish, for it’s work what keeps the lights on. Get on with it now, put your shoulder into it. I can’t bear sloth.
    YOUTH (grumbling): If I were Connatic I’d arrange that everyone had their wishes. No toil! Free seats at the hussade game! A fine space-yacht! New clothes every day. Servants to lay forth delectable foods!
    OLD MAN: The Connatic would have to be a genius to satisfy both you and the servants. They’d live only to box your ears. Now get on with your work.

    *

    “Sometimes I find a man or a woman to hate. I look into their faces and I see malice, cruelty, corruption. Then I think, these folk are equally useful in the total scheme of things; they act as exemplars against which virtue can measure itself. Life without contrast is food without salt.”

    That is Jack Vance from TRULLION: Alastor 2262. You can find more principled wisdom in a single Vance novel than all the arrogant shallow aphorisms on SJW Twitter feeds. The reason for that is SJWs purposefully move in the opposite direction of Vance’s simple lessons. Vance’s lessons are humanistic and not based on SJW’s sordid racism and man-hatred and Jim Crow, genderblindness, feminism and homophobia in outer space. That’s why Ann Leckie’s and Kameron Hurley’s Huffington Post SF will sink without a trace.

  495. One can only wonder about the intersection of hate speech and comments at Tor, and how the European Union’s European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) in Strasbourg, Germany would feel about it, given the fact that Tor is owned by the Georg von Holtzbrinck Publishing Group, who have expressed a desire to distance themselves from their uncertain provenance to the Nazi Party which has never been satisfactorily settled. Oops! Did I just say Nazis? Since the Holtzbrinck family has conspicuously opened up their archives to cooperate with shedding light on this issue, I can only wonder what they’d think of all this if they knew of it.

    http://www.atlantic-times.com/archive_detail.php?recordID=1646

    So, by SJW standards, if one is guilty of and profits from the sins of the past – what is Tor Books?

    *

    “Hate speech laws go further. Germany punishes anyone found guilty of ‘insulting’ or ‘defaming segments of the population.’ The Netherlands bans anything that ‘verbally or in writing or image, deliberately offends a group of people because of their race, their religion or beliefs, their hetero- or homosexual orientation or their physical, psychological or mental handicap.’ It’s illegal to ‘insult’ such a group in France, to ‘defame’ them in Portugal, to ‘degrade’ them in Denmark, or to ‘expresses contempt’ for them in Sweden. In Switzerland, it’s illegal to ‘demean’ them even with a ‘gesture.’ Canada punishes anyone who ‘willfully promotes hatred.’ The United Kingdom outlaws ‘insulting words or behavior’ that arouse ‘racial hatred.’ Romania forbids the possession of xenophobic ‘symbols.’ – “Hate-Speech Hypocrites” – By William Saletan – Slate Magazine, Sept. 28, 2012

    “… the court is always very careful to separate the principle from any political debate. What’s involved is not a political debate, what’s involved is an attack on people based on the fact that they are members of a group. It’s not just stereotyping, but it’s demonization.”  – Mark Freiman, former deputy Attorney-General of Ontario, commenting on hate-speech.

    “To raise awareness about the risks of online hate speech for a culture of human rights and democracy and to invite students to take action against hate speech and to join, where appropriate, national campaigns against hate speech.” – Council of Europe’s Development of Online School Campaign Tool Against Online Hate Speech 

    Unless Tor.com thinks they can ban Canada, the U.K. and E.U. they might want to think about ixnaying Irene Gallo, Justin Landon, Liz Bourke, Alex MacFarlane and other quote-machines and stop essentially quoting David Duke as Solomon the Wise.

    A former U.S. Dept. of Justice attorney named John Adams once wrote:

    “Americans are growing weary of the obsession of explaining moral choices through a racial context. Most of us have been raised to understand human behavior as a series of individual choices — good and bad. Consequences follow those choices. The incessant agenda to ascribe racial explanations to human behavior — whether pulling a trigger, or lying on the stand isn’t American-style justice. It’s immoral. It’s justice, race-hustler style; and it has overstayed its welcome.”

    SJWs: GUILTY AS CHARGED

  496. Well, according to John “Janus” Scalzi, we’re “entitled”. Says the man with more nominations that Arthur C Clarke and 3 million paycheck. And yes, once again, despite his claims that he’s not really that interested in SP, he still finds time to bash us regularly.

  497. Oh, and here’s something amusing from File 770:

    “I think it’s better to focus on the Puppy leaders’ hypocrisy, the difference between their own words and actions, in hopes of demonstrating to the “casual Puppies” that they’ve been sold a pig in a poke. The lead Puppies are likely beyond redemption, but their influence is only as large as their following. Expose the head Puppies’ hypocrisy, and maybe some of their adherents will drift away. If enough of them do, I really don’t care what the powerless figureheads have to say.”

    You’ve had two months, no, correction: you’ve had two YEARS to do that. And you still haven’t been able to.

  498. “Hypocrisy”? Two years? Does anyone remember this?

    http://www.jamesmaystock.com/essays/Pages/Resignation.html

    Surprise! SJWs gathered together on Twitter and implied I was a white racist just because I got sick of the flood of racist comments from Ahmed and de Bodard. Sound familiar?

    “John ScalziVerified account ‏@scalzi 1 May 2013 @saladinahmed I mean the Write Agenda dude. James May is just standard-issue terrified white dude. @stevengould @nkjemisin”

    “Steven Gould ‏@StevenGould 1 May 2013 @nkjemisin @scalzi @saladinahmed Uh, I think so. I try not to read that stuff in depth. You get stupid all over you.”

    “N. K. Jemisin ‏@nkjemisin 1 May 2013 @StevenGould @scalzi @saladinahmed Thanks. I could run a “find” on the stupid, but figured since other people had already read it.”

    “Jonathon Side ‏@JaceDraccus 1 May 2013 @scalzi @saladinahmed @StevenGould @nkjemisin So that’s what paranoid white dipshittery looks like? I’d wondered.”

    “Saladin Ahmed ‏@saladinahmed 1 May 2013 STOP THESE COLORED PEOPLE & THEIR WHITE ACCOMPLICE! (“@scalzi, @nkjemisin, & Saladin Ahmed must be taken in hand.”)”

    “Paul Weimer Republic ‏@PrinceJvstin 1 May 2013 @saladinahmed @scalzi @nkjemisin oh FFS, this idiot *again*?”

    “John ScalziVerified account ‏@scalzi 1 May 2013 @saladinahmed Wait, you didn’t know this guy was a fucking nutbag? @StevenGould @nkjemisin”

    “John Scalzi ‏@scalzi 1 May 2013 @saladinahmed Ah. Well, basically: Scum. And that’s the nicest thing I’d say about him. @stevengould @nkjemisin”

    “John ScalziVerified account ‏@scalzi 2 May 2013 @gregpak Although that could be interesting. If you followed who I blocked, you’d see a lot of spam and ranting from scared white men.”

    Which side could be taken in hand under European hate-speech laws. Me? “Nutbag”? I made a reasoned argument based on rules of hate-speech. SJWs are some of the stupidest and least aware people on Earth. They mostly live in America but could never create it. However they might be capable of creating something like an American Bund in the 1930s. Whatever it was, I’m sure there’d be “social justice” or “progressive” in the title. No dictionary, no rules. No rules, no peace.

    This sick feminist-inspired movement in SF deserves all the scorn and mockery we can heap on it. And Tor is still OUT until people are OUT. And remember, that’s by their own standards. I am sick of being attacked for my skin and sex and these fucks calling it social justice.

  499. @Frank Probst at 8:07 pm
    I want to give a great big YES, THIS to your entire post.
    The reason I want to know more obout how it was assembled was that at the outset, what I knew was that there were recommendations on the main post, but they did not tally with the final slate. At the same time, Brad was repeatedly mentioning how open and democratic the whole precess was (even on the OP, he mentions that it was transparent).

    In my usual stomping grounds, this discrepancy, and Brad not addressing it like for example how you speculate on your post, led to some lets call incredible levels of speculation, some of which were just grasping at some very flimsy straws (I think I lost one at the Mormon conspiracy angle).

    I can understand that Brad did not want to, or was unable to address these questions. But by continuing to insist that it was open and democratic, and that he had already answered these questions, he gave a lot of people (including myself) the impression that he was dodging the question, and that there was something to hide. It may not be fair, but hey, it is what it is.

    Oh and lest someone think that I’m doing this to try and pretend that I’m looking out for Brad on this in his forum, I’ll be clear – I’m not. I’m opposed to slates. They’re a frickin terrible idea. I think Brad was wrong to run with Larry’s mistake from the last 2 years. But I do believe in being part of an informed opposition. I’d like to be opposed to something based on reality, not random tinfoil speculation. That the slate exists is, to me, bad. That there was some vetting by the ELoE is worse to me (why do I want another cabal determining it? why not just run with the number of recommendations?). I don’t want my opposition to something be based on nutball unproven speculation.

    So, fine. Brad has said publicly that he’s not interested in explaining how the slates were assembled at this stage. It’s pretty likely from what others have said that what Frank has said (various recommendations form sources both public and private, which was then finalised/ vetted/ curated by Brad and he ELoE) is how the slate was assembled in general.

    What were the recommendations like? How many people submitted recommendations? What criteria did Brad and the rest use in finalising the list? Will Brad still continue to inaccurately insist that the whole thing was open/ democratic/ transparent? We’ll never know that, and that’s gonna be speculated, both reasonably and unreasonably.

    Finally, you people are terrible. So much words on a Fallout/ MLP fanfic xover, but no one wild that Fallout 4 HAS FINALLY BEEN ANNOUNCED? Y’all suck (MLP is not my jam, sorry).

    On that note, I will now go battle Nazis, like a good old non-Puppy should. They’ll be flaming undead zombie Nazis of course. The very best sort.

  500. A couple of notes I’d like to make. First, a link to a blog post where I discuss a recent post by Eric Flint: http://tlknighton.com/?p=7183

    Next, Snowcrash, if you are indeed trying to argue in good faith, then I offer my apologies for accusing you of doing otherwise. If you’d like, I’ll be happy to discuss how I came to that conclusion with you private (click my name and use the contact link at the top of the page), but it’s not necessary. Sorry.

    Now, I’m not going to do all that legwork for you. That hasn’t changed, and I do suggest you accept that no one will. To those of us who took part, we are satisfied that the process was open and transparent. That you don’t is something we will likely never address to your satisfaction simply because of the scale of the undertaking.

    My advice going forward to just agree to disagree with us on whether it was sufficiently transparent and move on. Fair enough?

  501. Snowcrash, in case you haven’t been paying attention, this whole dust up is about hate speech against any man, white or heterosexual which has been baked into the core SFF community the last 3 years plus.

    We are fighting a hate movement which lies as much as it breathes and has no standards for fair play anyone can detect. For example, the same people whining Gallo shouldn’t be fired are the exact same people who hounded Jonathan Ross, Jean Rabe, Mike Resnick and Barry Malzberg out of paying gigs over nothing; a lady editor’s looks in the case of the last 3. Meanwhile Tanya Avakian writes a bio of James Tiptree, Jr. (Alice Sheldon) which mentions her “starlet’s looks” and it’s crickets. Get the message? Hate speech unsurprisingly has no standards whatsoever. The reason SJWs do that is because they lie about what their movement is about. In fact it is based on a radical feminism which hates whites, men and heterosexuals and will move every goalpost in sight to keep that going. We understand the SJW movement is full of useful idiots who don’t necessarily hate us for our skin and sex. We also understand they are useful idiots. From the outside they act the same as their racist man-haters.

    This is why some are annoyed with what they see as your pedantic obsession with slates. We essentially don’t care. There is no way to screw up an initiative against a hate movement that has no idea what the word “fair” means.

    Let’s say SP3 was less than open and democratic. So what? In the end there’s only one boss. He took suggestions and made a decision. It wasn’t a vote.

    Capiche?

  502. Oh and lest someone think that I’m doing this to try and pretend that I’m looking out for Brad on this in his forum, I’ll be clear – I’m not.

    So, you finally admit that you came here in bad faith, posed as wanting to be reasonable, played the injured party when we told you to fuck off when that was exposed, and were here on a witch hunt, wasting our time. I’m sure you feel very proud of yourself.

  503. @Snowcrash – Thank you for finally saying that regardless of how open and democratic the process was, you would still oppose it because of its nature. This points up what I was saying to Frank: that minds are made up here and arguing over the finer concerns of a past process is not going to improve matters now or in the future.

    As to Fallout 4? We were comparing our respective fanfics, but if you insist:
    http://piecee01.deviantart.com/art/Welcome-Home-537034101

  504. @Tom Kratman – Want to know something funny?

    For all that Yama screeches about Vox contacting Emma during the course of his investigation, we have evidence that Yama sought out my husband as well.

    So some months back, Andrew P. Marston felt it absolutely necessary to contact my hubby, just to hurl insults at Rhys. Via my hubby’s unused old LJ. Take a look at those comment timestamps from the old friends comments. Year 2008, ladies and gentlemen. He had to DIG to find that post. Sure, Rhys never really posted much on his LJ, but that’s still a silly, happy little post he made over six years ago, nearly seven years now.

    https://forums.affsdiary.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=41&start=20#p113

    The sole visitor to a long abandoned LJ.

  505. yeah he hasn’t learned some of the stuff you get told in the second (or third) week of any decent fiction writing class (in my case, a screenwriting class)

  506. Really, Philbert? Really? You’re going to try to play that gotcha game? No thanks, Epic Phil. Brad owes you nothing and neither do we.

  507. I was banned by Beth Meacham at Tor my first day for objecting to racist comments by Liz Bourke and N. K. Jemisin about – who else – white men.

    Here is what I would’ve written to Mr. Doherty:

    Don’t listen to people in this thread who claim we are what we are not. We love SFF – period. What we do not love is your bloggers and editors talking smack about white men and pretending it’s “politics.” I do not love it when Justin Landon has a podcast with N. K. Jemisin and Kate Elliot talking smack about white men. The same goes for Alex MacFarlane and Liz Bourke. I do not like to see your bloggers leaving sympathetic comments at StormfrontAsia known as Requires Hate’s old site. You have some housecleaning to do. Until all the names I’ve mentioned (Gallo also) are cleaned out, I will not purchase your books. Let’s have no silliness about “diversity of viewpoints.” My skin and sex are not up for discussion or debate – period. Also, this is SFF, so why would it be anyway? That’s some strange and obsessive stuff to be dragging into SFF. Let’s be honest: goofy racialist feminism is of equal of more interest to some of your people than SFF. Kick ’em out.

  508. Calbeck: Having raised four daughters and having attended an all male school (Boston Latin) until it was integrated for classes a couple behind mine, I am of the opinion that, generally speaking, single sex education is a better approach. It’s not even about the romance issue, so much, nor the concomitant formal (read: black shotgun) wedding requirement; it’s that girls are going through some changes during middle and high school that usually make them nucking futz. Not their fault, there’s a hell of a lot going on there, much moreso than for us. Still a problem that doesn’t go away by ignoring it.

    By “better approach,” I don’t know that I am willing to require it, but would making it an option be such a terrible thing? Girls’ Latin, after all, was, until the progressives had their way and destroyed it (oh, yes they did, Eric), a slightly better school than Boston (aka Boys’) Latin was.

  509. @Tom – Sorry, I’m not going to support segregation by either gender or race. Even if I was going to support gender separation for your reasons (my education was entirely in public schools and I witnessed about as much hormonal stupid from males as females in that time), Anita’s tacking race onto the subject is about a mile over that line.

  510. Read this fuckery from Hurley called “The Revolution of Self-Righteous Dickery will Not Be Moderated.” Among the chief weapons of the Inquistition is fear, surprise and these highlights:

    “I read once that the real cost of racism was in keeping folks affected by same from doing their work. This works for stuff like feminism and homophobia, too. Instead of doing the work we were meant to do, bigots want to keep people spinning in circles, spending all their time writing endless think pieces that refute their insistence that we can’t and have never done anything.”

    Really? Got any quotes to back up the assertion SFF is hating on you? Of course not. It never has. But we have your quotes.

    “It keeps us defending simple bullshit truths…”

    Really? What truths? Other than a demographic spike during the Golden Age of SF, where are your quotes?

    “But everybody else is constantly challenged and bullied with the threat of erasure…”

    Really? Like your bullshit double-Hugo-winning claim men erased women from military history?

    “… my book The Geek Feminist Revolution which will come out in spring.”

    Really? Exhibit A.

    “To sum up, haters: I don’t have time for your internet wank.”

    Really? What haters? Where’s the culture-wide industry quotes to back up your preening paranoid bullshit?

    “Then I found out that a Tor Books employee who made an off-hand comment… Oh the irony.”

    When do 10,000 such quotes go from off-hand to an institutionalized ideology? And there is no irony in an ideology which lies and has no principles.

    “I know what it’s like to be a woman who says True Shit”

    In fact you don’t know that at all. See: quotes.

    “So here’s the deal: it fucking sucks to be a woman in the workplace”

    Really? Women seem to get a lot of books published and goddam awards. Is this workplace imaginary, like the women who’ve always fought?

    “How the fuck did we get here, anyway? How the fuck did anyone think Tor Books or John Scalzi were some kind of militant leftist front for full communism?”

    Thanks for the straw man. You’re shit radical man-hating racist feminists, not commies. If you were commies I wouldn’t care.

    “You can’t even say ‘the sky is fucking blue’ on the internet, as a woman, without public shaming. Where was the public employer outcry during RaceFail, or FrenkelFail?”

    No one knows what color the sky is in a world where you think we punch you at random and want to drag you behind pick-up trucks. And you morons still won’t say what Frenkel even did. Most likely cuz it was nothing more than an insult in front of witnesses.

    “… documented in pretty much every major news piece (including one I wrote!)”

    You didn’t document jack shit. You made stuff up out of your head. See: quotes.

    “TRUE THINGS WERE SAID BY A LADY ON THE INTERWEBS AND HERE WE ARE.”

    Bullshit was said and no one cares she was a lady.

    “If you’re an employer faced with a mob of bigots because a female employee said a true thing in public…”

    Saying it twice won’t chant it into existence. It was still bullshit, we’re still not bigots and no one still cares she was female.

    “There’s no safe space for women in public.”

    That’s bullshit. The opposite is true in SFF. See: quotes.

    “… mobs like the Gamergate/Puppies will swing back around and say we aren’t being vocal enough about our rights, and so deserve to live life as quiet second class citizens.”

    No one cares about your lies about Gamergate or wants you to be second class citizens.

    “I was asked on the Blogger Keynote panel at BEA if I had any final thoughts or advice for marginal folks writing online, and I said, ‘Don’t be quiet. It’s by being loud and angry and passionate that we’ve gotten this far.’”

    Exactly. It’s those racist fucking comments talking smack about men that have got you in trouble, not all men and whites on Earth.

    “So if you think you’re on the side of fair-handed even-mindedness while sending harassing letters to a woman’s employer…”

    Thanks for repeatedly confirming your supremacist doctrine about how sacred women are. Did you mean human throughout your ditzy post? And Hurley’s an “essayist”? What the fuck does she use for footnotes – “everyone knows – pg. everything?” I’m more of an essayist than Hurley is and I don’t know jack shit about it.

  511. In fact, I just remembered one particular example of multi-gendered high-school hormonal stupid.

    I was always something of a “loner”, in that I liked people but never cliques, so all my friends were just individuals. One day in drivers’ ed class, while watching a safety film, one of the “Slut Clique” girls began punching me in the right shoulder from across the aisle.

    Note that I did not ascribe “Slut Clique” to her group myself. This is what they called themselves, routinely making aggressive sexual moves on people to intimidate them, taunting people over who was fucking whom, and selecting their own sexual partners purely on basis of how well-connected said person. As a rule, I stayed well away from that bunch.

    But I couldn’t choose my classroom seat, so here was one of them punching me in the shoulder in the dark.

    “Knock it off,” I muttered.

    “What’re YOU gonna do about it?” she whispered sultrily, slugging my shoulder as hard as her 90-pound body could put into it. No one in class appeared to notice at all, certainly not the teacher.

    “I warned you once.”

    She snickered and repeated herself, adding another punch.

    So I balled my right fist and extended my arm. I didn’t even bother winding up. Right into her left shoulder.

    She, her desk, and her two-sizes-too-small pants went over with a surprised squeal.

    Of course, I was sent to the principal’s office for “unprovoked violence”, since the only thing the teacher noticed was that last part. There, I was admonished that my size and maleness meant I was in the wrong even if my story was 100% true. I was literally expected to sit there and take any beating a female student felt like dishing out, with my “proper recourse” being to complain to the teacher.

    Sure. Now remember your own high-school days and think about how THAT would play out. If you didn’t come up with “emboldening the Slut Clique because nothing happened to their friend except maybe a talking-to”, you fail.

    The actual effects of my action were threefold:

    1) The girl was genuinely shocked, staring at me from the floor like I’d grown fangs. Neither she, nor any of her friends, tried a confrontation with me again — behind my back, they just called me “the psycho”, but since none of the people they knew were my friends anyways (see: “loner”), that was water off a duck’s back to me.

    2) Aside from a short three-day suspension, I received no further punishment — a small price to pay, to stop and prevent future bullying.

    3) On my way home that day, a Volkswagen Beetle screeched alongside me, cut off my bicycle, and its driver got out. He was wearing a varsity jacket. He yelled as he stomped up to me, “HEY! Did you hit a girl in school?”

    “Yeah,” I responded, “did you hear -”

    And that’s all I got out before he slugged me with a right hook. I staggered around my bike, once, got my balance back, and put up my fists. If he wanted a fight — nope, he was already back in his car and squealing away.

    Hormonal problems? Yeah. That’s all part of growing up. So is learning about people. Next day in the same class, I grinned at my original tormentor and said “Your boyfriend has a mean right hook.”

    “What boyfriend?” Not only was she puzzled, but more importantly… she was being civil.

    “The one in the varsity jacket.”

    “…I don’t know anyone on the team.”

    Random white-knight, avenging the honor of a damsel in distress? CHECK-A-ROONIE.

    All this, years before the Internet got to be a big thing.

    High school… high school never changes. It just goes online. -;)

  512. ““Philbert” is over in the Tor.com comments. Mary Robinette Kowal is having a meltdown over the apology and Paul Weimer fully supports Irene Gallo.”

    This is my shocked face. Doesn’t it look so shocked?

    None of those three things surprises me whatsoever.

  513. They’re more angry that Tor apologized then they are at Gallo for making the idiot remark to begin with. So now Tor has offended Sad Puppies AND the anti-Puppies.

    Popcorn!

  514. MRK is there because no matter how many times it’s put to her she doesn’t understand the difference between racial and sexual group defamation and a personal insult.

    Weimer has the talent of searching out and supporting every single soul in SFF who disparages whites, men and heterosexuals as an entire group. He thinks he’s supporting social justice. Weimer is the ultimate example of the wrong-way useful idiot. He has the principles, morals and brains of a rock python. Asking him for a definition of hate speech would be like asking a monkey.

  515. Silly Pyotr, that’s not how you spell Hitl -… ooooh, you weren’t trying to make a 4chan meme reference to stir up needless and pointless rehashing of what’s already been settled? My bad. -:)

  516. Nathan, this thread has clampsign the likes of which even God has never seen.

  517. Wouldn’t be so bad, if his “debate style” didn’t amount to:

    …which, in all honestly, is giving the gentleman more credit than he’s earned.

  518. Calbeck you are aware that if I put up more than one link comments go into moderation across almost all platforms? Half my comments at Flint’s are going into moderation without links.

  519. “That’s because Gallo said nothing wrong.”

    Oh Marston, you silly hate-filled child. If I want crap from you, I’ll squeeze your head. Go hug your dakimakura pillow girlfriend, she misses you.

  520. @James – No, wasn’t aware of that, but I can see where it might be an automated thing to allow control of spamming. I do appreciate you at least quoting, though, because that’s something which can be tracked down with a little effort. The lady we were both responding to couldn’t be arsed to do more than allege she took offense to something by inference.

  521. James May– I think wordpress put in some kind of new spam-catcher, I managed to lock myself out of a blog I contribute to because I spellchecked in a different document, then copy-pasted. I guess it was too much text, too fast. 😀

  522. And that’s my issue, Calbeck – quotes. You probably don’t know this but this is a thing I came into completely cold. I had no idea who anyone was among this new crowd – no one.

    The stuff about white privilege and male gaze was a thing I stumbled across. My first thought was – oh, crap, are white male supremacists loose in SF or something? I started doing research and found virtually nothing on the so-called straight white male side that would account for all this new stuff about whites and men. What was it? Where was this coming from? I’d never heard of any of this stuff.

    The short story is I researched up a cult that’s so wacky even me repeating it’s origins makes me seem crazy. Flint went nuts when I used the term “lesbian-centric” but that’s exactly where this bizarre ideology comes from.

    The concepts they use are extremely confusing and the words never what you think. For example you see feminists like Sarkeesian use terms like “agency” and “performed” and we kinda think agency means giving a female character something to do. Wrong. It’s a bizarre theory gay French Queer Theorist Judith Butler borrowed from French intellectual Jacques Derrida about “performativity” and which she applied to gay feminism and gender. The way agency and “performance” works is if a society sees a woman (or gay gender) in a certain role repeated over and over again, it becomes real. The obvious problem there is in believing Gothic cathedrals and great paintings happened because men willed themselves into it and tricked women into subservient roles by repetition so they believed themselves out of equality. Equally goofy is the idea that’s how heterosexuality has been maintained and gayness kept under wraps. I told you it’s wacky. It all is.

    Judith Butler’s prose is nearly impenetrable. The funny thing no one seems to have considered is she may simply be mad. She makes Lovecraft’s arcane thoughts and archaic prose look like a redneck truck driver wrote it. I defy you to read Gender Trouble, and yet it is the single greatest source of the theories you see thrown about in SFF feminism today.

    Alex Dally MacFarlane is the gay woman who reviewed Ann Leckie’s Ancillary Justice at Tor from this perspective and also called for the end of binary depictions in SF, also at Tor. Needless to say, MacFarlane doesn’t think much of men. That’s why I keep talking about AJ as SFF’s Butlerian love-child. It is, and it is why it won awards in this new chic ideology. The idea I object to it is stupid. I’m just saying AJ a weird type of affirmative action. Genderblindness is an exercise in “performance.” That’s what’s behind all this goofiness from Sarkeesian and Wu. Here’s the madness:

    https://storify.com/foxvertebrae/non-performative-gender

  523. The obvious thing about SJWs is you notice how they either have no quotes or they quote the same two guys over and over again: Day and Wright. The problem there is SJWs were going ballistic about white men before they ever heard of those 2. That means SJWs have been pushing back against fumes from day one. They fought against Red Sonja paintings and the word “lady” for crying out loud they had so few targets. That’s the very definition of tilting at windmills.

    What we’re being asked to believe is this massive now year’s long culture-wide pushback against white men is to fight back against 0 to 2 guys. The misogyny, racism and patriarchy is there but they can’t show it.

    And when they go back in history they always show the same thing: John Campbell wouldn’t publish a Samuel Delany story and SFF was mostly male and white. Wow! I declare racism to have never existed in SFF. And these are the morons who say we make up cabals. The problem is we have thousands of quotes that all say the same thing and SJWs have zip.

    In gaming it’s the same thing: nothing. Sarkeesian and her new feminists came out of nowhere and aimed at nothing. They created their own firestorm where none existed cuz patriarchy. What a bunch of dopes. After having their way for a couple of years they’re now being systematically dismantled in the public arena and they don’t like it.

  524. Welp, guess all those SJW SFF authors are gonna have to find other things to write about; apparently, all escapist fantasy is right wing:

  525. “Meredith on June 9, 2015 at 8:28 am said:
    Re: racism, sexism, and homophobia

    “Why exactly is it necessary to come up with multiple quotes from every individual Puppy for each of the charges? A group that claims awards won by women and minorities were the result of Affirmative Action (and not simply that those women and minorities were any good) is a group with racist, sexist and homophobic principles.”

    See how casually these people lie? It is SJWs themselves in hundreds of quotes who push stories for no other reason than race and sex. That is accompanied by more quotes where people vow to make sure women, gays and non-whites have a higher profile in SFF. Then when they win awards they boast about it.

    “I can read what you say” equals “racist, sexist and homophobic principles.” What a disgusting ideology this is.

    The straight up lying is so thick over there you can’t keep track of it all. Day and Wright have single-handedly oppressed women, gays and PoC in SFF so an emergency feminist ideology was formed which pre-dates their presence.

    “Kate on June 9, 2015 at 6:36 am said:
    Paul: what’s specifically odd about that third para is that Ms Gallo’s original FB comment said nothing about ‘white men’.”

    Yes that is odd, because it’s well-known many neo-Nazis are black. And I never realized “white saviors” and “male gaze” referred to two guys. And did you see this pack of lies?

    http://review.gawker.com/americas-largest-sci-fi-publisher-gives-in-to-reactiona-1710069386

  526. Honestly, these people, the CHORFs, Irene Gallo and her ilk, don’t know the people who support the Sad Puppies.

    http://bayourenaissanceman.blogspot.com.au/2015/06/an-open-letter-to-tom-doherty-of-tor.html

    Mr. Doherty, I spent eighteen years working with the victims of racial and tribal violence in South Africa, trying to overturn the vicious and racist policies of apartheid. The white government sought to rule by diktat, and the so-called ‘liberation movements’ who opposed it sought to render white rule impossible through terror. Groups such as ours that sought to bring relief and new hope to areas of conflict were targeted by both sides. We paid a heavy price for our beliefs. Twenty-seven of us died during those years, and more have died since. I’ve written here from time to time about some aspects of our experiences. If you’d like to know more, try this article, or this one. As for my attitude towards racism, try this article for a start.

    Given that background, you’ll understand that to be told by Ms. Gallo that, as a supporter of the Sad Puppy campaign, I’m “unrepentantly racist”, is utterly unacceptable to me. Furthermore, I’ve fought (and I mean exchanged gunfire with) real neo-Nazis who sought to impose Nazi-like ideals of racial purity on a country at war with itself. Thus, to be told that I’m a member of an “extreme right-wing to neo-nazi group” is equally unacceptable. I could go on cherry-picking individual clauses out of Ms. Gallo’s statements, but why bother? I think you can understand why I exploded with anger when I read it. She has no idea about those realities. I do. I will bear their scars, mental, spiritual and physical, until the day I die.

    Will File 770 quote that?

  527. “I’ve fought (and I mean exchanged gunfire with) real neo-Nazis”

    Now THAT is a true hero. The only reason she isn’t being lauded as such by the Neilsen-Haydens of the world is that she picked “the wrong side” of their little turf war.

  528. Actually fighting actual neo-Nazis is something that the keyboard battalions of the Social Justice Brigades can only dream of.

  529. James Nicoll’s response? “Tom Doherty certainly has a talent for licking jackboot.”

    Keep those tasteless Nazi comparisons coming, Puppy-kickers. We’re taking notes.

  530. Wow, they have no clue, do they? Keep it coming, Nicoll, Kowal, all of you SJW hypocrite freaks. Keep talking. Keep showing us who you really are.

  531. Natalie the Lurid: “Imperator Nataliosa ‏@eilatan · 3h3 hours ago
    OH ERIC FLINT NO”

    Like I said. The people who praised him now turn on him.

  532. And also some conspiracy theorizing:

    “Imperator Nataliosa ‏@eilatan · 12h12 hours ago

    Imperator Nataliosa retweeted Wm Henry Morris
    How much money does Tom Doherty make from his stake in Baen? Massive conflict of interest here.”

  533. FullMac shows once again that Tolkien was right when he said that the only people concerned with escapism are jailers.

    As for the Puppykickers, is this like them sawing the tree branch they’re resting in?

  534. @nathan: I keep thinking “Wile E Coyote: Supergenius” when I view their antics.

  535. @jamesawolf

    Egads. Tom Doherty’s statement seemed to be exactly what it should have been. I’m not a Puppy, but it takes twenty seconds to read what Irene Gallo wrote and realize that she’s way off the deep end. And now HE’S catching flak. Um, read what she wrote, and then read what he wrote. He said pretty much exactly what you’d expect a really good PR person to say.

  536. “Like I said. The people who praised him now turn on him.”

    Yep. Flint is a good man and a leftist. He is also horribly naive about the extremists of his movement in a way that he should not be, seeing as he’s a Trotskyite rather than a Stalinist.

  537. Oops… lost who quoted this… Oh, and here’s something amusing from File 770:

    “I think it’s better to focus on the Puppy leaders’ hypocrisy, the difference between their own words and actions, in hopes of demonstrating to the “casual Puppies” that they’ve been sold a pig in a poke. The lead Puppies are likely beyond redemption, but their influence is only as large as their following. Expose the head Puppies’ hypocrisy, and maybe some of their adherents will drift away. If enough of them do, I really don’t care what the powerless figureheads have to say.”

    See… they think we have leaders.

    They don’t remember that time six years ago when we were so excited to find the local sci-fi convention and, joy!, they’ve got a filk track… and that moment when you’re there all shiny, waiting to sing your little heart out… and in between some non-sff folk songs, a couple of sf and fantasy related songs… are the “lets make fun of Republican” songs. WTF? And then you go to the panels, all shiny, and the super famous author, you discover to your horror, has a form of tourettes where she reflexively turns her head to the side and squacks, “BOOOOOOSH!”…. somewhat horrified, you go to another panel, all shiny, and listen as the panelists calmly explain how anti-science Christians set everything back a century or two… meanwhile the convention embraces Wiccans and Pagans and Aromatherapy. And you sort it out and figure out what is safe, and meet some great people, and then, all shiny, you listen to them laugh and explain that the quality of a book is directly inverse to the number of exploding helicopters…

    … and suddenly something that would just be funny becomes an attack on your tastes and preferences in the books you read.

    … and you still go because you love science fiction, and you have your favorite authors… but you’re timid about trying new ones and you’re timid about what you say and you’re timid about what panels you attend.

    And someone says, Sister! And someone says, Brother!

    There are no *leaders*.

    And that’s shiny.

  538. There is no “hypocrisy” to show, when Brad writes his Fanifesto and he describes your experiences to a T. When someone relates the deliberate disdain and alienation that reflect what you feel. When someone describes the FEAR and you realize you’re not alone.

    Oh, Brad lied about “democratic” and “transparent”… maybe we’ll… drift… away…

  539. (Again… there was no secrecy… and *even if* the only way “democratic” applies was in terms of the rabble vs. the elite, it would be true… no one who *knew* about the list was in any way uninformed about the nature of it. The only “surprise” is that it wasn’t just a couple of things that made it to the Hugo ballot.)

  540. “They’re more angry that Tor apologized then they are at Gallo for making the idiot remark to begin with.”

    Maybe Gallo, Feder, and PNH will resign in protest. One may hope.

    Over on the Tor site, the strained exculpatory parsing of Gallo’s statements has reached Clintonian levels. Heh.

  541. ” How the fuck did anyone think Tor Books or John Scalzi were some kind of militant leftist front for full communism?”

    PNH marching in a Stalinist parade didn’t help. If I saw someone attending a Klan rally, or marching in a Nazi parade, I’d assume they were a Klansman or a Nazi.

  542. Roll with it, folks. This is how #GamerGate has been getting stronger and turning the tide in recent months. Slowly, but it’s happening.

    Neutrals who don’t see things ending on their own step in to try and be the voice of reason. They expect that there may be a few hotheads on either side, but most people will respond to being heard out equally, right?

    Oh, HELL NO. The social-justice brigades do not want and never have wanted equality, they want what they see as equity, and their core view on how to get it requires redefining equality itself. Anyone who they see as a serious speedbump against that becomes the enemy, because social justice (as they see it) is paramount to them.

    So the erstwhile neutral runs into a massive wall of flak. All WE have to do is be polite and reasoned in our discourse… and James, I know you’re exceptionally well-read on this, but remember the tale of the pot and the lobster. It’s better to be concise and show specific immediate problems rather than a big overarching picture (and I have to admit, as I already have, that I can’t follow a lot of what you’ve been referencing, despite the fact I am semi-retired with plenty of time on my hands).

  543. I do both, Calbeck. I show the big picture about the history of this ideology and then I show quotes from the actual players:

    “Feminist Frequency @femfreq · Oct 25 Since so many seem confused. Masculinity ≠ male. Masculinity is a socially constructed and performed gender identity…”

    Note the use of the word “performed.” Once educated, that word and “socially constructed” become as obvious a red flag as “gracias” does for Spanish. That quote from Sarkeesian could’ve come straight out of Judith Butler, and probably did, since Butler is the first person to ever apply it to gender. What I’m trying to show is this “feminist” movement has absolutely nothing to do with equal rights feminism. It’s use of the word “feminist” is its greatest weapon, because Americans don’t know jack shit about Judith Butler, Kate Millet and Robin Morgan.

    “I feel that ‘man-hating’ is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them.” – ‘Lesbianism and Feminism: Synonyms or Contradictions?’, spring 1973, keynote address to West Coast Lesbian Feminist Conference, printed in Going Too Far: The Personal Chronicle of a Feminist, p 178.” – Robin Morgan

    The Robin Morgan anthology “Sisterhood is Powerful” includes the Redstockings Manifesto which has this: “All men receive economic, sexual, and psychological benefits from male supremacy. All men have oppressed women… We call on all men to give up their male privilege and support women’s liberation in the interest of our humanity and their own.”

    That anthology is one of the most important keystones in what kickstarted this whole movement, listed by the N. Y. Public Library as one of the 100 most influential books of the 20th century. Both quotes mirror those of Sarkeesian’s writer/mentor Jonathan McIntosh.

    Brianna Wu, Anita Sarkeesian and all the feminists in SF are gender feminists, not equal rights feminists. They have no interest in law or rights. Their goal is literally to make men less masculine and women less feminine through the depiction of gender in pop culture. The fact they are in perfect alignment with what created the Comics Code in the ’50s should tell you something, but these “feminists” have a very different agenda.

    “‘Partial nudity, the aggressive display of cleavage and the navel, and shorts/skirts higher than 4″ above the knee are not allowed.'”

    No, that’s not from the exhibition guidelines of a late 19th century Chicago art gallery whose patriarchy wants to steal women’s Joanna Russ pencil-boxes or part of the ’50s self-censoring Comics Code. That is part of today’s feminist driven guidelines for what a video gaming convention allows when it comes to “booth babes.”

    Know your enemy.

  544. Right, but take it from the point of view of someone who knows nothing about any of that, or any of those people, and whose concerns are solely the Hugos. Sure, they’re reprehensible people, but when discussing the Hugos it’s best to keep it to the figures involved. The only time any of this should come up is when looking deeper into the openly-stated politics of those Hugo figures… and that, only to show the ideology they’ve bought into.

    Nothing you just posted shows that link. That’s what I mean about being concise. What you’re actually doing here is the other way ’round: “Modern Feminism is bad, this is why, and I will now show you these people we’re against are Modern Feminists”.

  545. Rather cute, how they claim all men somehow “benefit” or gain “privilege” from “male supremacy” when it’s pretty obvious they are doing their best to blame all men for this “supremacy”. Their own variation of Original Sin.

  546. Calbeck, these are the openly stated politics of these Hugo figures. There is only so much room in a comments section. Not only is it their politics, it is so massively culture-wide people can’t grasp it. It is a lake. Every quote below is a disparagement. To say “black dude” in such a way is – of course – racism. I don’t take issue with the comments. I take issue with the idea it’s racism if you use the word black. At what point is it obvious these are racists and their useful idiots?

    “… straight white dude story” – Nebula nominee Kate Elliott
    “White Dude parade” – Hugo nominee Seanan McGuire
    “Someday all the straight white dudes will board the ships into the west and diminish. ‘Now begins the age of… everyone else.'” – Joel Watson
    “… it’s not b/c I dislike white dudes, it’s because White Dudes rarely examine their privilege” – K. Tempest Bradford
    “OLD WHITE DUDES ARE ANGRY THAT EVERYTHING IS ONLY 98% SKEWED TOWARD THEIR OLD WHITE DUDE EXISTENCE” – Chuck Wendig
    “White dudely authors being white and dudely and gross, get out of my life.” – Anna Hutchinson
    “… if a problem isn’t seen by a straight white dude, it doesn’t exist” – Nebula nominate Veronica Schanoes
    “… so great seeing all these white dudes talking about how fucking awesome they are for standing up to G—-Gate.” – Natalie Luhrs
    “The straight white dude perspective is basically the Dunning-Kruger effect apex of all civilization” – Cecily Kane of the Hugo-nominated Skiffy & Fanty franchise
    “soooo many of these blowups involve white dudes who think they are princes…” – Solace Ames
    “I totally do see the ‘Here’s a list of recommended white dudes!’ thing happening” -Elizabeth Bear.
    “Well-educated white dudes with a lot of opinions and just enough smarts to think they have it all figured out make me so goddamn tired.” – Sunny Moraine
    “the little clique of white dudes grumbling about the Nebula awards” – Damien Walter
    “Poor set upon white dude talks about his white dude pain.” – Cora Buhlert
    “white people scrambling to save face and look more enlightened than the next white person” – Requires Hate

    This is from a review of Guardians of the Galaxy at Tor:

    “misogynistic, male objectification, sexualize, straight white man, white dudebro, person of color, lack of diversity, blond white men, LGBTQIA, sexual object, rape culture, straight male’s sexual appetite, PoC, sex objects, non straight/white/male, white male superhero protagonists, straight black dudes, Asian, Native American, Middle Eastern, or Hispanic character, trans person, slut-shaming.”

    Just accept the fact this is the same as Gamergate. The idea the Hugos isn’t a stacked deck is ridiculous. There is no cabal. You don’t need one in an echo chamber. It is public and above board. For every one of those quotes there are 100 more. Intersectional gender feminism is hate speech. They are obsessed with sex and race though they can show no quotes aside from 2 guys that would speak to any oppression in SFF. Intersectionalists are paranoid or naive or liars.

  547. Colonel Kratman: It may be minor, but something I observed in my time on active duty: the Benning boys had real issues dealing with women in any service for about 2-4 months after getting out. Most infantry bases the more senior guys took them in hand and got them sorted out, no big deal. A few got weirdly routed through the system so wound up in an MI AIT after 11 weeks at Benning and were having issues computing that the women were not just civilians in uniform. There was a similar, though of lesser severity, issue with the long term combat arms guys reclassing into an MI field and learning to deal with females as NCOs, Officers, and trainers. Usually it wasn’t an issue but there were a few of them who had real trouble adjusting. The advantage of from-the-start training together is that a lot of those things get hashed out along the way. The guys I went to Basic with really didn’t have issues. There are probably other ways to get that ‘learn to cope with X’ skill, but sooner or later it involves actually letting both genders interact as they are going to in their professional environment or as close as you can get to it… preferably before they get to a professional environment.

    Addendum for a thought: There was also some rocky ground civilian side for the girls who went to all girls schools then went to mixed-gendered colleges. Again it was subtle, but many of them had rocky first semesters (Usually NOT academically, but trying to deal with college as a collection of people rather than simply a collection of classrooms) until they learned to deal with a mixed gender learning environment.

    I understand that anecdote are not data, but these observations, seem to me, to be worth investigating and I haven’t seen any studies done on such topics (which may be me. I’m a geologist these days and have never been a sociologist.)

  548. “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” are all in one post by Ann Leckie because she’s an amazing SF writer.

    “cis,” “cissexist,” “transphobic,” “racism,” “sexism,” “homophobia,” “cis gender,” “able-bodied neurotypical,” “privilege,” “colorblindness,” “genderblindness,” people told to “examine” their “privilege” and a word like “diversity” is used in a sense it is interchangeable with “white racism,” are all on one single page of a post by Jim Hines so of course he needs to lecture Sad Puppies because we imagine things.

    Alex MacFarlane’s review of Ancillary Justice uses the word “gender”(ed)(s) 49 times because it’s all about the rockets and outer space and not lesbian ideology.

    That stupid shit is emblematic of what’s overtaken SF. They are so obsessed with it they don’t even see it – it’s natural. There’s your genre-killing asteroid.

  549. @James – I do understand that this is the same mentality that GamerGate is facing. My point is not that it’s a different flavor of SJW, but that you are browbeating neutrals and semi-neutrals with material which is largely irrelevant to them. It leads people to discard your arguments because they just don’t care or think (because they can’t be arsed to check) that you are blowing smoke/deluded.

    As I said, *I* have the time to dedicate to this sort of thing, but NOT EVEN *I* can keep up with you. And I’m willing to listen to begin with. How do you think this comes across to people who are less than predisposed to hear you out to begin with? Human nature dictates that they will mostly or even entirely discard what you have to say, and Mr. Flint’s rebuttals make clear that’s what’s happening.

  550. @wyrdbard – That’s peculiarly almost the opposite of how I recall women in the Army from when I was in (’88-’91, Gulf War). Never met one who wasn’t highly professional and treated as such. There are so many REMFs in the Army, it’s valued when someone legitimately busts their backside to help you get things done.

    Then again, I was getting out just around the time that many of the “sensitivity training” courses began to take effect. I remember the one or two I had, everyone in them was mystified over how we were “supposed” to treat women and minorities — because we were already doing that. It was like “okay, this is a class on how to breathe”.

  551. Very good blog post, Drow. Well done. The 770 Club won’t know what to make of it. 🙂

  552. I honestly have no idea what you’re talking about. The only thing clear about Flint is he’s so out of touch that after I left one single short innocuous comment at his Fortress of Solitude he decided to write an entire blog post about it which claimed I was making fun of the hero of Vicksburg and Abraham Lincoln and plus I don’t name names cuz I’m full of hot air and he’s a very brave union organizer.

    Then when I named names he declared only quotes from Vox Day meant anything and everyone else was really talking about tuna fish sandwiches and I cut up their quotes about tuna fish sandwiches to make it seem they had an insane paranoia about straight white men. He declared me right wing and a fan of Rush Limbaugh because quotes don’t matter but making stuff up out of your head while taking a nap in an easy chair is like cast iron footnotes from Solomon.

    If I’m following you correctly, you think the less I talk about the obscure origins of this cult of mentally ill racists and naive flak catchers the more people will understand about it cuz Eric Flint is the gold standard for absorbing information, kinda like a commie in a coal mine.

  553. @Calbeck: It was odd. Most of them adapted after a month or so. This was ’01-’05ish. End of my AIT through my reclassing after going from active to guard status. The ones I talked to said the problem was since they hadn’t served with females, and most of the training had women and children exclusively representing ‘civilians’. It was Woman=Civilian=”What’st hat civilian doing in uniform? wait does not compute” kind of disconnect. The ones I knew were all fine once they got over the initial shock to their instincts. But it’s a case where joint training can be beneficial (since the topic was learning environments separated by gender). In some cases it lets that instinct adjustment happen someplace relatively safe, and in others it can completely prevent the need for an adjustment.

  554. Wyrdbard:

    Getting the sexes used to having each other around is an argument. I’m not convinced it’s a sufficient argument, given that people were pretty capable of figuring things out, getting married, having and raising kids, long before there was co-education. However, as mentioned, I am unwilling to mandate gender segregation in education (though I would absolutely insist upon it in the ground gaining combat arms and quite possibly in the military as a whole), but I’d like to make it an option, at least.

  555. @James May
    “‘Partial nudity, the aggressive display of cleavage and the navel, and shorts/skirts higher than 4″ above the knee are not allowed.’”

    No, that’s not from the exhibition guidelines of a late 19th century Chicago art gallery whose patriarchy wants to steal women’s Joanna Russ pencil-boxes or part of the ’50s self-censoring Comics Code. That is part of today’s feminist driven guidelines for what a video gaming convention allows when it comes to “booth babes.”

    Holy shit… I think my brain just melted. Let’s see. “Partial nudity” – if you wanted to get truly bugfuck crazy, anything less than a burqua would be partial nudity. Or a full formal nun’s habit – but that’s Christian and patriarchy and therefore badthink. “Aggressive display” nevermind the rest… how is display “aggressive”? I have this scene playing now in the theatre of my mind, of a costume shouting “LOOK AT ME OR I’MA SLAP YOU!” while its wearer reddens in embarassment.

    FWIW, I got this little gem in a conversation on IRC the other night; it started from, God help us, a discussion of starship design – did you know the starship Enterprise is full of penis symbols? It’s a craptacular design, yes. But penis symbols? New one on me. Anyway, apparently white cis-dudes don’t know how to write strong, believable female characters. Well, I asks, what makes a female character strong and believable? Female characters are strong and believable only when written by womyn (yes, that’s how it was written), I’m told. So in other words, this person’s definition of a strong, believable character is based primarily, if not completely, in THE SEX OF THE PERSON WRITING. David Weber’s Honor Harrington? Not strong and believable, because MALE AUTHOR. So I replied “If that’s the case, is it not true that strong and believable male characters can only be written by men?” “OMG MISOGYNIST MUCH YOU HATER.”

    I give up. I really do. I don’t know how to counter that kind of mindset, and unfortnately I have this urge to pick up the gauntlet and enter into these debates when I really ought to know better. As Donna Moss said in an episode of “West Wing”, when Josh ill-advisedly gets roped into an internet debate, “these are people who haven’t taken all their medication.”

    I’m going to go back to designing starships. With penises.

  556. @James – Not exactly. I appear to have missed most of what you’re referencing, and I apologize on that basis. I’ve only just seen some of Flint’s newer messages, which flipped around so quickly (now claiming Brad and Larry “championed” Vox) that I’m half-convinced it’s a troll posing with his name.

    So it may just be that I didn’t catch Flint being a concern troll. Which it’s starting to look like, to me: “they’re not X, Y and Z, but they’re still terrible people and they certainly support people who are X and Y”.

  557. @William – And the second a female author writes something they don’t like, they suddenly lose cred as “authentically womyn” in the same vein as black people who like country music get ragged on as not “authentically black”.

    Sheesh, it still pisses me off that some people think “black” itself is a pejorative term — it was the PC term adopted so folks would stop saying “Negro”! Every time around, the language gets pickier and less appropriate, just to make it sound different enough to matter to people who never smile.

  558. I’m not surprised sex obsessed feminists would take the science of aerodynamics and reduce it to male sex organs, William. Maybe they think submarines should be giant cubes. Lord knows what they think flying buttresses are.

    You’ll never win an argument with these people, Calbeck. That’s why Larry Correia fisks them to humiliate them. I chose not to fisk Flint’s post because I write about hate speech, not insults towards me. Add in the fact I’m nobody from nowhere and it adds up to no one care about insults towards me, including myself. Also, there’s the issue of friendships with these guys and I don’t want to poke too hard at that. When I said I could take that post down brick by brick I meant exactly that. I don’t have to do everything I can do.

    There are other fish to fry and Flint’s not really part of this problem. He doesn’t use hate speech and he’s not really an SJW in the sense of the feminist paranoia that has gripped the old institutions of this genre. You have to go to naive flak catchers like Chuck Wendig and Paul Weimer for that kind of covering fire for delicate girls like Kameron Hurley and Ann Leckie who think men are trying to crack the locks on their Joanna Russ pencil boxes and put them back in the kitchen. The fact they have no quotes over the course of 100 years to back that up doesn’t seem to faze them. Lord help Field & Stream if feminists ever take an interest in fishing. The editors will have a lot of mansplaining to do about diversity in bass fishing and squirrel hunting over the last 100 years.

  559. Different people respond best to different forms of argument. On one hand, Mr. May is performing an immense service by keeping reminders of what we’re up against out there, so when people call us racist or sexist, we have concrete things to point to. On the other hand, it’s like throwing out any accusation, good or bad, over and over: eventually people will stop reading.

    Well, I asks, what makes a female character strong and believable? Female characters are strong and believable only when written by womyn (yes, that’s how it was written), I’m told. So in other words, this person’s definition of a strong, believable character is based primarily, if not completely, in THE SEX OF THE PERSON WRITING. David Weber’s Honor Harrington? Not strong and believable, because MALE AUTHOR. So I replied “If that’s the case, is it not true that strong and believable male characters can only be written by men?” “OMG MISOGYNIST MUCH YOU HATER.”

    It’s another part of arguing from the conclusions and not the evidence. They believe they know how men think, so they can write male characters. They believe men don’t know how women think, so men can’t write good female characters. It comes from living in a bubble where you don’t understand and can’t acknowledge the other side’s arguments. They “know” men are all misogynist rapists, whites are all privileged racists, Christians are all deluded haters, and any evidence to the contrary is just a tool of the Man.

  560. It wasn’t supposed to be this way.

    The Puppies were the ones who were supposed to be brought to heel. Toni Weisskopf was the one who was supposed to admonish Larry Correia and Brad Torgersen. The Entertainment Weekly article was supposed to bring the wrath of the mainstream down upon our heads. Baen was going to the publisher hurt by this controversy. We were supposed to be mocked, isolated, and defamed.

    It wasn’t supposed to be this way.

  561. “On one hand, Mr. May is performing an immense service by keeping reminders of what we’re up against out there, so when people call us racist or sexist, we have concrete things to point to.”

    This! So much this! I greatly appreciate knowing what the other side is saying and just how batcrap crazy they are. It reminds me to never let my guard down. They think we’re lower than dirt and they’re completely unwilling to have dialogue or compromise with us. They think we’re evil, so they don’t have to respect our opinions or positions.

  562. “And no, feeling persecuted for being a Puppy isn’t the same as the persecution faced by members of marginalized groups.”

    http://www.themarysue.com/tor-irene-gallo/

    The writer of that piece is named Carolyn Cox. Shouldn’t it be changed to “Carolyn Box” or some other non-aerodynamic object because solidarity?

    It would be nice if any of these feminist morons could show even one stick of evidence “marginalized groups” even exist in SFF. Seems to me when a gay Asian woman gets a Nebula nomination for a story about a woman killing all the men in her family because of mermaid-rape written in a writing workshop and avoids the slush pile at Tor because of what points to affirmative action, one isn’t being marginalized but is a star. I suppose her writing a blog post about “rape culture” at the same time is another in a long line of amazing coincidences which dogs the heels of these bright new non-intersectional non-gender non-feminist talents. It’s another coincidence she ran around the Nebulas taking pix and posting them with hashtags insulting to whites who are guilty of racial “micro aggressions” because of mistaken identity. Usually you have to go into an alley to find that amount of grace and reserve. I sense a bright future for her in social science fiction.

  563. EXCITING AND FUN NEWS!

    If you’re not white, Con-Or-Bust will give you cab fare to an SF convention near you! It includes a free tour of the Museum of Tolerance followed by a visit to the Ministry of Memory Holes and Humorous Libels. At the SF convention, you will be given a comic book and a treat yet to be determined and gradually brought into the awareness of white people so as to not create a triggery PTSD experience. No one will touch your hair or mistake you for any other PoC, mostly cuz there are none. In the event there are, you will be issued a unique color-coded uniform made of bio-degradable rice paper and cat hair. There is of course a climate-controlled glass-walled safe-space with its own air-exchanger for you to retire to at your leisure. Enjoy PoC! Our white monoculture values your unique lived experience!

    http://con-or-bust.org/about/

  564. “And no, feeling persecuted for being a Puppy isn’t the same as the persecution faced by members of marginalized groups.”

    The blatant double standards are killing me. How does she know? Considering that most of the persecution that marginalized groups feel seem to be microaggressions, which the rest of us recognize as just the natural order of living in a world of human beings, some of whom are rude, callous, ignorant or otherwise imperfect.

    It’s a net result of reducing the world to group identities. Some people of Group A are treated poorly by members of Group B. Therefore, Progressives see it as right that restitution and “justice” be accomplished by doing harm to other members of Group B, where the harm may be well out of proportion to the original poor behavior and the members of Group B harmed may be completely innocent of the original offense.

  565. Oh, I am having a blast over on Flint’s blog. I just tossed off a proposal that GamerGate might end up saving the Hugos if both the Rabid Puppies and the CHORFs try to kill them off with “No Award” retaliations…

    …only to have Dex say this itself was a “threat” of “retaliation” from GamerGate. -XD

  566. I notice that she can’t even bring herself to admit of actual persecution — only “feelings” of same, while leaving persecutions of other racial and ethnic groups as a given. She’s not merely comparing the two, she’s denying one has any legitimacy at all.

  567. You’re doing a great job, Calbeck. The people you’re arguing with are arguing on fumes. They seem to think whatever they know is all there is to know. They don’t exactly seem curious to learn anything either. It all seems kind of pointless sometimes. I am routinely stunned by the comments at 770. They used to call that Ma and Pa Kettle Go to WorldCon.

    The problem is we don’t have anyone like Sargon of Akkad, Milo or Mercedes Carrera or any of a number of other Gamergate voices who spotted the problem right off the bat and attacked its weak points: gender feminism. Milo is tearing those babes a new one.

    Everyone in SF being attacked weren’t really interested in anything but reading and writing SFF. Everyone was pretty much taken by surprise. Most people didn’t have blogs and casually commented at other blogs and suddenly all this whitey stuff hit and they started getting banned and deleted. That pissed a lot of people off; I think more than SJWs realized at first. They were so smug and so in control of the main blogging platforms there was really no recourse. Then L. Correia came along and acted as a central clearing house and the movement never looked back.

    I still think most of us would rather go back to reading and writing. You’ll never dislodge these people. They’re probably doing a better job of destroying their own careers anyway. Between the hatred of their own fans and the shitty stories, SFF fans have long since gone to Harry, Bella and Katniss. That’s where the big bucks are that used to belong to SFF until the early ’80s. Then Heinlein, Herbert and Asimov died and fans started coming in from Star Wars rather than the old school.

    Let’s be honest: if you think someone like Kameron Hurley is a brilliant essayist and Alexandra Erin is clever then that’s a dead literary movement. What Hurley sells isn’t brilliance but gripe and hokum and complaint based on mysterious women-hating racists out there and these new eternally offended and oppressed fans eat it up. Why? Who knows? The whole core of old SFF is WisCon now, and it’s almost as much on the same page as the Dem or Rep conventions are, but with race and gender rather than politics.

    Their weird obsession with the truth of race gender privilege rivals 9/11 truthers and their leaders are moonbat demogogues who think white men are out to strangle their careers, if not actually strangle them. They seem to like bragging about people who want to kill them as much or more than video-games and SF.

  568. …only to have Dex say this itself was a “threat” of “retaliation” from GamerGate.

    At this point, what do they expect? They attacked gamers. Gamers weren’t a faction until the corruption in the media gatekeepers was exposed, and when they complained many of the Social Justice types came out full force for the media gatekeepers. Only then did GamerGate unify a large number of gamers as an oppositional force. They’ve been attacked, of course they will retaliate.

    I get together with friends for weekly game sessions, specifically tabletop / board game sessions. A number of games that other people like, I’ve discovered we can’t play, specifically ones in which players are directly opposed. Why? Because a good number of players in the group tend to discourage attacks on themselves by retaliating with overwhelming force. And it works, though it does make those sorts of games too boring to play.

  569. I just don’t see preserving the Hugos in the face of opposing factions who want to wreck it to be either “threat” or “retaliation”.

    To us, it would be the same as adopting a sea lion.

  570. I see now that the official line among the Usual Suspects is that Vox was somehow behind the Gallo thing, in an effort to distract from the Nebulas. Leaving aside that Gallo made those idiotic remarks on her own Facebook page (presumably) of her own free will, how did Vox conceal them from everyone else until last week? There was nothing preventing someone else from noticing what she said and spreading it around the Puppy community. I for one, didn’t hear it from Vox (whom I don’t honestly care for), I heard it from someone posting on Brad’s Facebook page.

    Is this just more Puppy-kicker paranoia? Or did Vox fess up somewhere?

  571. Glyer says he asked Vox on File770 and says Vox cheerfully admitted it. Good! I hope it hurt worse because of that. Gallo earned it.

  572. Whatsamattah, Clampsy? Your girlfriend pillow reject you again? Why don’t you go over to Vox Popoli and share your feelings there?

  573. The only thing that can be said of Vox is that by NOT instantly leaping on it and letting Gallo’s words hide away, he revealed that no one who reads her Facebook had a problem with calling SP/RPs “respectively” extremist right-wingers and neo-Nazis.

    His action in finally making a fuss about it had no other effect than to amplify HER signal.

  574. It’s baffling how adults throughout SFF who use hate speech on such a wide scale can continually single out one guy for hate speech. Don’t they understand how revealing that is and what it says about their own lies? They’re just making excuses for their own weird sociopathic animus.

    I admit this is one of the stranger things I’ve seen in America. I never in a thousand years thought I would see so much fluent and even eager hate speech used against whites and men in a literary movement of all places. Even more bizarre is their claim they do it cuz they’re anti-sexist anti-racists.

    Anyone who’s ever read or watched old-school SF knows that when it addressed the issue it was violently against hate speech of any kind. Ray Bradbury, The Twilight Zone and E.C. Comics all had stories that were explicitly anti-Jim Crow. And you had the feeling that was a culture-wide consensus. I never saw a hint of an obsession with hate speech against women or blacks within stories or letters sections anywhere. This idea you constantly see rotated among these folks that SF authors used aliens as analogues to non-whites and then made fun of them is a straight up lie.

    This is an Orwellian nightmare literature. So-called social justice fiction based on hate speech. We even have a sub-genre of racial and sexual revenge fiction now, including two entire anthologies. What a stunning lack of perception by so-called artists, and there’s scores of them, not 4 or 5. Some of these people are so hateful I just find their lack of self-awareness retarded. How can you make up theories that take out millions and even billions of people at a single go and whine about homophobia and laugh at the idea of misandry?

  575. I have noted that Vox Day’s exact words often reward careful parsing, if you want to find out the truth of a matter. Mike Glyer posts his email after Glyer asked him about it:

    “I’ve held onto this since I had the screencap, which as you correctly note was made several weeks ago.”

    Please note that Vox is careful not to assert that he is the one who made the screencap, and he also doesn’t say when he got the said screencap. This is perfectly consistent with someone else having made it weeks ago and later sending it to Vox (or Vox just finding it posted somewhere), and Vox having subsequently “held onto” it for… oh, who can say – an hour or two? before tweeting it.

    My guess is Vox found out about it a few days ago, and simply could not resist creating the impression that his strategic genius extended to 1) reading Gallo’s Facebook page daily, 2) checking the comments, 3) making a screencap, and 4) patiently holding onto it until this exact moment, when the Master of Timing, the All-Seeing Lidless Eye, who notes all and forgets nothing, chose his moment to unleash it upon an unsuspecting world. (Creating that impression does in fact give him a strategic advantage: if he immediately knew about and preserved a comment inside a post on the FB page of someone who heretofore has not been mentioned in this ongoing goat rodeo of a debate, then what doesn’t he monitor? A number of people must be frantically reviewing their every online remark for weeks in the past, wondering whether He Who Must Not Be Named has squirreled away screenshots of everything they’ve ever said online, even if they’ve deleted it.)

    Vox has once more succeeded in amusing me.

  576. All together now!

    Supercalifragirevolutionary fervor,
    If you buy into it once, you’re buying into hurr-durr,
    It’s a load of bollocks just a step removed from murder!

    Supercalifragirevolutionary fervor!

    (nonsense lines here, as though it wasn’t all nonsense to begin with)

    Today I was accused of being “neo-reactionary”,
    A term which simply does not show up in the dictionary,
    Mencius Moldbug coined it, so you might want to be wary,
    Now I’m supercalifragirevolutionary!

    (yet more idiocy here, make it up as you go along, it’s what the kids do)

    Social-justice loonies use these terms with gay abandon,
    They seem to come up with this stuff for reasons rude and random,
    No matter what you do, you are “a threat to this here Fandom!”
    They’ll drink up all your “male tears” and laugh, “oh yes, we banned ’em!”

    (et cetera, et cetera)

    So if you like to crack a book or delve into a game now,
    You must ask permission from the ones who lay the blame now,
    “Micro-aggs” and “privilege” have made it all the same now,
    Hey there, it’s the Fun Police! It seems they want my name, now!

    (sounds of someone being bodily tackled, gunshots, sirens in the distance)

  577. Gah – sorry, @calbeck, not @calbek. My keyboard & my fingers are conspiring against my brain.

  578. [Joins in the standing ovation for Calbeck]

    So, in addition to being a stalker, artistically challenged and a lousy writer, our troll is historically challenged.

  579. From File 770:

    “The Puppies keep saying they want change, but what they want is things to go back to the way they were.

    That’s what really pisses them off so much.

    They want things to stay the same.

    They don’t want change.”

    If Puppies wanted things to stay the same . . . then why the hell are you guys so mad at us? They’re the Perpetual People’s Revolutionary Front. Even long after they’ve won, they’re still imagining themselves the underdogs fighting against The Man, oblivious to the fact they *are* The Man.

    And I see “alauda” is in the File 770 comments badmouthing Drow as usual.

  580. Nice bit of projection on their part. The puppy-kickers are the reactionaries screeching at a new group bringing in their own thing (the Puppies with their own nominations) and throwing whatever flak they can in a desperate attempt to shoot it down.

  581. No no, we’re the Neo-Reactionary Puppies’ Front of Leftwingia… or did we table that motion until the next order of business already?

  582. Making things go back the way they were . . . by nominating people who usually don’t get on the ballot instead of the same dozen people over and over.

  583. Isn’t it past your bedtime, Clampsy? You tried the same crap further up thread and it went nowhere. Why do you expect different results by trying it again?

    Oh, that’s right: You’re insane. The sad, pathetic sort of insanity. Waving your tiny little arms, wailing and gnashing your teeth, hoping to inflict some sort of pain on the ones you hate and barely managing to be annoying.

  584. Nice bit of projection on their part. The puppy-kickers are the reactionaries screeching at a new group bringing in their own thing (the Puppies with their own nominations) and throwing whatever flak they can in a desperate attempt to shoot it down.

    No, they’re Progressives. They can’t be reactionaries. It’s right in their name, they’re for Progress. Anything they do, even if it makes things worse, even if it ruins people’s lives, is good by definition. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a tool of the Man, regardless of the evidence (which is also a tool of the Man).

  585. Thanks for posting that excerpt from Drow’s novel. I think I’ll go buy that now. 😉

  586. Oh, that’s right: You’re insane. The sad, pathetic sort of insanity. Waving your tiny little arms, wailing and gnashing your teeth, hoping to inflict some sort of pain on the ones you hate and barely managing to be annoying.

    Note that rather than defend his works, he brings up someone else’s early works (which the creator admits are flawed). He could quote the worst Emo Harry Potter / Star Trek / Furry Yaoi Lemon Mary Sue self-insert fanfic (don’t ask me to define the terms; I probably can’t), and it doesn’t make his own work one iota better at all. He also doesn’t try to defend his abysmal knowledge of politics.

  587. “Thanks for posting that excerpt from Drow’s novel. I think I’ll go buy that now. ;-)”
    If I hadn’t already bought it, I’d buy it again just to spite Marston. :-p

  588. I notice that Yama is back to yelling about the artwork that everyone here liked better than his. The butthurt is strong in him.

    Also, hilariously, while Yama complains about Vox contacting his friend, clearly Yama has no problems contacting members of my family and actually harassing them.

    He also came back when Brad is obviously too busy or already on his way to an active war zone.

    And the funniest thing is, that was the rough sample that we put out for our intended audience to see if there was interest in Seda’s Diary. We told the people we were aiming it at that it wouldn’t be the same story, so the actual product isn’t the same as the feeler sample.

  589. Oh goodie. Nocturnal.

    That partially explains your persistence towards Drow. You’re up during her daytime hours. Which to you means more opportunities to launch attacks that she’ll get in near realtime.

    (Or, why yes I do know what time zones are.)

    @Civlis: “Emo Harry Potter / Star Trek / Furry Yaoi Lemon Mary Sue self-insert fanfic “?!
    O_o;;

  590. I was trying to come up with the worst fanfic concept pitch possible. I should probably have thrown in Pokemon or Dragonball. You need at least one over-hyped anime series in there.

    Note that our troll doesn’t think we’re smart enough to remember earlier in the conversation.

  591. Vhen Herr Clampsie spams, “YOU SUCK YOU SUCK YOU SUCK!”
    Ve laff! Laff! At der silly chucklef*ck!
    Vhen Herr Clampsie screams, “YOU SUCK YOU SUCK YOU SUCK!”
    Ve shake our heads and say, “Zhat doesn’t even rhyme!”

    Ist he not Der Stuporman?
    Rantink, frothink Stuporman?
    Ja, he IST Der Stuporman!
    I’d rather read in Yooper, man.

    He brinks us all New Order
    HEIL! Clampsie’s Fan-Fic Orders!

    Vhen he tells us to our face,
    Zhat ve cannot take his place,
    He brinks to Der Internet
    Disorder!

    …okay, this is waaaaay too easy. I have no idea what I’m going to do with the dead fish and bullet-riddled barrels I already have…

  592. @Civilis

    Screw making it fanfic. Go do it the Jim Butcher way, take two insane concepts and write a book. Butcher wrote the Codex Alera series by one of his fans suggesting Pokemon and the Lost Roman Legion. And it is AWESOME.

  593. Also, screw it, have some other pony crossover stuff I worked on. If you ever read “Roadside Picnic”, you might be familiar with the video game series it inspired, S.T.A.L.K.E.R.

    So yes, it’s an MLP/S.T.A.L.K.E.R. crossover, written and drawn by a talented Russian artist. Translating it into English was my job except for the first two chapters, where I only assisted with editing.

    If you’re interested in the full story, five chapters are now out, starting here: http://allottho.deviantart.com/art/Call-of-Ponyville-Chapter-1-page-1-408052341

  594. @Chris Chupik –
    And I see “alauda” is in the File 770 comments badmouthing Drow as usual.

    frankly, it doesn’t surprise me. They are okay with people who cyberstalk women, harass their family, threaten the children of their victims. I think that speaks to the kind of things they find acceptable.

  595. calbeck and James May, you two are my heroes tonight. I visited Eric Flint’s tonight, and was somewhat taken aback by the inaccuracies he wrote. It was sorta “nicely” written, but I consider it a hit piece. He keeps combining Corriea with Brad and Beale. If I was an SJB that would disqualify everything else he had to say. Ever.

    He brings up the Breibart piece, but conveniently forgets the Entertainment Weekly piece that inspired it.

    He brings up some of the language that Brad used when totally pissed, and conveniently forgets the insults and mistreatment that Theresa put him through on Making Light, I won’t make a big deal at the moment about the insults levied our way by a couple of other Tor execs.

    The two of you stood up to the SJBs and their chorf and prog useful idiots and made a good account of yourselves.

    I thank you……….

    On another note, I’m glad Flint isn’t one of my friends. You don’t need enemies if you have friends like that.

  596. @Angus – Anytime. I’ve always loved a good semi-intellectual tussle on the Internet. So rare to actually have one with semi-intellectual people -;)

    @Shadow – Not really, no. What I can do is use Google Translate, online Russian-English dictionaries, and emails to the artist to ensure everything is hammered out to specs. Usually I can get a working draft pieced together without him, then we go back and forth to iron out the fiddly bits. Russian is, after all, a Latin-based language, despite use of the Cyrillic alphabet. Many of the idioms are very similar, lending a much easier “gist” to what’s being said than one might think.

  597. @jaed

    I confess to knowing very little about Vox Day, but this was a perfectly-played move against someone who went WAY over the line. You have to give credit where credit is due.

  598. ADVISORY: at this time, Reddit is mass-deleting entire subreddits (forums to everyone else). While the basis for all such deletions is “harassment”, this has begun to include boards which criticize the new company CEO Ellen Pao.

    It also seems to be extremely spotty, with boards that trip “SJW” triggers being the first to go. These include a fat-shaming board, as well as one which exists to criticize website NeoGAF — rearranging the name to “NeoFAG”. The board itself is not actually used for homophobic purposes, and the only apparent reasons for deletion are to erase the name itself as well as eliminate criticism of NeoGAF itself.

    Far nastier boards, with names I cannot repeat here without shocking the hell out of anyone with anti-racist sensibilities, have been left untouched at this point, as have boards dedicated to “child death”, rape, and so forth.

    At this time, Reddit mods have clarified that what they mean by harassing behavior is: “We’re talking about men and women whose lives are being affected and worry for their safety every day”. Apparently being told you are fat means you have reason to worry for your safety.

  599. Let me make this very clear. Conservatives don’t know literature. Their minds are practical, with no ability to imagine that which doesn’t exist. SF/F is particularly difficult for them to grasp.
    You are not welcome to nominate for the Hugos because your political values closely relate to a brain defect. Or rather, “defect” is unfair — the way you think is simply “different.”
    If you are hellbent on nominating for a literary award, may I suggest a Children’s Book award being given out by your local community paper.
    Needless to say, you are also not welcome at Worldcon. Perhaps at the children’s events that take place during the day, but not the adult parties. This is for your own benefit — we’ll be talking about art and imagination at the parties, and you simply will not understand what is going on. The children’s events can be great though; the topics discussed there have been know to challenge the conservative mind in a fun, exciting way.

  600. I’m not sure what Flint’s deal is. He and his supporters seem more interested in scoring points than making them. You really can’t take anyone seriously who dismisses quotes on the basis they somehow always mean something else or are taken out of context. Long about the time you see the 50th filthy slur against white men you’d think it would make some impression, especially when you can actually show people hounded out of gigs and feminist bullshit work nominated for awards. Somehow we’re supposed to believe that just because no one turned out to be disastrously harmed by being hounded out of gigs that it was just fine. I don’t get that one at all. That’s a pretty monstrous double standard when these idiots claim to be harmed by racist micro aggressions.

    All I’ve really ever tried to show is what I’ve learned from reading these so-called feminists themselves: that their ideology is based on one that is racist and hateful towards men and has been for 50 years. That’s it’s a weird cult of feminism that has nothing to do with equal rights feminism. That their bullshit about “marginalized,” “underrepresented” and “diversity” is a smoke screen to disguise their hatred of white men. That their so-called “allies” are naive middle class morons who believe their bullshit an anti-lady Jim Crow stalks SFF. That the totality serves to mainstream hate speech towards white men as something that is not only noble but necessary. And the most obvious of all: that they are the ones who do what they claim others do.

    No SP or anyone else is saying don’t read gays for a year. No one is saying they won’t review women. There are no Eurofuturism symposiums celebrating white SF. There is no Men’s Rights Activist fiction. There are no white dinners. No one is accusing non-whites of culturally appropriating mid-century white SF. No one’s running around taking insulting selfies about non-whites and uploading them to Twitter. No one is saying “This is great! It’s by a white man!” No one’s boycotting all-non-white boxing cards or complaining about “black saviors” in sports. No one’s saying feminists are womansplaining the civilization I created to me. No one’s making up clever theories that show some bullshit about non-whites. We’re not on Twitter all day talking smack about non-whites and gays. No one’s highlighting violence against men or whites and ignoring everyone else. For all of that action you have to go to SJWs themselves, not us.

    These people are the worst con men and liars and I’m sick of their feminist bullshit about race and gender. Like they say: take it outside.

  601. Philby blathered:
    Let me make this very clear.

    No need. Most of us already knew you’d try to portray your personal bigotries and desire to dehumanize the people you hate (conservatives) as fact. You didn’t disappoint.

    Conservatives don’t know literature

    *snipped after the first lie*

  602. But… but… they mumble the most eloquent Social Justice memes so that makes them Noble and Compassionate… and any who disagree are inferior beings whom are not welcome.

    *eyeroll*

  603. “Apparently, there is no mistake so insignifcant that it does not deserve a call to action by the outrage committee. Torches, pitchforks, tar and feathers. Even the smallest of sins must be punished by an internet pile-on, public shaming, and boycotts of everyone in the same neighborhood.” – David Gerrold

    Welcome to the movie you folks wrote, produced, directed and star in. How many times have you people thrown about your racial and sexual identities around like clubs to beat me over the head with? Exactly what in the world was I doing when SFWA president’s started writing bullshit about white privilege and Hugo and Nebula nominees started asking if Game of Thrones was too white and calling Americans xenophobes? There was no reason in the world to start making up theories and complaining about who an author puts in his books. If that’s your case for racism I declare racism solved.

    Who started the internet pile-ons. Wasn’t our side – no. We were reading and writing books and suddenly all this bullshit started about our race and gender and how we were oppressing everyone. Because of all that, now every fucking movie comes out to the accompaniment of wailing and crying by feminists who bitch and moan about women this and whites that. Don’t come to us about the monster you created. Go to your lab and dissolve it in a vat of acid. Gerrold finishes:

    “… being right has become more important than being friends or colleagues.”

    Wrong. I have no friends or colleagues who use hate speech, and before you can be right you have to define what right is, and it is mysteriously never us because of male gaze and white privilege and patriarchy.

    Here’s GRRM: “The emptiness of the Puppy arguments is indicated clearly by how much time they seem to spend in coming up with new insulting terms for those who oppose them… First it was SJWs. Then CHORFs. The latest is “Puppy-kickers.” Next week, no doubt, they will have something else.”

    Wrong again. “SJW” is a term for people who claim social justice consists of using terms like “cis-scum,” “mansplaining,” “white tears,” “cis white dudes,” “white privilege,” “white savior,” etc. All those terms precede “SJW” in the same way Pearl Harbor preceded Hiroshima. Get your dates straight, George. Dates are important. Who threw the first punch is the difference between assault and self-defense. No one’s dropping a-bombs for fun. George says he’s “been reading all the blogs.” The problem is he wasn’t doing that when we were seeing what we eventually reacted to. Neither was Eric Flint, or he wouldn’t be saying SJWs were the Army of the frickin’ Potomac. And remember, Gerrold laughingly maintained Gene Roddenberry was an SJW. Uhhh… no – he wasn’t. Neither was fucking Xerxes, cro-magnon man or the first slime that washed up in a beach in 1,000,000 B.C.

  604. “Dandy MxFopperson retweeted Mary Robinette Kowal ‏@MaryRobinette 10h10 hours ago Many thanks to @leeflower for suggesting and funding the Women of Color Short Story Intensive scholarship…”

    Hahaha. Is that held at the Museum of Tolerance?

    Is there some rift in the Fourth Dimension? How do we close it?

  605. For a cult that laughs at others about conspiracies and cabals, SJWs can’t point to any mechanisms, institutions or culture-wide attitudes in SFF that act to keep out gays, non-whites or women. Instead SJWs make up bullshit about micro aggressions and privilege in their place. The truth about this entire silly race gender war in SFF is that everyone in the world is being published in SFF.

    The amazing coincidence is that the people saying straight white men are somehow responsible for an informal race-gender boycott themselves have rhetoric that is obsessively laced with resentments and slurs against men, whites and heterosexuals. No one innocently looking for a seat at the table uses words like “cis-scum” or “white tears” or “mansplaining” or takes selfies at awards shows and conventions with racially insensitive remarks. If you read the latest posts by K. Tempest Bradford about being a good “ally” or Nebula nominee Alyssa Wong about the very Nebulas she shamed with racially insulting selfies with another Nebula winner or the latest post of virtual paranoia of men by Kameron Hurley together with a flood of hostile remarks by others that are by now routine, you start to run out of coincidences real fast.

    Somehow useful idiots like Chuck Wendig and Moshe Feder see that as me being a blackballing racist. Men like GRRM and Eric Flint don’t read or know what we do but for some reason feel compelled to comment and conclude think it’s us trying to stir up trouble by selectively quoting what in reality is a culture-wide flood of racial and sexual insults against white men that has been ongoing for several years.

    Somehow the wide-ranging eyes of Glyer, Martin and Flint continually miss the most inflammatory posts like the following by 4-time Nebula nominee Jemisin which is full or undocumented innuendoes about “a few dozen other editors,” illogic, racial disdain and plain bullshit, writing Brad “and his cronies have resorted to a lesser version of” Jim Crow literary tests in which she also links us to the KKK and “that his forbears used to defend their hoarded privileges — like enlisting the aid of violent bigots.” The violent bigot in question is Daddy Warpig.

    http://nkjemisin.com/2015/04/not-the-affirmative-action-you-meant-not-the-history-youre-making/

    Jemisin links us to Book Riot which has this typically clownish SJW rule about comments which makes the site all but useless for normal human beings or debate: “Users can be banned on the first offense for any of the following behaviors: * Posting comments that question or denigrate the value of marginalized voices.”

    Jemisin’s remarks about “Tarzan being the awesomest person on the African continent and endless iterations of ‘let’s go subdue the natives (in space)’ have been granted such pride of place in this genre that for years it was nearly impossible to get widely published writing anything else” are nonsensical. Of the 48 stories in the historic overview which is the SF Hall of Fame anthologies, none are about subduing natives.

  606. There are a number of fallacies and mistakes at the heart of the Progressive / Social Justice worldview, all of which are on display in some of the recent commenters that subscribe to such a worldview. What’s worse, the fallacies are all interconnected such that they reinforce each other; it’s nearly impossible to disprove one of them in isolation from the others.

    Philbert’s screed is an excellent example of many of those fallacies and mistakes.

    Let me make this very clear. Conservatives don’t know literature. Their minds are practical, with no ability to imagine that which doesn’t exist. SF/F is particularly difficult for them to grasp.

    Progressives have little or no understanding of other points of view. This is in part from being comfortably enshrined in a comfortable bubble of like-minded thinkers. This bubble is reinforced by the Progressive worldview that treats other points of view as aggressions or otherwise offensive and demands to be protected from hearing those contrary opinions. You can’t understand what people with a different worldview think if you are unwilling to listen to what they say, or if you start with the presumption that “[their] political values closely relate to a brain defect.

    Basing arguments on names for political groups, especially names based on archaic political definitions for terms that have since evolved, you’re doing something wrong. Furthermore, any political ideology has something to contribute to a discussion of sci-fi. Cautionary tales about what could go wrong (the domain of archaic conservatism / reactionary thinking) are just as important to thinking about the future as thinking about what good can come from the progress. I’ll skip the details about how the so-called conservatives are the ones hoping for technological progress while the so-called Progressives are the ones screeching about how bad technological progress is.

  607. “Conservatives don’t know literature. Their minds are practical, with no ability to imagine that which doesn’t exist. SF/F is particularly difficult for them to grasp.
    You are not welcome to nominate for the Hugos because your political values closely relate to a brain defect. Or rather, “defect” is unfair — the way you think is simply “different.””

    Epic Fail, er Phil, you sir, can take your bullshit propaganda lies and go straight to hell. I paid my $40 so I can nominate & vote on who I please.

    You can suck it.

  608. For an example of the Social Justice dynamics in action, see the following article:
    http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/06/11/why-do-feminists-cook-up-stories-about-misogyny-when-they-lose-debates/

    The TL;DR:
    Debate between Milo Yiannopoulos and a feminist professor sparked by a British professor complaining that it’s hard to work with females in the sciences because they are too emotional. Debate largely considered won by Milo because the feminist professor kept breaking down emotionally during the arguments. Debate included a lot of ‘Men and women are identical, but women are better’ arguments from the feminist. After debate, feminist complains of misogyny on Twitter, but no examples can be found.

  609. Wow, Philbert has managed to out-troll Clamps. Quite the feat.

    Clamps is obsessed specifically with VD, Drow, and his own sense of superiority. Philbert just wants to throw insults.

  610. My vote this year will be so conservative that Sasquan will need a telegraph to receive it.

  611. Just weighed in on File 770. http://file770.com/?p=23063&cpage=8#comment-280431

    Basic points being: as no one argued the Pups broke any rules or laws, this is a war of dueling moralities. That being the case, where are the Pups who’ve committed libel/slander (see: Entertainment Weekly), and where are the Pups coming out in full support of vile things said by Vox Day? Yet the opposition is rallying firmly around Ms. Gallo, with little to no pushback, while Pups are told they must denounce Day on a daily basis.

    If it is indeed a morality war, it is the Pups with the high ground, clear and away.

  612. Philbert (the troll):

    Do Mike Resnick and Gene Wolf know they don’t know literature? Somebody ought to tell them, since we’ve got Eric Flint’s word for it that these men are conservatives. You might want to also inform them they’re not welcome at Worldcon, since I saw them both at Chicon 7, and I am pretty sure Mike’s gonna be in Spokane. Worldcon clearly needs you to keep the riff-raff out.

  613. Yet the opposition is rallying firmly around Ms. Gallo, with little to no pushback, while Pups are told they must denounce Day on a daily basis.

    But, you see, Ms. Gallo was correct when she libeled a libertarian with strong connections to Israel as a Nazi. The evidence and the facts are tools of the Man!

    This is why definitions of words are important. You and I know what a Nazi is:
    Nazi definition: a member of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party.
    For them, it’s an insult, just like fascist, or racist, or misogynist. It’s a term for them to define how they want in service of their cause. All definitions that serve the cause of Progress are valid. Just like offense is entirely in the eye of the person on the receiving end. They can’t give objective, non self-referential definitions for any of the important terms in the debate, because as soon as they do, Mr. May and those like him will reduce their arguments to ashes.

  614. As was pointed out to me elsewhere, I think Mr.Philbert here is about the best example I’ve ever seen (in real life) of the Dwarves from Lewis’ Last Battle. He’s so convinced of his own fantasy that he cannot see reality for what it is.

    Even if the people opposed to SP are right his statement is still utter fantasy and easily disprovable.

  615. I had a nice chat with one gentleman on File 770, marred only slightly by about a dozen people who insisted there is no discussion or debate to be had and we’re all evil people. I’ve often said, most folks never mature beyond their days of high-school cliques, and if I were to write a graduate paper on the subject I’m afraid it would have to include this experience as one of the samples.

    Ah well. More recruiting material, at least. -:)

  616. The Hon. Philbert Watson III, Esq., go fuck yourself. “If I Were a Dinosaur, My Love”. Your side is forever stuck with that turgid, steaming pile. Don’t throw stones if you live in a glass house.

  617. @Calbeck

    To be fair, quite a few people tried to engage with your arguments regarding SP, including myself at 9.11am, & 9.28am; Chris Hensley at 8.33 am; McJulie at 8.47am; Matt Y at 8.47am; and quite a few others

    Unfortunately, it looks like you were more interested in treating this as a Gamergate redux, and were more interested in those discussions (media ethics!) rather than anything else more related to the current Hugo kerfuffle. It may be worth

    FWiW, it’ll be good to see you back at 770. I’d like to see more of your perspective on the nominated works.

    Oh, and as I mentioned, since you liked Sex Criminals, and if superhero comics are remotely your thing, check out the Immortal Iron Fist (esp the collection titled the Seven Capital Cities of Heaven) and Hawkeye by the same author as Sex Criminals (Matt Fraction). Some of the best superhero comics writing in recent times in both.

  618. Unfortunately, it looks like you were more interested in treating this as a Gamergate redux, and were more interested in those discussions (media ethics!) rather than anything else more related to the current Hugo kerfuffle.

    He’s not willing to go into how much detail on just how much of a pompous arsehole John C. Wright is, so obviously he isn’t interested in anything related to the current Hugo kerfuffle, right?

    Again, this is a case of individuals on both sides approaching this with different perspectives and goals. To one person, the sacred purity of the nomination process may be the only thing they care about, while another person may be concerned about the long term trends in book readership. For some people, it’s all about politics. For others, it’s all about art. For one, it’s about insulting his enemies.

  619. From the Guardian, answering the important questions: “Is Jurassic World sexist?” (http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2015/jun/10/is-jurassic-world-sexist-assessing-the-films-key-females-of-the-species)

    Breitbart’s sarcastic reply: “We furthermore believe that avoiding “gender stereotyping” is far, far, FAR more important a goal for any aspiring modern movie director than, say, plausibility, credibility, excitement, narrative drive, verisimilitude, realism, entertainment value, a decent script, and so on.” (http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/06/11/jurassic-world-will-its-dinosaur-sexism-violate-your-personal-safe-space/)

  620. This is in fact a war of morality… and naive stupidity. What if you were a private investigator looking at SFF publishing from the outside? What if you looked at it at the time this cult of feminism arose several years ago? What evidence would you find of a culture dedicated to keeping out gays, women and non-whites? You’d find no objective evidence of a culture-wide or institutional trend like that. This con game is all based on smoke and mirrors about misogyny, racism, patriarchy, sexism, paranoia and hysteria from a lunatic fringe of feminism that has been hostile towards men, whites and heterosexuals from day one. Who in the world came up with nonsense about “gendered slurs” and “cisheteronormativity.”

    How many amazing coincidences does one need? At what point do you accept the fact this is in fact working in the reverse of what’s claimed: a racist sexist cult that acts much like a group of racial supremacists?

    At what point do you observe the worst sheer hostility for men, whites and heterosexuals by an amazing coincidence coming from the very people engaging in outright segregation and calls for even more? Has no one figured out the very reason these people claim they can’t be misandrists, heterophobes and racists is because they are women, gay and non-white? Convenient how that all works out for them and not for their targets who they’ve created a reverse set of rules for which includes all whites and men benefitting from white privilege and sexism.

    It’s time to run out of the amazing set of coincidences where whites, men and heterosexuals are amazingly never right unless they state their feminist bona fides and non-whites, women and gays are never wrong no matter how foul the abuse and unsourced their claims.

    Where were these people in 1975 when there were fewer gays, women and non-whites in SFF? Were people stupid back then? Are we to believe an American culture just come off a decade of organizing, rallies and protests didn’t know racism, homophobia and misogyny when they saw it? Or are we seeing a group of con men trained in identical rhetoric come out of gender studies classes and selling bullshit about a new Jim Crow and patriarchy sold to naive middle class justice warriors? The truth is all these so-called “marginalized” voices in SFF are living placid peaceful lives according to any past standard of American life and can do whatever they want whenever they want, just like anyone else. When you’ve gotten to the point you’re selling “micro aggressions” and how the Black Widow was treated in a film as racist and sexist “oppression” it’s time to admit you got nothing.

    Considering Gallo’s remarks about Hurley’s “feminist” book of essays prior to her stupid remarks, it’s clear Gallo’s part of this stupid “intersectional” movement and has got to go. Hurley sells as much bullshit about men as anyone in SFF. What’s the Las Vegas odds a person can talk about men as much as she does and it be 100% negative. Zero. That is a con game. There is no world where 3.5 billion people are simply always wrong as an entire group except for a few good “allies” who’ve checked their privilege and got on the feminist train. Apply any intersectional rhetoric to Jews rather than men and whites and it’s pretty clear what we’re facing. There would be “good” Jews and “bad” Jews. No humans in sight, which is the real issue – good and bad people. The idea we’re in a made-up culture war is ridiculous – it’s real. You can’t move a muscle in core SFF without being strained through some racist sexist intersectional scrim, nor others rewarded for same.

    And by the way, this is a Gamergate redux, unless you’re blind to the moral corruption and one-sided feminist stances at Tor. Do they delete feminist comments? Nope, only anti-feminist ones.

  621. @snowcrash – My introduction to the Hugo controversy was via people flatly lying about #GamerGate being a kingmaker in the noms. Of course this will be my perspective on entering the debate.

    However, what I said there remains the same regardless: neither side claims the other has actually done anything illegal or rulebreaking in terms of the Hugo nominations. Both arguments come from a position of proselytizing morality.

    So as I said on 770, if it’s about morality, I am decided by one side’s choice to engage the press for purposes of confirmed — not alleged — libel. If this were the only difference between the two sides, it would firmly establish my alliance with the Puppies.

    Ms. Gallo’s recent comments, by themselves, existed for no other reason than to convince a neutral party of the immorality of her opposition by lying about them. Not even with specifics, but with broad-based stereotyping. And taken by themselves, they are just one person’s attempt at slander.

    Which has since been picked up by people defending her claims to the hilt. Not only the vacuous notion that every Sad Puppy is racist, sexist and homophobic, but also repeating the “GamerGate Kingmakers” myth, which is an attack on MY core group. Where are the denunciations of Gallo, and if SPs are supposed to be “supportive of Vox Day” if they don’t denounce HIM, why shouldn’t anyone hold the opposition to their own standard?

    Various of them can’t even bring themselves to stop supporting the “neo-Nazi” remark, including attempts at fisking various individuals to try and make the accusation stick.

    If this is a morality war, the Puppies are solidly on the high ground, now with not only the numerical but also the positional advantage. My shield is on the wall with theirs.

  622. Another amazing coincidence about Jurassic Park there, Civilis. When do we run out of coincidences and name this what it is? These people don’t like men – it’s not rocket science. And observe how easily this intersectional movement sees pure disdain or hatred as the culprit when it’s something they don’t like? Suddenly hate in perfectly logical. But it’s a question of evidence, isn’t it. Which side has all the fake academic theories which demonizes the other side just for existing?

    Con game.

    When you look at Ferguson or Baltimore, notice how easily intersectionalists accept the idea of racial cultural failure on one side as easily as they scoff at the idea of such a thing on the other.

    Con game.

    Look how easily these feminists see misogyny as a common thing and how much they consider the idea of misandry an impossibility, even having hashtags like #ImaginaryMisandry.

    Con game.

    *

    “Cecily Kane retweeted Usman Malik ‏@usmantm 21h21 hours ago SFF: Believe me when I tell you that young, diverse, international, marginalized writers don’t need you. You Need Us.”

    “Cecily Kane retweeted Usman Malik ‏@usmantm 21h21 hours ago SFF: Where wud u be w-out Junot Diaz, Ken liu, Atwood, Okorafor, Hopkinson, Ted Chiang, Vandana Singh et al? In the poorhouse. That’s where.”

    *

    Read this for giggle laughs. It’s supported by the usual suspects, including Gallo’s “brilliant” essayist, Kameron Hurley. Yet another amazing coincidence about the “white male colonial gaze” in Coincidence Land.

    http://www.patreon.com/monicabyrne?ty=h

  623. Another amazing coincidence about Jurassic Park there, Civilis. When do we run out of coincidences and name this what it is? These people don’t like men – it’s not rocket science.

    One could just as easily say that it’s economics, at the lowest level. All of this can easily be seen as just a means to get more of the pie by controlling who gets what. The two central tenants are (1) that the only reason economic results aren’t equal for various groups is past oppression by the group currently ahead and (2) we are the only ones who can justly redistribute material things, statuses, privileges, etc. to redress that imbalance. The group currently ahead can change (it’s gone from ‘capitalists’ to ‘white cismales’) but the formula and the people pushing it are the same.

    Sci-fi is rightly a microcosm; you can see the whole thing playing out in miniature. If you don’t take as an assumption that the reason females are underrepresented in sci-fi as the fault of the old sci-fi establishment, and instead see it as the result of millions of individual decisions, the whole logic behind this falls apart. Because the under-representation of females is assumed to be the result of the Man keeping women down, the only people that see the problem are the only people qualified to fix the issue, and people that don’t see the problem are obviously harmful.

    It’s capitalist vs Marxist economics in miniature. A Marxist sees that women have a smaller piece of the pie, and claim it is injustice that the pie is not even and demand pie be taken from the men and given to the women. A capitalist sees that male authors have expanded the size of the pie by producing good works and attracting male readers, but even though women have a smaller percentage of the pie, they have more pie because the pie is larger; more importantly, they wouldn’t object to women having a bigger percentage of the pie as long as it is accomplished by further expanding the pie.

  624. Here’s another one:

    He laments that Jurassic World is “not about corporate greed, anti-militarization, crass commerciality, disrupting the food chain,” etc., but “about a woman’s ‘evolution’ from an icy-cold, selfish corporate shill into a considerate wife and mother.” Of all the things I will never understand about progressives, their love for capitalistic careers over actual human bonding and decency is way up there. (From http://thefederalist.com/2015/06/11/liberal-claim-that-jurassic-world-is-sexist-is-hilarious/)

    It’s not serving the Progressive need; it doesn’t recognize and address a Progressive pet cause; therefore it is bad.

  625. Even the local newspaper movie reviewer is getting in on the deal; Dann Gire bemoaned -in the same paragraph- not including females -and- including a female:

    “Wouldn’t it have been a more daring casting decision to make the siblings sisters instead of brothers? And why is the major female character here a sociopathic, genetically engineered thrill killer?”

    http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20150610/entlife/150619950/

  626. Dear bassmarco. Thank you for proving my point. “If I Were a Dinosaur” was an excellent work that clearly went well over your head. May I ask, are you a conservative? I suspect you are, which is why you did not understand the story — if in fact, you read it. Most conservatives have difficulty actually reading anything with big words.

    I suppose you found John Wright’s stories more interesting? He had that one about a pig, horse, and other barnyard animals talking with each other. Animals talking! How delightful! Conservatives seemed to like that one a lot, and nominated it for a Hugo this year. Not that we can blame you. It echoed a lot of the tales most liberals held dear when we were 6 years old.

    Bottom line: Conservatives don’t understand what adult writing is about, and are absolutely incapable of discerning quality. Thanks again, bassmarco. (PS: there is a rule in English: we generally capitalize names.)

  627. Swirsky’s story didn’t go over my head. You don’t have to be a genius to understand “what five blustering men” are in contrast to “a fag, a towel-head, a shemale, a sissy, a spic…”

    It’s amazing coincidence 3,988 in which straight white men once again sadly appear to have the morals of a rock python.

    Amazing coincidence 3,989 is that these intersectionalist ditties claim to set themselves in contrast to a trend of yet other homophobic, misogynist and racist SFF stories which in fact doesn’t exist.

    That’s why people voted it in, same as Ancillary Justice. Art flew out that backdoor a long time ago. You claiming we don’t understand art merely makes you look like some fool in a room with a rat-cage on his head seeing 38 fingers on command when 3 are held up.

  628. He had that one about a pig, horse, and other barnyard animals talking with each other. Animals talking! How delightful! Conservatives seemed to like that one a lot, and nominated it for a Hugo this year.

    Yeah! I mean, what can a story featuring talking animals ever teach adults? I mean, there’s no way one of those could ever win a Hugo. Oh… wait. The 1996 Retro Hugo for Best Novella was awarded to Animal Farm (widely regarded as one of the best works of the 20th century). I understand it’s a good book, and despite it’s prominently featuring talking animals, there may be a lesson in there that even some adults can stand to learn.

  629. “Wouldn’t it have been a more daring casting decision to make the siblings sisters instead of brothers? And why is the major female character here a sociopathic, genetically engineered thrill killer?”

    We want more major female characters. But they can’t be villains. Or die horribly. Or be presented as worse than any of the males in the story in any way.

  630. philbert watson, asshat:

    That you consider that dinosaur porn, pathetic revenge-fantasy take off on “If You Gave a Mouse a Cookie” excellent, then you clearly need help. First, it was neither sci-fi nor fantasy, just the incoherent ramblings of some depressed woman. There was no plot, no actual events occurred, simply a list of possibilities with a sloppy conclusion about rednecks and gin.

    I haven’t read Mr. Wright’s Hugo nominated story yet, but I did read his rebuttal to the dinosaur porn and lo and behold, it was an actual story, with a plot and characters you actually were interested in. You should try one of those sometime.

    Antidisestablishmentariansim. There is a big word for you. And worthless (in literature) if not used to further the story and only sound intelligent, which is really what most liberals care about. Sounding intelligent, not actually thinking in the real world or conveying a simple thought. Everything has to be as obtuse (wow, another uncommon word!) and wordy as possible.

    Adults also SPELL accurately. The name is bassmaNco. I am a bass layer that lives in Colorado. Heaven forbid I not capitalize a nickname. No one on the internet has ever done that before (sarcasm, since you seem to lack the mental capacity to grasp the concept).

  631. Yon Philbert is exuding Eau d’ Poe quite strongly today…

    I was just about to say that myself. I think Philbert is performance art, not serious.

    James, you should consider making your collection of quotes into a searchable database, with the quote itself, venue [Twitter, etc], link, the person’s handle, the person’s name [if public info], and the person’s position [author, editor, reviewer etc], and perhaps a set of subject categories. Others could use the resource, and you could post a single clickable link to the result of a database query to illustrate your current point.

  632. Here’s what the view from an insulated diving bell looks like.

    “Nick Mamatas on June 11, 2015 at 10:37 am said:
    Point of fact: Katya’s quote she attributes to Brad (the …”It is an amazing act of literary bigotry that almost every winner was in some manner a reflection of disdain for ethnic European heterosexual males. In principle, you can’t get more neo-Nazi than that”) is NOT from Brad.

    “It’s a comment on Brad’s blog, left by James May, a well-known kook.

    “For all of Brad’s many faults, he generally doesn’t sling this sort of direct race-baiting claims that “ethnic European heterosexual males” are being discriminated against.”

    It is not a fault to match non-fiction rhetoric to 5 award winners nor does one need to be a “kook” to analyze last year’s Hugos on the same basis. It is a simple matter of research and quotes. Did I make up feminists Stross, Mendelsohn and MacGuire attacking Jonathan Ross over nothing, including a Brazilian in Brazil who co-edited the anti-white anthology We See a Different Frontier arrogantly asking Ross to take a hike in his own country and genre? I do not make up things about “white dude parade”(s). It’s called “reading.”

    A thing like neo-Nazism is a reflection of a human intellectual and philosophical space that is a reflection of the supremacy of one race or sex over that of another. Intersectionalism is a racist, sexist, supremacist cult. I stand by my comment and the research that went into it, which was considerable. There was nothing inflammatory about it. In fact, the race-baiters are on the other side, and they are fluent in that language.

  633. The thing that is routinely amazing to me is how the big intellects at Glyer’s don’t understand the following simple truth: if you throw all these issues about race and gender into a higher arena of principles where racial bigotry and sex-hatred have a neutral human meaning, then intersectionalists in principle oppose themselves. If you make it a question of quotes from each side on an institutional basis in SFF, it only gets worse.

    I do not create or support demonization theories that take out Arabs, Jews, whites, blacks, Latinos, Asians, gays, straights, men or women. That is what intersectionalists do.

    I am not moved by people who use “marginalized” as an excuse for racism or “punching up” power/privilege theory to excuse sex-hatred. Only a sheep buy into such a transparent con game.

  634. Part of my discussion on File 770 resulted in someone claiming I was prepared to vote “No Award” on a Graphic Story called “Zombie Nation” — which, he was quick to point out, is a Puppy nom.

    Except, of course, I said no such thing. In fact, “Zombie Nation” isn’t even on the packet download page. I thought it had been pulled like certain other nominations which have been withdrawn (the voting packet itself says there were some last-minute changes). So, I simply thought nothing else of it. I certainly wasn’t going to vote “No Award” on a book I hadn’t even read!

    Anyways, is anyone able to tell me where to get my copy so I can evaluate it? I haven’t yet heard back from Sasquan on the matter. Failing that, is there an online store which carries it? If I have to pay in order to exercise my voting principles, then so be it…

  635. Mamatas seems to have a habit of dismissing someone’s stated facts by essentially saying one version or another of “oh, you silly person, that simply never happens”.

    His entire basis for calling James a kook, insofar as this quote goes, is simply that he made the charge. He expends zero energy on addressing any of James’ points, as to do so would be to admit the points exist. This appears to be a more common “debate” tactic of the extreme left these days: to suggest, imply or outright state “there is no debate to be had”.

  636. @calbeck:

    Their website is http://www.thezombienation.com – they have an Etsy shop where the sell (un)dead-tree copies. It’s also up on Amazon.

    If you were feeling particularly frugal, I suppose you could read the webcomic off of their site to get a feel for the art and story – besides, the book is probably “June-September, 2014 from our site” as opposed to a new, standalone storyline.

  637. @Civilis

    He’s not willing to go into how much detail on just how much of a pompous arsehole John C. Wright is, so obviously he isn’t interested in anything related to the current Hugo kerfuffle, right?

    Well, the poor man is what he is. I gave my comments on his work elsewhere in F770 (Shorter snowcrash: needs to keep to the KISS and the “Show, don’t tell” principle).

    Anyways, thus far the gold standard in snark on Wright’s prose has been what Eric Flint said:

    “…an example of what I think of as the Saudi School of Prose. No noun may go out in public unless she is veiled by grandiloquence and accompanied by an adjective.”

    (from http://www.ericflint.net/index.php/2015/06/09/a-response-to-brad-torgersen/ )

    But you’re right of course. What I’m more interested in re:the Hugo’s may not necessarily be the same as what anyone else is. Just wanted to let Calbeck know that some of the commenters on F770 found his reviews interesting, even though we may (!) disagree on other things.

  638. “I kook therefore I am.”

    I like Nick Mamatas. I am into retro-design and it never would’ve occurred to me to make a web site like his which resembles a beeper circa 1990. I myself am more partial to Bettie Page and Edwin Georgi.

    Mamatas’ brilliant career and adventurous life doing pretty much nothing is a testament to his verve and elan. When your Islands in the Stream is an account of ghostwriting terms papers for exciting students rather than climbing erupting volcanoes, that is a testament to a life well-lived. Had such a brilliant thought occurred to me while I was doing something like playing frisbee while high on mushrooms in a tiny Guatemalan village, I might have dashed back to the States and lived in bomb shelter rather than continuing on to hitchhike cement barges up rivers in the geographical heart of South America.

    I suspect Mr. Mamatas wishes he were as kooky as I am and meant to pay me a compliment but is too much the reserved aristocrat and intellect to do so. His insult is something only advanced minds can fully understand.

  639. Eric Flint co-wrote an SF novel with Ryk E. Spoor called Threshold that came out 5 years ago. In it we find the following in a life and death scene with a woman’s life at stake, cuz Spiderman always makes with the puns:

    “At a gesture from Modofori, Jimmy grabbed her arm, forcing it up behind her back. ‘A nice speech, and I see we have less time than I thought. But I can carry out my threat.’

    “A.J. raised an eyebrow. ‘I find your lack of faith . . . disturbing.’ His hand raised and gave a small gesture.

    “Helen felt Jimmy suddenly go rigid behind her. He gave a strangled cry and clawed at his throat. Helen knew she was staring, but doubted that her expression was any more dumfounded than Modofori’s. Alex Zaent, his face pale, pulled out a knife and started for Helen. ‘You cut it out, you son of a–‘

    “Another gesture–a rippling gesture, the one she knew well from A.J.’s use of virtual controls–and Zaent screamed and collapsed, the knife falling from a hand that seemed limp and useless.”

    Aside from the mystery of why a hand might seem limp as opposed to actually being so, I might have laughed at that if Star Wars had been chiseled in 77 B.C. and I was 12 seconds old.

  640. A little perspective:
    Hitler was a progressive,
    Hitler was a socialist,
    Hitler was a disciple of Margaret Sanger, the genocidal racist who founded Planned Parenthood.

  641. Okay, so apparently “Zombie Nation” is an online comic strip, and the Hugo-nommed book is a collection of strips which was published last year. No indicator of which strips are included in the book, and other people on the Internet appear to be using the online strip archives as their means of reviewing it at this point.

    …time passes…

    Okay, after about fifty strips, I can tell:

    1) The art isn’t as good as most of the Graphic Novel category,
    2) The writing isn’t as bad as most of the Graphic Novel category, and
    3) The plotline (in an online comic strip!) is more coherent than most of the Graphic Novel category.

    My vote is still for “Sex Criminals”, but “Zombie Nation” is taking either Slot 2 or 3.

  642. Ugh. Can we please NOT play the “No, They’re All Really Nazis, Honest!” game? The anti-Pups do enough of that for the entire Hugo controversy put together.

  643. Dear bassmarco. Thank you for proving my point. “If I Were a Dinosaur” was an excellent work that clearly went well over your head. May I ask, are you a conservative? I suspect you are, which is why you did not understand the story — if in fact, you read it. Most conservatives have difficulty actually reading anything with big words.

    Yes, yes, Philby. We poor beknighted conservatives can’t see the majesty of the Emperor’s New Clothes.

    We just point out he’s nekkid.

  644. Calbeck your 6:06 is absolutely brilliant. I love sing alongs and filk and it’s perfect!

    Alas… it wouldn’t make everyone feel welcome at the filk sing-along, and I do have that as one of my minimal requirements of appropriateness having been subject to anti-Republican songs (well, it was probably just one) when we were supposed to be singing something funny about science or spaceships or chainmail bikinis (to the tune of Stairway to Heaven). But it was super fun, and the beats scanned! I love you just for getting the beats to scan. 🙂

  645. Also, nothing wrong with that passage from Threshold, James. The characters don’t always act exactly like I figure they would, but the series is a whole lot of fun and very good besides. Also, for the scene at the end of Boundary where the “political officer” explains why she unleashed an arms race on the world? For *that* I will defend those books forever. It probably ranks up there with my 10 favorite scenes in fiction.

  646. I’ve run in Leslie Fish’s circles from time to time, always loved putting together some goofball filk. Got a minor entry in “Bastard Children of Argo” that way. Glad you liked this one!

  647. From Glyer’s latest links round-up:

    “… you have the big boss publicly shaming one female employee.” – K. Tempest Bradford

    “I’m a feminist. This post is categorized as ‘Feminism.’ If the concept of feminism enrages you, feel free to go about your business elsewhere” – Brenna Clarke Gray at Book Riot

    “… a world is at risk. The world of ‘tradition,’ the world where straight, cis, white guys are the inheritors of the throne, the world where women and minorities have their identities dictated and blunted by a dominant narrative.” – Saumya Arya Haas

    “… Tom Doherty’s been quiet about a lot of things done by men at Tor.” – Sean Struck

    “… the actions of Tom Doherty takes women a few years back.” – Heather Allen and Tqwana Brown

    “Why would you want to write a gay character when what you’ve read before are straight characters” – Ferrett Steinmetz

    “They’re white, afraid of anything not white, and usually very antagonistic towards women.” – Kyle

    *

    “That ‘mainstream American art’ is almost exclusively created from within, and to serve, the white male colonial gaze. That is an established fact that requires no further proof or validation going forward. – SFF author Monica Byrne, June, 2015

    “Let’s run it on down. White males are most responsible for the destruction of human life and environment on the planet today. Yet who is controlling the supposed revolution to change all that? White males (yes, yes, even with their pasty fingers back in black and brown pies again).” – gay radical feminist Robin Morgan, “Goodbye to All That”, 1970.

    Those two statements are so ideologically same-page I could exchange them with no problem whatsoever and no one would know. They are a direct reflection of the ideology which controls core SFF on almost every level of its institutions.

    It’s long past time to stop calling these people “liberals.” A “liberal” ideology wouldn’t question other “liberals” for being straight, white and male.

  648. I’m rather fond of “Proglodite” myself. I MAY have coined it, but it was an inevitable formulation, I’m sure others invented it as well.

  649. From the news today:
    California professors instructed not to say ‘America is the land of opportunity’
    (from http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/22839/)

    California College Counselor Advises Students to Be ‘Less Asian’
    (from http://www.breitbart.com/california/2015/06/11/tiger-moms-beware-college-counselor-advises-students-to-be-less-asian/)

    I leave it as an exercise to the reader to draw the connections between the two, and how this relates to Social Justice.

  650. Ah, so Irene Gallo is beyond all reproach because she is a woman? Does that mean the anti-Puppies will be nicer to the women of Sad Puppies from here on in?

    Don’t hold your breath.

  651. Irene Gallo is the Sansa Stark here. She has UNESCO World Heritage protections, possibly because the fuckery of her ideology pre-dates the concept of principle and may fall over at any moment without flying buttresses.

  652. Natalie the Lurid again: “Imperator Nataliosa ‏@eilatan · 17h17 hours ago
    Eric Flint can go fuck the hell right off.”

    Such *nice* people, eh?

  653. I use the same lingo. The key is to be right. I’ve been transblack and a crypto-Muslim since 1986, so word tuh ya sheesha. The mad albino Luhrs can blimp off. She’ll never be right because of white ignorance, privilege, her stinking colonial gaze, an almost certain addiction to pickles, Friends, and other assorted problems associated with whiteness, which I retro-despise dating back to my transition to transblackness and wig-theory.

  654. Exactly. If a white woman can be black and the NAACP doesn’t bat an eye for decades, I can be a bloody damn unicorn and anyone who says otherwise can bite my fluffy tail.

  655. Now: since the NAACP appears to have no problem with the fact that this trans-black woman alleged hate crimes requiring her to be actually black to file them — numerous times — then criminal activity is ameliorated or eliminated under law by one’s personal identity, NOT their actual biological status or socially-constructed “personhood”.

    Therefore, I am going to go out and frolic in traffic now. And if anyone hits me, they are infringing upon my Unicorn identity in an oppressive manner clearly intended to marginalize my voice as well as the aforementioned fluffy tail.

    “Dude… you just ran over a unicorn.”

    “Unic- WHAT?! Really?!”

    “…I’m feeling kind of triggered over here. How much money do you guys have?”

  656. @calbeck:

    Downside: it’s not murder if you’re in season and they have a license.

  657. Gender feminist intersectionalism has produced such notable events as:

    Whites who claim to be black
    Men who claim to be women and then launch ideological assaults on lesbians
    Privilege theory which demonizes all whites on Earth
    Review-censoring white men
    A Hugo and Nebula nominated SFF author heavily promoted as a Muslim/Arab who virtually never mentions he’s half Irish
    A multiple-award-winning SFF author lamenting “SFF is, alas, dominated by white westerners”
    An SFWA president Tweeting men should #JustListen to women
    A four-time Nebula nominee who claims whites have tried to strangle her career
    Patriarchy theory which demonizes all men on Earth
    A serial convention panelist claiming the Ferguson police officer who shot Mike Brown is my “bigoted murdering kin.”
    A mental breakdown on Twitter by a gay feminist who feared a common TV personality
    A mass attack against bikinis on an ad and a painting with a chain mail bikini
    The return of racial segregation created by a team of women who use terms for whites like “cracka ass cracka” and “sour dough-faced.”
    A mental case called Requires Hate
    SFF authors making fun of a photo of white charity workers in Africa
    A call to “destroy patriarchal power at its source, the family”
    Routine claims SF is sexist, racist and colonialist
    Claims that men hate women
    A Tor blogger who referred to heterosexuals as “cis scum”
    A Tor blogger who claimed an all-white Table of Contents will produce nothing new
    A Hugo-nominated podcaster who want the cishetero patriarchy to burn
    A call for an end of “whites saviors” in film and books by SFF authors
    Claims that all men benefit from “rape culture”
    A claim by a Nebula-nominated author that the world used to belong “to angry white boys sitting around in their white-wall buzz cuts eating white bread and watching Leave It To Beaver.”
    A claim by a Nebula-nominated SFF author that the police shootings of blacks are “pogroms”
    A John Campbell award-winner claiming she lives “under white supremacy & Islamophobic paranoia”
    A claim by an SF author of an “unconscious bias on the part of men/whites”
    Anyone who claims such bias in women/blacks is declared a misogynist/racist
    Claims white SF authors write Step and Fetch It aliens to make fun of them
    A Nebula nominee who feared all of white Australia
    A convention Guest of Honor and rape expert who claimed he wished he was exaggerating racism he admitted seconds later he’d never seen
    A four-time Nebula nominee who claimed an SF author was using an analogy to Jim Crow literary tests
    A claim by a multi-award-nominated SF writer that all whites comprise a “monoculture”
    A feminist science-writer attacking a shirt during a scientifically historic comet-landing
    Claims women are misogynists
    A claim by two Nebula nominees that whites read epic fantasy because of whiteness
    A claim by a Hugo and Nebula nominee that Game of Thrones may be too white
    An advisory at a feminist student convention to use jazz hands instead of clapping because it may trigger PTSD
    A college rape hoax still supported by feminists
    Fake rape statistics
    Fake wage gap statistics
    The expulsion of a white feminist for exposing a hoax hate crime
    An anti-white racial revenge anthology
    A claim white male privilege only cares about maintaining its power written by a N.Y. Times best-selling author who holds non-whites-only writing workshops
    A N.Y. Times best-selling author who boycotts all-white or male panels
    Calls to stop reading white men
    A call to not publish any men
    A claim that the Jewish Isaac Asimov benefitted from white supremacy
    A Patreon kickstarter to offer an alternative culture site to the white male colonial gaze
    A person who claims to be neither a man nor a woman who writes white men should come with trigger warnings
    A historically awarded SF author writing of America an an analogy to a restaurant where “Women and POC and LGBT” get a punch in the face every time they sit down to eat
    A man posing as a woman attacking misogyny in video gaming
    Racist selfies by “marginalized” at a convention and award event who haven’t been house-trained
    The editor of a 66 yr. old SFF magazine claiming “CIS white men, aren’t used to having their moral authority questioned.”
    An SFWA president claiming men are emotionally immature compared to women
    An activist who claimed men killed 9 million witches
    Claims that heterosexuality is compulsory
    An SFWA member who wished an SFF author and his fans should die in a fire because of using the word “pussy”
    The feminist CEO of anti-harassment initiative who serially harasses people
    Claims that men and women who actually reflect their biological sex are living an illusion constructed by society since the dawn of civilization
    Claims that the incest taboo is to enforce heterosexuality and keep down gayness
    A claim by a four-time Nebula nominee that whites are “diabolical”
    Claims that white men who marry black women are white supremacists
    A Hugo-winning claim men have erased women from military history written by a woman who claims unknown individuals would like to drag her behind a pick up truck
    Claims whites have systematically erased non-whites from the history of medieval Europe

    They claim anyone who opposes – or even documents – the insanity above is a white supremacist woman-hating homophobe. It is further claimed that’s all taken out of context and anecdotal and is not representative of a cohesive ideology. It’s all a coincidence, friends, even though they all claim to be “feminists.” All of it is cross-supported. None of it is called out.

  658. @Orgell – Hunting licenses are genocidal tracts written by anti-equine supremacists. They even have a speciesist term for it: “culling”. If any humans “culled” any other humans, the word transforms into “murder”.

    Not even Unicorn magic can just hornwave human structures of gentrified capitalism away.

  659. @calbec:

    Don’t trample my hippophagic rights, meadowmuffinlord.I identify as Lion-kin. My preferred pronouns are: Mew, His, Purr.

  660. I hereby declare myself a non-race, neither a man nor a woman, a multisexual member of all religions and none.

    Where’s my forty acres and a mule?

    Plus I’m a swinger.

    My toll-free is Neo-Matrix-Spanking-Nazi

  661. You’d think the BBC would have ‘DO NOT TRUST GODFREY ELFWICK!’ painted in meter-high letters at the entrance to every nerwsroom by now…

  662. “Asymptotic Binary ‏@asymbina 20h20 hours ago @Cecily_Kane @LoopdiLou @chrysoula Just like white people congratulating themselves about being great anti-racist allies.”

    “Cecily Kane ‏@Cecily_Kane 20h20 hours ago @chrysoula @asymbina @LoopdiLou Men are hilarious that way because they’re so obviously projecting. They depend on/seek our reassurance.”

    “Cecily Kane ‏@Cecily_Kane 21h21 hours ago @LoopdiLou Yeah, this is how liberal straight white dudes show up to extract our emotional labor. +”

    “Shay GenderFuq Ture ‏@Pundit_AcadEMIC 2h2 hours ago Race is a categorical arrangements of particular bodies that serves the system of privileging certain bodies over others in whiter supremacy”

    “Shay GenderFuq Ture ‏@Pundit_AcadEMIC 1h1 hour ago Anybody cosigning or not seeing anything wrong w/ #RachelDolezal’s actions are white supremacist racist & anti-Black transphobes”

    “Mikki Kendall ‏@Karnythia 20h20 hours ago The difference between #RachelDolezal feigning Blackness (for whatever reason) & Katy Perry, Miley Cyrus, Brooke Candy etc doing it is what?”

    *

    Social justice never sleeps. Go try talking to that nuttery, then guess how they vote awards. This is an ideological virus. And they talk about anyone who opposes that as “Men’s Rights Activists,” misogynists and racist. They must be out of their gourds.

  663. “A widely cited essay by pro-“social justice” sci-fi writer John Scalzi seeks to explain privilege to geeks by arguing that being a straight white male is akin to playing a videogame on “the lowest difficulty setting.” Does the white son of a poor single mother have it easier than the daughter of a wealthy black couple? As a minor afterthought, Scalzi mentions that “players” in other groups may be better off if they start with more “points” in areas such as wealth.”

    That’s Scalzi? Haven’t read or seen anything directly from him previously, but with Young putting a link in, I felt I have to read that essay…

    …time passes…

    Waitwaitwait. I HAVE seen some of this before — cited by opponents of #GamerGate as part of their argument that the movement is completely racist “because reasons”. THIS is the dumbass behind that? This is his entire actual argument?

    Just right off the bat, tossing out dictionaries in order to lecture people on what specific words “signify”. What the hell are words anymore? Who needs dictionaries? This is the same BS you get in pure political rhetoric, where arch-conservatives have turned the word “liberal” into an actual curse — IN THEIR OWN CIRCLES, FOR THEIR OWN PEOPLE. It’s Balkanization of a mutual language, deliberately shutting out discourse by way of imposing preferred meanings on common terminology.

    “If you don’t agree with how I define a word, it’s just because you don’t know what the word REALLY means, according to the discordant hierarchies of shrimp-babbler halfcock and theramin sauce.”

    Oh, forget paraphrasing, let’s just quote the idiot himself:

    “I should note that I’m planning to Mallet anyone who decides to start a debate on the word “privilege” in this thread. I’ve already established that straight white dudes often cannot deal with the term rationally”

    Screw you, Scalzi. This is my first introduction to you as an authentic person, and you’re literally dictating to people how they are REQUIRED to “interpret” common words and phrases to your liking. The reality is, NO ONE outside your damn cliques “deal with the term” in a way you find to be “rational”, and because of this you just erased millions of women and persons of color from the discussion.

  664. @James – In future, instead of trying to read folks the riot act on “social justice” anti-feminists and racists, just send them that link and let folks watch Scalzi hoisting himself on his own petard.

  665. Calbeck, Hoist in “Hoist by one’s own petard” is actually the past tense of “Hoise” meaning “to be hurt”. It’s pretty much the only way that word is ever used any more. But that’s also why saying “Hoisted on one’s own petard” is wrong. It has nothing to do with being pulled up on a rope.

  666. “Kameron Hurley ‏@KameronHurley 10h10 hours ago There are so, so many white guys in the TED audiences. So, so many.”

    “Kameron Hurley retweeted K Tempest Bradford ‏@tinytempest Jun 11 Do you know what Sad/Rabid Puppies hate? The #TempestChallenge. Piss them off by suggesting Tor books that qualify on #KTBookChallenge tag”

    No, what we hate are racist morons who don’t understand normal human beings go their entire lives without talking smack about ethnic groups, women or men. What about that do these people not understand? I’ve never known or met anyone like these people. If I did they wouldn’t last long in my home, no matter who they went after. Who wants to listen to that?

    *

    “Alyssa Wong ‏@crashwong Jun 10 Truly, if someone calling you a neo-nazi is the worst thing you can think of happening to you, you have lived a charmed, charmed life.”

    That’s there’s coming from the Nebula-nominated charmed life of a woman who’s part of the mistaken-identity-is-racism “micro aggression” hashtag movement, cuz simple comparisons are unavailable to racial bigots. Anyone want to guess how people who think they’re attacked by racists just because of mistaken identity or notice how many white men are everywhere are going to vote for awards? Is it rocket science to translate hate speech into literature?

    *

    “Kameron Hurley ‏@KameronHurley Jun 10 @scalzi it was REALLY tough to ignore EVERYTHING during the Atlantic article weekend, but it worked. Kameron Hurley ‏@KameronHurley Jun 10 @jennygadget @eilatan yeah, as if comment sections weren’t proof enough”

    You mean the people who rightly pointed out you made up bullshit accusations without quotes out of your head about other authors?

    “Kameron Hurley retweeted Ta-Nehisi Coates ‏@tanehisicoates Jun 9 Kinda true though. End of white supremacy is, effectively, the destruction of white identity. @KevinMKruse @jbouie”

    “K Tempest Bradford ‏@tinytempest 18h18 hours ago ”

    It’s all about the rocket ships and what jerks white men are. Are there no normal people in their lives who look at what it is they write and say “ahem.”

    *

    Oh, look. intersectionalists have confused their intersections. So they have to explain it at themselves:

    “K Tempest Bradford ‏@tinytempest 18h18 hours ago The reason why anyone would say “if transgender is a thing then why isn’t transracial a thing?” is inherent belief that trans folk are just putting on a costume. Like, oh, I’d rather just wear dresses! It’s awesome to have dreds and be down! NO. FUCKING NO. People who put on racial identities like costumes are doing so out of lack of respect and b/c their own racial identity isn’t “interesting” enough. What I can say is that the way gender is constructed and understood and shaped socioculturally IS NOT THE SAME as the way race is. They’re not swappable, understanding of one does not inherently confer understanding of the other. TRANSRACIAL DOESN’T FUCKING EXIST.”

    Why not? If I can say I’m a woman, why not black? If I’m a woman trapped in a man’s body, I can be a black trapped in a white body. You morons opened up this can of worms and your monsters are crawling all over the place. Meanwhile you’re backfilling trying to explain your own insane ideology. Did it ever occur to you it’s just insane in the first place?

  667. @Doc Mauser – A petard being a giant explosive charge set under city walls during sieges, it’s perfectly fine — as the idiom was about a poor explosives expert blasting themselves into the sky by screwing up the job. -;)

  668. Calbeck, I assume (perhaps wrongly) that everyone knows about Scalzi’s white privilege thing. It was also published at Kotaku. Three years prior, there was a two part post at Scalzi’s by Mary Ann Mohanraj, the gay intersectionalist who started the lesbian-heavy Strange Horizons magazine in 2001 or so and which to this day is anti-white anti-male. She published Scalzi’s first story. Long after Scalzi wrote his white privilege post, he asked us to “bone up” on “intersectionality” and linked us to a PDF by Ahir Golpadas called “Intersectionality 101.” Both Mohanraj and Goldpadas quote the gay black intersectional icon named Audre Lorde who used phrases like the “gap of male ignorance.”

    http://whatever.scalzi.com/2009/03/12/mary-ann-mohanraj-gets-you-up-to-speed-part-i/

    To say Mohanraj’s piece is rancid is an understatement. The tone of racial supremacy throughout is sick. Mohanraj handed out an award at the just ended Nebulas. Surprise!

    There is another important and widely quoted work intersectionalists in SF use. It is called “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack” by radfem Peggy McIntosh. It came out around 1989 and is considered a seminal work. 1989 is around the time the term “intersectionality” was coined by the black feminist Kimberle Crenshaw. Donna Haraway and her gay “cyborg” SF feminism is another icon with these folks.

    Were I a lawyer presenting all these connected dots before a judge, the case would never go to trial. This is a hate movement created by a handful of hateful lesbian ideologues in the late ’60s. It has nothing to do with equal rights. Radical feminists (a term they created) call themselves “gender equality” feminists. In essence they are talking about male and female identities being fake social constructs created by men to oppress women. This is a gay movement of female supremacy where an added racial kicker (intersectionalism) went into high gear around 1990, though it is mentioned in the earliest writings of radical feminists.

    What you are facing in Gamergate is identical to what SF is dealing with. Sarkeesian’s main idol may be bell hooks, but hooks herself has borrowed quite a bit from Judith Butler about “performed” gender since Butler’s 1990 book Gender Trouble. Butler herself is critiquing the intellectual origins of the earlier radical feminist movement starting with Simone de Beavoir in 1949 and her book The Second Sex. This is nothing more than a matter of research. Milo and Sargon of Akkad have latched onto this but I don’t know how deeply they’ve researched it. The upshot is that once you know this stuff, everything SJWs do becomes clear. The weirdest part is that middle class straight whites have adopted a movement that essentially hates them. Tom Wolfe called such people “flak catchers” in 1970.

  669. Yes, I’m familiar with intersectionalism via #GamerGate. “Privilege”, when used in Scalzi’s context, is used nowhere else BUT intersectionalism.

    What pisses me off is his anti-intellectual “I get to redefine words but no one else gets to debate me on it, including actual authorities on what words mean” nonsense.

    It’s… like watching someone willfully shut off their ability to reason.

  670. Also, believe it or not, I read that particular “Mau-Mau” book by Wolfe some years ago. Even in the ’70s, whole roomfuls of rich white people were falling over themselves to beg militant black leaders for what amounts to forgiveness — for being white and rich.

    Which, as I recall from Wolfe, simultaneously confused, bemused and amused the militant black leaders who encountered them. Even they said that the relationship was one of poor activists harnessing rich suckers for easy money.

  671. Just right off the bat, tossing out dictionaries in order to lecture people on what specific words “signify”. What the hell are words anymore? Who needs dictionaries?

    This is one of the reasons I like to use dictionary definitions. I’m not saying the dictionaries are always right or can’t be biased, but if you’re disagreeing with me and the dictionary, I’m going to force you to show your work.

    Scalzi’s analogy is poorly constructed on so many levels it’s hard to know where to begin. His essay tends to specifically send me in to rant mode faster than just about anything else, so I apologize if this gets out of hand.

    As a gamer, when I am familiar with a game I can usually tell if it is being played on easy mode. How can you tell if a game is in hard mode? The Game Over (or reload, or respawn) screen comes up more often. Let’s look at life expectancies. African Americans have shorter life expectancies than whites, so this analogy isn’t completely off base. However, men have shorter life expectancies than women, so by this analogy white women should be the ones playing on ‘Easy Mode’. Men are also more likely to be in prison (another of life’s Game Overs). Men make more than women (by about 3% when everything is taken in to account), but score isn’t usually a proxy for difficulty except on some older games; a lot of newer games that keep score usually give higher scores on harder difficulties in a sort of ‘more risk, more reward’ mechanism, which also would fit the analogy. We’ve done the most simple validation test (“assuming the analogy is true, what predictions can I make, and do I see what I predicted in the real world?”) I can think of, and the analogy already fails hard.

    The comparison also fails when you start delving more into the groups in the analogy. Scalzi’s analogy sets up four groups for comparison: White Males, Minority Males, White Females, and Minority Females (we’ll leave out the sexual orientation part, as that inclusion alone can support a half-dozen rants.) To keep a long story short, the group ‘Minority’ is so heterogeneous as to make useful comparisons impossible. It’d be like doing a drug trial, where group A is on the drug to be tested, and Group B is randomly given one of a placebo, the competitors drug, or a powerful hallucinogen (“People taking our drug are 10% less likely to experience hallucinations than the control group!”) This is what happens when you break people down into superficial groups for comparison; any breakdown is going to still be so facile as to miss a lot of the underlying things that make people different. Would Scalzi have said “Asian males are living life in easy mode”? (See my reference to California College Counselor Advises Students to Be ‘Less Asian’ above.)

    Scalzi is supposed to be a Science Fiction writer, and we used to expect those to have at least a rudimentary grasp of Science. He’s certainly not a gamer, to judge by his poorly constructed gamer analogy.

  672. Often a door-breeching charge. Still, being blown up is not the same as being hoisted. I latched on to this bit of trivia because I once had to do the research and found out about this obscure word. I kinda like collecting obscure words that only survive in idioms. And it drives me nuts when people get them wrong. (Like “Tow the line” ARGH! And don’t get me started on fools who write “For all intensive purposes.”)

  673. That’s why so many people see Scalzi as a clown. Not only that, he’s the gateway which introduced this virus into the community and then called anyone who disagreed as being the thing this virus actually is: an analogy to white supremacy.

    For all their squawking about equality, SJWs can’t accept the fact non-whites, gays and women can act like that. And those who admit they can wipe it clean by saying “Well, privilege, power, majority” and blah, blah, blah. It never seems to occur to any of them what a perfect little self-healing con game that is for hate speech or that they have no proof of any oppression in SFF. They are taking a demographic that has skewed straight white male and presented that to us as a straight white male supremacy. These are stunningly gullible people. They never notice how they only see white colonialism and slavery in a world history full of it among all ethnic groups.

    They never notice how easily they lay racial cultural failure at one door and laugh at the idea the other way round. Same with “misogyny.” With man-hatred you get LOL or #ImaginaryMisandry and Sarkeesian saying “There’s no such thing as sexism against men.” Really? Has this fool never heard of law? Or more bullshit about Gamergate “is a war on the women, critics, and feminists who care about making gaming more diverse and inclusive.” The war is precisely the other way round. Hanging out and getting Pearl Harbored by insane feminists isn’t an offensive.

    They never notice that if diversity is so wonderful, why only whites and women? Con game.

    It also never seems to occur to these flak catchers how their vocabulary suddenly changed. All this white-hatred and man-hatred flew in on terms like “privilege,” “cisheteronormative,” and “rape culture.” That stuff was created by a mad hat cult, but it comes out the other end as noble “social justice.”

    No one seems to have noticed that’s how Germany drove itself mad: by mainstreaming hate speech – by listening to a core group of smooth-talking sociopaths who had a thing for Jews and Poles and made hating them seem plausible. That plausibility is the way intersectionalism works as well. Because there actually was a time when whites acted pretty fucked up, mostly depending on the region, and not all that long ago – within living memory.

    When a Tuskeegee airmen left Iowa in 1942 and headed south for training on a train, he said it was the first time he’d experienced discrimination. That’s not surprising since that region – such as Minnesota – had anti-Jim Crow laws that precede the year 1900 and never had slavery. I’m not saying black folks had it easy but the obvious problems were mostly in the South. 85% of black lynchings occurred in the deep South. You just can’t will that truth away.

    But living memory is where the plausibility comes in. I was just reading a black guy who said his white mother was arrested as a prostitute for her first date with his black dad and that she got booted from college for dating him. But anecdotal aside, that’s gone, and these naive neo-Freedom Riders won’t accept that when they listen to these racist demogogues, some of them with admitted mental health issues, trying to convince us all nothing has changed or that whites have a leg up. They do that by presenting a skewed view of cherry-picked studies or statistics while charging anyone who uses such studies or statistics the other way are racists or misogynists. It never occurs to them to explain how new non-white (or white immigrants without a leg up) immigrants do well or why they flock to a racist country and why no one is flocking the other way. It’s one big con.

    In fact their rape statistics are lies, they pay-gap stats are lies, their race crime statistics are completely cherry-picked or even reversed and their logic about sex-hatred mysteriously only lands in one lap. That is not the way law or fair play works, that is how a supremacist con game and hate speech works.

    They never explain why – in a white supremacy – Lebron James is the most popular athlete rather than a white quarterback, why the 2/3 black NFL is the most popular sport rather than the 2/3 white or all-white hockey, or why rap music is the go-to music of white kids rather than country western. They never explain how the Alien franchise which featured a women took off or what women were in fact doing in old SFF. They either ignore that stuff or drag out more excuses, including ignoring a black President. They have “reasons” for that too.

    All supremacist ideologies have goal posts with legs. None of this bullshit would survive in a courtroom or debate, which is why SJWs won’t debate. That’s why “brilliant” essayists like Kameron Hurley don’t use quotes or footnotes while my massively quoted and footnoted work is dismissed as creepy stalking, the madness of the Unabomber or out of context. On the other hand when it was thought I didn’t name names, it was said I did that because I had nothing and got my news from Rush Limbaugh. Or they say we watch Fox News, yet another thing I never do.

    You will never win an argument with morons like that. Never.

  674. And Civilis, add in the 4 to 1 male suicide rate and 63% harsher sentences for men than women for the same crimes. Memory-hole time. We could dismantle this con game all day. The truth is our side looks at things on a human level, not on that of identity. You can’t have a healthy society large or small by ignoring discrimination. But you can’t have one making up discrimination and, even worse, institutionalizing in-group vs. out-group behaviors like valuing Sansa Stark so much more highly than men. A society just can’t live like that.

    What got my comments censored at Glyer’s was my making the comparison to how Sarkeesian critiques violence in games and how America critiqued violence in movies beginning in the late ’60s. Back then we critiqued them as a shared human failure. We didn’t critique Jewish producers. Sarkeesian is not critiquing shared human failures – she is critiquing the “toxic masculinity” of men. In the late ’60s that would’ve translated into critiquing the failure of Jewish producers.

    SFF is being critiqued as the failure of straight white men – there is no doubt about that. It is a supremacist racist gay radical feminist ideology doing so. There is no shared humanity or guilt within those critiques. They are the exclusive territory of white men. If you’re looking for analogies to neo-Nazis start where they dominate the dialogue in the equivalent of city hall, not two goofy neighbors down the street that are blimped up into an army.

    Institution has always been the sole determinant of societal discrimination, not anecdotal racism. The issue of the Civil Rights movement was one of law – of having blacks being legally second-class citizens – not an apartment manager who didn’t like blacks. Jews weren’t being packed onto trains in 1928 – why? Given what happened only 5 years later, we can presume a lot of Germans or apt. managers didn’t like Jews. What changed? Institution and law, that’s what changed. And it changed via hate speech from within gov’t and media and universities and the credibility those institutions have, not from two guys. When the presidents of the SFWA or bloggers and editors at Tor speak, that gives a credibility to speech. That’s where I started my research, not with nobodies. The nobodies came later as the rank and file either supplying that speech or supporting it and the whole interacting together via Twitter and blogs, and it’s an open and shut case to anyone willing to look at the material without bias.

  675. James, please tell me that’s the actual book she was reading and not a Photoshop. That’d be too priceless. As it is, it’s hilarious.

  676. Somebody did Photoshop that in. In the original it’s blank papers she’s holding. I got the one here from Milo’s Twitter feed.

  677. Calbeck, changing the meaning of words is the way to keep the language useful for in-group signaling purposes. This is the whole reason that a term that is demanded today will become offensive tomorrow. Just as soon as too many people start using the “preferred” term, it’s no longer useful for sorting people out into “us” and “them.” So the word has to change, just like teenagers with new slang, to identify outsiders.

    Also, the single most harmful part of the “white privilege” doctrine is the abdication of one’s own moral “self”. What you said to Scalzi (understanding he’ll likely not ever see it): “The reality is, NO ONE outside your damn cliques “deal with the term” in a way you find to be “rational”, and because of this you just erased millions of women and persons of color from the discussion.” Is true and quite well said. It’s all about the in-group. It’s all about identifying the out-group. It’s a creed and a catechism and a confession.

    It also doesn’t matter at all that the whole thing is non-falsifiable. Failure to accept the premise is proof of it. In order to be GOOD one must willingly give up one’s own moral volition and adherence to one’s own senses and reason. To be GOOD one must confess that they’re blind to their sins, and that the blindness itself is proof of their sins. A GOOD person needs someone else to be arbiter over their soul. So this external authority can say… “That’s colonialist apologies” and the good person can only say, “Yes, I’ll try to be better.” Or “That’s cultural appropriation” and the good person can only say, “Yes, I’ll try to be better.” Or “Your ‘strong heroine” is really a man with boobs” and the good person can only say, “Yes, I’ll try to be better.” Or like that dummy whoever it was on twitter explaining that no one should ever need to *escape* to a place where bad violent stuff happens and you’re a bad person if your “escapism” involves killing bad guys… *good* people say, why yes, I’ll try to be better. People who still own their own moral volition and assert their rights over their own self and view themselves as sovereign, otoh, refuse to cooperate with such soul destroying bull sh*t.

    You’ve heard of that thing with Require’s Hate? Started attacking the “Good Guys” and women of color and other marginalized voices? Her victims reported being traumatized and fearful and having PTSD type reactions to so much as sitting down at the keyboard? The reason is, that they’d given away their moral volition to others and accepted that they HAD to rely on the judgement of others to identify the sins in what they wrote.

    That’s what Scalzi was demanding… if you were a white dude, you couldn’t see your privilege. You had exactly one choice, which was to accept someone else’s authority and judgement to see for you what you can’t see.

    I grew up fundy religious and we had NOTHING that extreme.

  678. @Doc Mauser – I can see your point of view on this… I also tend to get persnickety when people foul up basic grammar. I decided to go to Mirriam-Webster for this one (gasp! a dictionary! no one tell John!), and your definition is definitely the “most” correct. Aaaaaalmost all of the examples and definitions suggest or outright state a mechanical contact with the item being lifted at all times until it reaches the point of rest.

    Except for the very last: “She hoisted a last-second shot that would have won the game if it had gone in.”

    HAHA! Saved by womens’ basketball! We’re both right! -:D

  679. @Julie – Very well said. Frankly, these people sound like hard-core Scientologists, and think virtually identically:

    1) If you deny your thetan level, it’s only because you need clearing.
    A) If you deny your bigotry, it’s only because you are a bigot.

    2) If you can’t get by in life, you need to buy our books and learn more techniques!
    B) If you can’t get by in life, use our single technique to know which race, gender or class to blame!
    (strangely, the Scientologists end up being more proactive and positive than Scalzi’s bunch)

    3) Learn entirely new made-up words like “thetan”, “engram”, and “apparency”!
    C) Relearn words you already know so they mean something completely different!
    (and again, Scientology comes out on top because at least they CREATE new words instead of mangling existing language)

    Let’s just call Scalzi and persons of like mind what they are. A cult. Not even a “cult of feminism”,
    since that’s only one facet however prominent.

    They’re a Cult of Accusation.

  680. Well, technically “apparency” is a legitimate word, just obsolete. The Scientologists do repurpose it to mean something other than what it once did. And at least they’re not mangling CURRENT language in this way. So, quarter-point instead of half to them on that one.

  681. And in Scalzi’s immediate follow-up piece he maintained white privilege was as obvious as “gravity.”

    In other news, devoted crusader for justice across the world via SFF Moshe Feder of Tor deleted his Facebook post defending Gallo. Someone might have actually said “shut up and take it outside. This is SFF.” I agree I don’t want to hear lectures about Marx when I’m getting my tires rotated or the fascinating world of lesbian ideological theory when I’m trying to enjoy a fictional journey to the center of the earth that is nevertheless more real than lesbian ideological theory.

  682. I get a little tired of pointing out that “isn’t it obvious” is the watchphrase of every nutjob conspiracist from Moon Hoaxers to 9/11 Truthers.

  683. Actually, I think Feder has nuked everything SP related from his FB. I’d say Tom and Macmillan have put their feet down a lot harder behind the scenes.

  684. Different word entirely. But bad usage and the fact that the word is otherwise archaic leads to confusion. “To Hoise” and “To Hoist” are two different verbs. But I think you might have to go to the OED to find it. The Big OED.

    Then again, when one is hoist by one’s own petard, one is typically blown to flinders. A word that is pretty much only used (by people who know it) for a person who is blown to bits.

  685. Listen to more stupid:

    “NelC on June 13, 2015 at 5:24 pm said:

    “When someone is a racist, then calling them a racist isn’t calling names, it’s calling out. Vox Day is a racist, and a few other things besides. When I call him a loony, that’s just my opinion; when I call him a racist, then I can point to posts of his where he’s being plainly racist and no amount of sophistry will hide it from anyone who has any but the vaguest idea of what racism is.

    “If I point out that Correia, Torgersen and Wright voluntarily allied themselves with someone that they should have known was a racist with only a little research, and almost certainly can’t honestly deny that they know now and still haven’t wholeheartedly dissociated themselves from; then I don’t have to call them racists, just people to whom winning a tin rocket for, at best, a vague cause is more important to them than racism. Furthermore, if they themselves say that winning a tin rocket is so important to them that they have to declare war on people who aren’t white males, then I don’t have to call them racists; their own words place them in that camp.”

    Aside from the fact no Sad Puppy has declared a war on non-white women, notice how he used the term “plainly racist” and “can point to” one. Then there is the idea of a larger support for those views.

    If he turned that around to the other side and used what he asserts is an ability to understand what is “plainly racist,” he’d find at least a couple hundred SJWs just waiting for his bile, and well-placed institutionally. He either can’t or won’t do that because he is full of shit.

    This simple fact, convenient vision and moronic application of double standards is the core of this divide.

  686. Saying something that is true isn’t libel or slander in the US (in some places the truth of the public accusation is irrelevant because someone’s reputation can be destroyed by the truth and thus “defamed.”), but in the US at least, Truth is a defense.

    Saying something you believe with all your heart is true, but isn’t true, isn’t a defense against a charge of slander or libel. It might mean that you weren’t doing those things intentionally, but it’s the truth and not your honestly held beliefs or intentions that matter.

    I honestly wish these people would get over this stupid notion that anyone who calls them on their bull sh*t is racist, sexist, homophobic, blah blah, defending the patriarchy, rape apologist, blah blah, etc., If you think about it, how much self-reference and hubris is in that conclusion?

    “I want to be sure that everyone feels welcome and has the chance to participate in SF publishing and fandom so I am going to insist that we do this list of incredibly stupid things. Anyone who disagrees with these incredibly stupid things obviously wants to exclude all of these people from publishing and fandom in order to defend their white male privilege.”

    What did Larry say back when? Something about how telling young new writers that science fiction had to have non-binary genders and have this social message was actively bad advice to give new writers who needed to understand that story comes first? Call out the stupid ideas and did anyone say… no really, this is GOOD advice for new writers learning to write in the field for these reasons…. and putting story first is bad for these other reasons? Oh, heck no. It was all… omg… he wants to erase me from fiction and chase everyone out of the field and have only white men publish things.

    But then, it would be pretty near impossible to actually *defend* the incredibly stupid things, if anyone actually tried.

  687. Tor is part of a transracist agenda that denies my agency and lived experience and is guilty of cultural appropriation. My genre is not for sale to non-Western intruders presenting as TransWestern and transwhite.

  688. Once again, this time with NelC, an argument is made which is wholly reliant upon guilt-by-association and devolves utterly to staining an entire movement by the involvement of one person.

    In which case, Ms. Gallo represents the whole of the anti-Puppy position, including Tor (who clearly could have understood her views with a little research), Eric Flint (oh, wouldn’t THAT piss him off to be so tarred), and the lot.

    Of course, WE understand she does not because WE do not employ guilt-by-association fallacies. Not even regarding the SJWs: we are fully aware that frothing “social-justice warriors” do not represent the whole and that many anti-Puppies have simply been misinformed — or outright lied to — by people they otherwise trust and consider friends.

  689. Here’s what I’m sick of:

    “Liz Bourke retweeted Elizabeth Bear ‏@matociquala Jun 11 I am awed by the women who remain awesome, funny, joyful, accomplished despite the forces arrayed to make them feel awful for existing.”

    There is nothing political there. There never is. It’s the same old supremacy mixed with defamation. Women are awesome even though they share the planet with men.

    So I get shit on for not doing anything and so does SFF because it conspires against women on zero proof so don’t review or read white men. But what would happen if I wrote stuff about awesome men and immoral women? I’d get thrown into the misogyny and Men’s Rights Activist boat. I do no matter what, as you can see from Bear’s preening feminist ladygood statement.

    And when they blog this crap at Tor I get banned for saying anything.

    Fuck this bullshit and fuck Tor for allowing it. Why would I read stuff from a company which never ceases to remind me how much its employees hate me for waking up in the morning. There are no forces arrayed against women. Just knock off that paranoid bullshit. Plus this is SFF.

    Bourke Tweets with Shaun Duke who, because of his dumbfuck intersectional feminist agenda, thinks white supremacists marry black women. She Tweets with Paul Weimer who wants to smash the Patriarchy. Both Tweet with Requires Hate, who had the most anti-white racist blog in SFF history. Bourke used to leave sympathetic comments there. There is nothing political about stating white men have the brains of buffaloes. And these people want to talk about neo-Nazis when they support StormfrontAsia?

    What if I said that about the brains of women – every day, and enshrined it in theory to write blogs about at a giant publishing house? If you want to attack actual Men’s Right’s Groups – fine. Not all men. But why in the hell would you obsess about that in SFF anyway? Is the rodeo circuit pulling itself apart because it lacks PoC or “agency” for women?

    Put two and two together Tor. Do you want to sell and promote SFF or prove white men are assholes? By the paper-thin standards of feminists themselves, talking like SJWs do against a race or a sex is racism and sexism. That’s supposedly the whole reason for their idiotic social justice crusade gone haywire in the first place.

    Why do you have bloggers who use terms like “Cis peeeeoooople” when we laugh at her dumb binary manifestos? Are you as adults incapable of understanding what “Homo peeeeooooople” is when used like that? Suddenly bigotry light bulbs flash on.

    These very people have defined the difference between politics and hate speech, so take them at their word. Attack people with names – fine. Race and sex – kick them out. I’m sick of listening to it; we all are.

    I’m not even judging these people by my standards, although I find their comments rancid; I believe in live and let live. Were I allowed to answer back and challenge their ideas I’d be fine with that. But what happens is I’m already a racist, misogynist, homophobe and become even more so by answering Bourke, Scalzi or Anita Sarkeesian and we’re deleted and banned. We musn’t talk heresy we are human beings. Tor needs to figure out whether they are the public arena they pretend to be or a gender studies shit hole like WisCon. More importantly, they have to figure out whether straight white men are human.

  690. I agree Calbeck. Guilt by shared ideology is one thing, association another. It is not rocket science to figure out what communists or Muslims or Catholics are. It is not rocket science to figure out what intersectional feminists are, especially when they call themselves that and use the language and ideas that are as specific to them as the Stations of the Cross and Last Supper are to Catholics, Marx and the proletariat to communists and hadiths and sharia to Muslims.

    When you’re talking about an ideology where its centerpiece is one where human beings are singled out as men, heterosexuals and whites and talked about in groups of millions in a way that is negative 100% of the time, that is not rocket science either. “Male gaze,” “patriarchy,” “rape culture” and “white privilege” is not normal American speech. That is dehumanization theory concocted by a bunch of fringe lunatics 50 years ago and mainstreamed to morons today as “social justice.”

    You often hear this cult say anyone who uses the terms “SJW,” “political correctness” or the sarcastic rebuttal of “misandry” is dismissed. Fine. None of that is group defamation; they are legitimate political critiques of ideas and a real ideology, not vast millions of people. “White privilege” is not a legitimate political critique. It is an Orwellian idea that white people are too stupid to understand how they act as white supremacists. When I have actual “politics” that involve white supremacy, I’ll let you know. Until that time you will not enroll me by race in any fake “political” suits you’ve laid out for me and which fit like straightjackets of circular illogic. All whites do not speak a shared and bizarre political lingo like intersectionalists themselves do. It’s a moronic idea created by a cult of morons and man-hating racists.

  691. When someone can’t shut up about gender theory in genres like SFF, murder mysteries or westerns, that’s just a bizarre and unhealthy obsession. When you add in the hatred for the very people who created those things, it verges over into insanity.

  692. Man, I knew Kurt Busiek was a liberal, but he’s a nasty, vicious liberal.

    It’s gonna be a LONG time before I can reread Astro City.

  693. I’m leery of lighting up people as liberals. We’ve had political movements as long as we’ve had a nation. I can respect dissent and talk about it. But “white privilege” and “compulsory heterosexuality” is not classic liberalism. Same with the term “SJW.” If someone’s not talking smack about whites and men then they’re not an SJW. At least that’s my definition. Liberals don’t hate people for waking up, and the idea Vance or Bradbury were conservative rednecks is laughable. They were dreamy eccentrics, not Ma and Pa Kettle. Even Burroughs was a weird oddball. You can’t write his stuff and not be. We have another problem, Houston. I wouldn’t confuse shitty or naive personalities on either extreme with the actual ideology. But when shitty is baked into the ideology, and may include half of all people on Earth, that’s something else.

  694. “https://jeffro.wordpress.com/2015/06/14/do-not-refer-to-yourself-as-a-person-to-whom-honor-is-important-again/

    Did they link to this?”

    Wow, I’d seen Mamatas’ name show up every so often in relation to the Hugo business, but I didn’t know he was that much of a crapweasel.

  695. “Mark says:
    June 14, 2015 at 12:29 pm
    @Christopher M. Chupik

    What, apart from all the Peter Grant articles that have been linked in the last week, you mean?

    http://file770.com/?tag=peter-grant

    None of those are the ones with the Tor insider.

  696. “Mary Robinette Kowal ‏@MaryRobinette 9h9 hours ago @RizziWorld How about this. If they fire Irene, I will return the advances on my next two books and pull them.”

    Some months ago I went through the best-selling SFF (not authors, books) at Tor. I don’t remember exactly but Orson Scott Card had something like 6 or more of the top 20 spots. Kowal finally showed up around 260.

  697. ““Mary Robinette Kowal ‏@MaryRobinette 9h9 hours ago @RizziWorld How about this. If they fire Irene, I will return the advances on my next two books and pull them.””

    Oooooo…. does she promise? Really? 😀 If she promises to quit Writing Excuses, I’ll carry a sign outside the Flatiron Building!

  698. If Mary returns her advances for her next two books, that means Teresa can get a -Venti- latte tomorrow!

    Score!

  699. I’m going to take a swing at writing a mirror-image of Gallo’s original post:

    “Who are the Anti-Puppies?”
    “There are two extreme SJW to Neo-Stalinist groups, called the Puppy Kickers and the CHORFs, respectively, that are calling for the ethnic cleansing of all cis straight white male voices from science fiction and fantasy. They are unrepentantly racist, misandrist and pedophiles. A noisy few but they’ve been able to gather some anti-GG folks around them because they didn’t get their usual slate of bad to reprehensible works on the Hugo ballot.”

    So imagine a Creative Editor at Baen tweeting that. Think anybody would be calling for his/her resignation?

    I also love how Moshe Feder decided to mansplain Gallo’s comments. The poor dear girl just didn’t mean what she said. Can he be more condescending towards a female colleague?

  700. Been a while since we heard from The Guardian’s Village Idiot:

    “Damien Walter ‏@damiengwalter · 12h12 hours ago
    Same is true of all the Sad Puppies. Crap writers who’ve formed a confederacy of dunces to get their crap writing noticed.”

    At least Puppies HAVE writing. How’s that novel coming, Damo?

  701. I’ve heard very few people calling for Gallo to get fired. A statement that elsewhere she *would* be fired, isn’t a call for her firing, but a statement to compare corporate policies. People wanted a better apology, but that’s a nit. I’m sure that people would like reassurance that an author doesn’t have to hide their politics or opinions if there is a chance she’s got any authority over the cover of their book. Some statement from her about *that* would also be welcome. Even if it’s just that her job is to do the best for the novel and she’s dedicated to doing the best on every book, always.

    But is someone demanding she be fired that I missed?

  702. But is someone demanding she be fired that I missed?

    2 that I’ve seen recently:

    Vox Day (Vox Populi), in “The outrage is not manufactured” – June 14

    Peter Grant (Bayou Renaissance Man), in An appeal for help to all my readers – June 14

  703. Yes, there are a lot of people calling for her to be fired. There are even a few recognizable names from the ‘SP side’ who seem to be calling for it. Most of the calls are the noise you expect on the Internet. A few are much more focused and explain why she cannot do her job if this is her stance.

    Many more are expressing amazement that she hasn’t been fired, which is being interpreted by many as demanding that she be fired.

  704. Peter Grant explicitly says he is not calling for Gallo’s resignation or firing: “Vox is also asking his readers to request the resignation or dismissal of ‘guilty parties’, but I’m not going to go that far.”

    Tsk. Lies are one thing. Easily checked and disproved lies are arguably worse.

  705.      I have to confess. I haven’t been keeping up with new SF for a few years. The last “new” writers I discovered were William C. Dietz and S.L. Viehl. But I read the article on the Sad Puppies in National Review. Now I’m interested. So far I’ve just checked the local neighborhood branch of the public library. They have two books by Wright, none by anybody else mentioned in NR. I have to check the online card catalog and their main branch downtown. My next stop will be the used bookstores. My last stop would be Barnes and Noble.     By the way, I like Vernor Vinge too. I LOVED “Marooned in Real Time” when it was serializedvin Analog many years ago.

  706. “A few are much more focused and explain why she cannot do her job if this is her stance.”

    I’ve explained why she can’t do her job if that’s her stance. I don’t think she should be fired. I think she should explain how she’s able to do the same level of professional work for people she clearly hates and proclaim and affirm her desire to do so. EVEN if what she says is… “I deliberately avoid finding out about the author and address each book as a book when it comes across my desk.”

Comments are closed.