Incredibly Interesting Authors 001: Dilbert creator Scott Adams


I read Scott in the hope of rising from douchebag to loveable douchebag.

I saw this Woody Allen documentary the other day where he explained what a douchebag actually is. They used to have these rubber contraptions that you would hang off the shower rail. The great thing about it was that he obviously had no idea that it had become a slang term.


Ahhhh Scott Adams world class Asshat,

This Pharyngula link has some greatest hits attached.


Dilbert creator outed for using sock puppets on Metafilter and Reddit to talk himself up


Not only is Scott Adams not interesting to me because he believes in the whole “men don’t have rights because women took them all” myth, but also because he’s just not that funny.
I don’t think I’ve actually laughed at a Dilbert strip in the last 10 years…


Ya, he is a gem alright:

The reality is that women are treated differently by society for exactly the same reason that children and the mentally handicapped are treated differently. It’s just easier this way for everyone … I realize I might take some heat for lumping women, children and the mentally handicapped in the same group. So I want to be perfectly clear. I’m not saying women are similar to either group. I’m saying that a man’s best strategy for dealing with each group is disturbingly similar.


Boingboing, and Mark, you’ve disappointed me. Supporting someone who is both anti-science and anti-woman is not a great move.


Yeah, they were marketed to women as a solution for "not feeling fresh down there’ ", even though that area’s generally pretty self-cleaning and douching can actually make a smell problem worse via throwing off the pH and letting stuff grow.

fittingly enough, this means BOTH kinds of douche are things which tend to create the problems they claim to solve.

Here’s a link with other links therein that explains some of the um, issues with Scott Adams: Dilbert Creator’s Misogynist Rants

1 Like

Incredibly interesting =/= morally upstanding

1 Like

Say what you will about Scott Adams, but he is one of the most expert trolls I’ve ever known. World class, even.

I don’t agree with some of the things he says, but I cannot deny the expert way that he honks everyone’s nose as he does it.

As good as Richard Dawkins?

Nah - Dawkins is like on a whole different plane of existence.

You make it sound like that’s an admirable thing. Every online community I’ve ever been to shuns, loathes, and discourages people behaving that way.


That is true, but it is different when the person in question is independently famous.

It’s not so great when you’re the one being compared to children.

1 Like

He wrote a book with a chapter in the back about “Affirmations”. You write down something you want, like “I will become a nationally syndicated cartoonist”, on a piece of paper, and the universe reads the piece of paper and makes it come true for you.

It worked for him, see, so that proves it.

Hence the other nonsense doesn’t surprise me.

1 Like

Huh - IIA sounds like an interesting series even if author #1 is a bust. Problem is I can’t find it using Beyond Pod. I can find all the other BB podcasts though, maybe they haven’t updated their list yet.

Anyone else have a recomended podcast app for android? Beyond Pod works decently but isn’t the cat’s pajamas.

This sort of reminds me of the way people physically attack soap opera stars for things their characters did in the show. You guys know that authors require readers, right, and they sometimes say things to get readers? So they won’t starve? I don’t know that that’s the case here, but given that one of the complaints is that every time he tells certain stories he tells them differently, it sure seems like maybe some folks are having trouble with the concept of fiction.

Scott Adams has replied personally to every email I have ever sent him, and his replies have always been as polite and thoughtful as my emails required. (This is something I can also say of Cory Doctorow, incidentally.)

I’m thinking I’ll continue to judge him based on my own pleasant interactions with the man, rather than by the interpretations others have put on the writings of a comic whose speciality is provocative fiction and black humour.

The people who have criticized Scott Adams in this thread aren’t attacking him for things that Dogbert said in the context of a fictitious comic strip. They’re criticizing Scott Adams for opinions he has publicly espoused in his own name.

Agree with him if you want, but when an author makes inflammatory comments in an editorial or an apparently non-satirical blog post he doesn’t get to dodge criticism just because he also writes fiction.

1 Like