OT, but that reminded me of this:
2 Likes
Heinlein could write relatively androgynous characters, and he could write relatively distinctly-feminine-but-also-distinctly-sexualized characters. On the whole I prefer the former.
2 Likes
It all reminds me of http://lesswrong.com/lw/2pv/intellectual_hipsters_and_metacontrarianism/
People who do not want to be perceived as unenlightened but define themselves by being âthe third optionâ that apes the unenlightened view in all but rhetoric.
If they win their coveted awards the victory will be short-lived: winning an award might boost sales in the short term, but people are still reading âThe Martian Chroniclesâ 60 years later. Good writing wins out.
Or to quote Chuck D âWho gives a fuck about a goddamned Grammy?!â
Imagine if the puppies were allowed to own the entire process, they could nominate all their favorites every year, and win every year . . . and they would be the only ones who cared. The Hugos would be about as important to people who love good sci-fi as The Grammys are to people who love good music: meaningless.
5 Likes
You know, it takes very little to find out that Vox Day is against womanâs suffrage. For instance, it took me about three seconds of searching to find this putrescence from last autumn, which I am sure is within your skills to confirm without my dignifying it with a link:
There are very solid rational, Constitutional, and historical reasons for denying female suffrage.... Free men are accustomed to voluntarily limiting the use of their power and not pushing it to the full extent of its capabilities. Women, to say the least, are not. Just as an angry woman does not pull her punches, women in politics do not restrain their instincts to attempt to control the uncontrollable... This is why a nation that wishes to remain wealthy and free does not permit female involvement in its governance, and why totalitarians from the Italian Fascists to the Soviet Bolsheviks have historically made a priority of female involvement in the political process.
And there is much, much more in the same vein, which I will not bother wallowing through or shoveling over here. Yet here you are, not just declaring this man as a supporter of women voting, but actually questioning whether it is right to portray this sort of hatred as misogyny.
Well, then, here is the answer to this:
I understand the only thing this community requires is that you follow the posted guidelines. But if youâre questioning other people without having the slightest idea what youâre talking about, or as seems more likely being actively dishonest, you are going to find other people are not going to be gentle in taking you to task for that.
Particularly when itâs in the service of this kind of cause. I think itâs fair to say most people here care far more about being welcoming to women and minorities than to people who are bigots against them, and that extends to people who are disingenuous in their defense.
14 Likes
I canât believe there are over 100 posts of people responding to obvious puppies trolls moving goal posts and making transparently false assertions about their special authors and the nature of the Hugos the last few decades. Talk about a complete waste of time and energy.
Ignore these idiots and theyâll go away to never post again until Cory or Xeni dare say something âlibrulâ about fiction.
1 Like
As a thread elsewhere on the site has it, âKeep ignoring the trolls, they say, and it keeps not workingâ. Thereâs some value in the strategy of ignoring isolated instances of obvious trolling, perhaps, but when thereâs a surge of them, you pretty much have to respond, else theyâll take over and force out any dissenting voices. As anyone who remembers Usenet can attest.
10 Likes
âIgnore shitty bulliesâ sure works in every real life scenario, doesnât it?
Itâs a kind of crude liberal-bait is all.
Yes, that seems to describe me - responding to trolls, that is.
However, I will point out that the responses are not cut-n-paste jobs, but thinking responses (or roughly at least half of them are). So, if nothing else this is a good crucible for thought.
2 Likes
2 Likes
Iâm not a troll, Iâm not a backer of SP3, and Iâm not here to white knight for Larry Correia.
LC is more than capable of defending himself. Too bad everybody seems set on attacking the strawman Larrys put up by the anti-Sad-Puppy contingent rather than judging the man by his own words.
Too bad youâre responding to me, instead of whomever you meant your screed for.
Are you ever going to get around to answering the questions posed to you, or are you going to keep deflecting by talking to different people? Feel free to keep telling the lie that you are engaging in good-faith debate - eventually with repetition maybe it will stick. You say something is a fact - it is your responsibility to back it up with research, not anybody elseâs. Unsubstantiated claims are not worth the pixels they are printed on.
Itâs not impossible for us to scroll up in the threads, you know. Your responses, unlike the supposed biases in Hugo nominations, are well-documented.
4 Likes
I agree deleted.
Can you not? Thanks.
http://www.illdoctrine.com/2012/06/why_you_should_feed_the_trolls.html
2 Likes
I just wasnât sure what is was in reference toâŚ
Nope. As someone who grew up in a very small town and who was bullied, ignoring bullies does not generally work.
4 Likes
