Yeah I got that, too. The ironic hypocrisy was not lost on me. Like I said, I’ve been around a while.
Why are you so concerned about me? Every criticism you have of me replying could be replied to you just as well.’
Never mind, I don’t think you’re an ally any longer. When I give people the benefit of the doubt… sigh.
I wasn’t concerned, btw. I was being snarky. I see right through you!
But anyway. This is just a derail. That never happens! Conversations about sexism never get derailed by dudes. Everrrrrrrr. Nope, nothing to see here.
I … okay? I don’t care about your meeting. What the fuck are you even trying to prove at this point?
The irony is that the trollies were WAY more fun than you. You’re just a bore.
1 Like
Set a troll on fire and he will be warm for life… 
3 Likes
Or he’ll just make a nice BBQ dinner. Pass the A-1 sauce, please.
Back to the topic, is there a term for the type of literature/art that imagines the future will be a return to the past?
And isn’t the process of imagining a different future essentially orthogonal to such nostalgic notions?
To me, the entire premise that there should be a genre of speculative fiction that caters to one vision of the future is essentially flawed. Seems to be more propaganda than art.
8 Likes
2gether 4EVER (in our 
):
3 Likes
What you never heard the Dianetics regrows teeth story?
See there was this magazine called Analog edited by this guy called Campbell when the Hub was first coming up with Dianetics.
And Hubbard got Campbell to publish (at least one, maybe two) Science Fact articles about the wondrous new science of the mind.
And how one of the benefits gained by the practitioners of said psychic science was the ability to grow new teeth.
When Elron first got started his church acquired a bunch of yachts, and he and his disciples started to sailing around the world.
Sadly Dianetics does not endow the gift of navigation, because wouldn’t you know it, they kept sailing into areas that where being used by foreign governments to build and test navy stuff.
In fact, the reason Dianetics was PNGed for so long in a lot of countries stems not from religious persecution, but rather their poor navigational skills.
And there was a rumor going around in the ?90’s? that the reason L.Ron Hubbard started his church was to provide a cover he could use while spying for Naval Intelligence.
Which means, if true, that a whole religion got started as an intelligence rig, a disinformation campaign run to hid covert activity.
I don’t know about you but I find that funny, maybe because it’s so far removed from ‘normal’ church beginnings, were some wild eyed desert rat stumbles into town and starts raving about his visions of god=)
And yeah, enough people have told me that I have no taste and am indecent that I don’t mind, it’s a fair cop=)
Again, the ‘it’s a conspiracy’ is a claim I’ve seen in every controversy I’m aware of. I’m not sure how to make that clearer.
And since you claim racists groups commonly misrepresent themselves, could you give me a for instance?
Regardless, the unsubstantiated claims of conspiracy break the ‘logic’ game.
An example.
Someone claims that Brad Torgensen is a white supremacist.
When someone points out that Brad is married to an African-American, which contradicts the white supremacist claim, the conspiracy gossiper will dismiss the data by claiming his ?15?16? years of marriage is a ruse.
They might even claim that his choice of spouse was deliberately made to provide him cover for his participation in the Prevent Sad Puppies campaign.
If they’re far gone into the gonzo paranoia they will even use his marriage as PROOF of his duplicity.
The point being that claiming Larry or Brad is a secret racist, based on their claims to not be racist, because conspiracy, is nuts=)
That’s fair, 100% is a non-workable standard.
As for your hater not needing to trawl through everything you’ve said before deciding to hate you, well they don’t need to.
But then again, strictly speaking, you hater doesn’t have to hate you for you claim about Sneetches, the problem is that they don’t need any reason at all.
The sad fact is that most hatred isn’t based on ‘reasons’ in the first place.
There are different degrees of racism. You’re talking about folks who actively believe that non-white people are inferior. I haven’t studied the issue extensively, but I’m willing to believe that Larry and Brad don’t think that.
But then you also have people who say “I’m not racist, and no one I know is racist, so I don’t believe racism is a problem anymore and I’m sick of hearing about it and shut up already.” These people are certainly not as bad as hardline racists, but they are (unintentionally, but through willful ignorance) contributing to racism. I agree that it’s not fair to say that these people are just as bad as open white supremacists, but it’s also not fair to say that they’re harmless innocents.
9 Likes
The Tanya Harding Award
[quote=“murph, post:259, topic:56166”]
The point being that claiming Larry or Brad is a secret racist, based on their claims to not be racist, because conspiracy, is nuts[/quote]
Well, if Beale’s own writing won’t convince you that he’s the White Devil Himself, then I’m unsurprised that you have a tough time unpacking the freight that Correia and Torgersen carry.
This seems pretty good at pointing out some of the complicity, though, and I’d not seen it linked yet.
This obsfucation, this shuffling shifting of blame, this transference of responsibility? This makes me angry. The leadership of the campaign actively made the decision to bring in Vox Day and people like him. So it is impossible to argue Vox Day is not representative; they chose him as one.
In other news, I’m writing a dystopian fanfic crossover event where Larry and Brad team up with Davis and Jordan, under the evil mastermind of Milo.
2 Likes
Fair enough, but I think Larry and/or Brad would both agree that racism is still a problem. My guess is the only point of contention would be the best way to fix things.
Example, American blacks are more likely, on a per capita basis, to be in the criminal justice system. .
I would recommend fixing the criminal justice system by repealing victimless crime statutes targeted at minorities and requiring LEO’s respect everyones civil liberties, regardless of skin color or ethnicity, because I think that would do more to address the issue, and because I don’t think the other solutions I’ve seen would fix anything.
Disagreeing with others as to the existence, cause, nature, severity, and/or solutions to any problem doesn’t equal supporting the problem.
And lumping everyone together and affixing a good or bad label on to them just makes analysis that much harder.
Which is a major reason that I would rather see ideas fight than people.
As to the ‘willful ignorance’ position, I don’t think it holds up, simply because it can be used to condemn anyone as being harmfully guilty by the crusaders for any hot button issue.
And to use it properly as a diagnostic tool would require a massive amount of knowledge, just to be sure that your understanding of the problem and your solutions are correct, and their ideas about the issue are not.
I’m not seeing how categorizing someone as guilty on some level because they disagree on the existence or severity of a problem actually changes anything, in terms of making things better.
Where is the Torgersen and Beale slash fanfic?
Worse, a guy who we should all ignore for being an odious, racist, sexist trolley AND MEDIOCRE WRITER TO BOOT.
I mean, if he somehow wrote glorious stories while being that odious, I could at least see it being worth controversy. But the thing he was nominated for by last year’s SP was just tripe.
4 Likes
In theory, that sounds like a great hate-read for a book club, but in practice it would mean giving money to a horrible person.
2 Likes
Which is not to say that it may not have causes.
1 Like
we could all join worldcon and get the awards packet…
1 Like
Zachary Jernigan wrote a hilarious mini-review of a Beale book the other day on Goodreads.
[quote]Bahahahahaaaa!
“The bright colors and the flat, unnatural perspective were typical of the artist: Mariattus, the great Nardine. Only the face of the stabbed man was facing toward the viewer. The six assassins were all in profile. It was almost as if Mariattus had intended to draw particular attention to the face.”
…almost as if…
Nothing to inspire confidence like an author who, on the opening page, draws such startlingly original (and not at all freshman-college-art-appreciation-course-level) conclusions about a painting he just made up.*
It could be worse, I guess: “In the painting, Jesus was sitting in the middle of the table and all the other dudes were looking at him, almost as if Jesus was the most important guy there.”
And yes, I did read an excerpt of this book just to find something to make fun of. Fortunately, it happened on the first page so I didn’t have to wade any further into this shit.
Why did I do this? Because I’m an asshole, I guess. Or because Vox Day’s an asshole. Take your pick.
Nah. It’s because he’s an asshole.
–
*The other clue to feel confidence in this author is his use of “face” and “facing.”
“The face that was facing the faces of the viewers was an important face, because the face was facing the faces of the viewers as opposed to facing sideways like the faces of the other face-bearing people.”[/quote]
3 Likes
Didn’t the deadline pass?
I don’t believe so. They haven’t even sent out the voter packets yet; no point in cutting off supporting registration until the voting deadline, and I’m not sure they do that at all.
There may be a limit to how late they send out the voter packet to new registrations, I don’t know, but it’s only April, plenty of time to read five novels and a bunch of short stories (especially if some of them can be abandoned early on due to lack of quality).
