I want to be evil too

In case you’ve been living under a rock for the last week, our very own Kate stirred up more than a tempest in a B-cup with her post last Thursday. The glitter has been flying and outrage has been levelled. She and Sarah have been called two of the most evil persons ever, beating out – I guess – Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot and Stalin. At least one woman – and I use that term loosely – has voice the wish that she could resign from her gender because of them. Golly, I had no idea two of my best friends were such evil, horrid persons.

Okay, now that I’ve finished laughing hysterically. . . .

It started with a fellow – note, I don’t say gentleman because he didn’t prove himself to be one – by the name of John Wesley Hardin. Yes, that JAH. He of the drive-by troll fame. He came swooping down on MGC after seeing a link to it on Facebook and left a comment that had nothing to do with the post. When he was called on it by several of us, he went running back to Facebook and made fun of Kate, including noting that she wasn’t a “pro” writer. His reasoning for this? Her bio lists that she work in QA. So that must mean that she isn’t a “real” writer.

Now, several of us responded to this on MGC and he tried to weasel around it and said weaseling once again had nothing to do with what he originally said or with the original comment. He was a troll. Worse, he was a SFWA-loving, glittery hoo-haa worshipping troll. Why? Because he came in with an agenda of leaving a snarky message and then going back to gloat about how he showed us.

Then came the GHHers. Except they didn’t have the balls to actually come to MGC to take on Kate or any of the rest of us. Oh, no. They took to their blogs and Facebook and Twitter. Now, we are nice folks. We’re even welcoming folks. We have no problem with opinions that differ from ours at MGC – as long as you discuss and don’t come in and name-call or leave one line diatribes and then flee. DISCUSS is the key here. Frankly, we have better things to do with our time than worry about what the GHHers and the apologists who side with them (men who think they need to apologize for having a penis and, gasp, testosterone) think. We smile when they accuse us of being disgruntled right wing writers (especially since I am probably the most conservative of the group and I’m anything but on most issues.)

But there are times when we just have to respond. This is one of those because another author, Cora Buhlert – I won’t insult her by saying she is a female author since I don’t know if she is a cis-female, a gay female, a pink-purple polka dot female or what – has taken it upon herself to try to castigate Kate for what she wrote.

I won’t go into the misrepresentation Buhlert has of why Vox got kicked out of SFWA. Nor will I talk – yet – about the double standard SFWA has been employing of late as evidenced by what happened with Vox. I won’t even go into the fact that I don’t always agree with what Vox says, much less with the way he says it. However, I will defend his right to say whatever he wants because, whether the politically correct crowd likes it or not, this is a free country and we do have a right to free speech within certain limits set forth by the courts.

However, let’s look at some of the rest of what she has to say.

“Next, her post is brimming with sexist language about “glittery hoo-haas” (“hoo-haa” is apparently a weird euphemism for “vagina” used to people who can’t bear to use the proper term, because they feel it’s a dirty word) and “storm in a B-cup”, while completely forgetting that many of those who criticised the petition are cisgender men and therefore not in possession of a vagina, glittery or otherwise.”

Okay, now everyone quit laughing. This is serious.

To start, I have serious concerns about Buhlert’s research skills if she can’t find out what a glittery hoo-haa is. A simple Google search brings up numerous links to sites using it, including the Urban Dictionary and the site where Kate first saw it. As for Kate not being able to bear to use the term “vagina” because she feels it’s a dirty word? Pardon me while I laugh again. (You know, I haven’t laughed this hard in a long time. Maybe I ought to thank Buhlert for being such good comic relief.) Kate’s Australian. She can swear with such vigor, fervor and inventiveness that a sailor would go to confession just because he heard her.

I guess that using alternatives to vagina and commenting on a bra size is sexist. At least according to Buhlert. So, does that mean she is going after every romance novel that uses every slang reference for a vagina, anus and penis because those are sexist? Or does her outrage only flow – oops, maybe I shouldn’t use that word either – to those who don’t agree with her perception of “right”?

Then we have Kate being basically accused of being insensitive because she didn’t take into account the number of cisgender men who don’t have a vagina.

Give me a break. Can this person not recognize saracasm? Yes, I’m rolling my eyes.

As if attacking Kate – which really is a foolish enterprise because Kate is more than capable of defending herself – wasn’t enough, Buhlert goes on a confusing rant about Cedar. I’m still trying to figure that one out but I think it comes down to the fact that Cedar dares identify herself as the Lady Writer (not bothering to discover that Cedar has long been known as the Lady Cedar by the ‘flies and others) and yet then identifies herself as white and – gasp – says she is gender and race blind as a reader. How dare she!?!

But she’s not done there. She tries to bring in Larry Correia, including figuring he’s still “too busy campaigning for Hugo nominations and getting his knickers in a twist about post-binary gender)” to speak up about this current kerfluffle. Then she accuses those of us here at MGC, and I assume this includes at least some of our commenters, of being Heinlein worshippers. Oh save me now! I didn’t know I was in the company of such . . . such . . . intelligent people. You see, we are bad because WE have message fiction. So how dare we bitch and moan about THEIR message fiction.

What she fails to take into account is that we don’t beat our readers over their heads with our message. We are more interested in telling a story our readers want to read. You know who I mean. The readers who want to pay money for our stories. Those who write us, demanding to know when we are going to get our next book out. That is what’s important, at least to me, as a writer.

When she finally gets to condemning Sarah, well, she proves her inability to read and comprehend in context. That’s too bad since she claims to be a writer. Or maybe it is just the politically correct blinders she has on. It certainly wouldn’t help her cause in condemning Sarah to note that the post in question was in response to a comment by the above-mentioned troll that Vox should not only have been kicked out of SFWA but out of the human race as well. The implication being that he shouldn’t be allowed to die. Sarah drew the comparison that is tantamount to saying that one group has the right to say who should live and who should die. I’m not sure where Buhlert got to Godwin’s Law.

What gets me is the double standard that has reared its ugly head in all this. No one on the other side gets upset when one of their own calls someone with a differing opinion names or suggests they should be hurt or killed. They don’t get upset when their own mock and make fun of those who aren’t of the “enlightened” set. But God forbid that the tables are turned and they get called on their BS or made fun of. Then they get full of righteous indignation.

Someone can’t disagree with them without them wanting to resign from their gender. We don’t lack empathy because we don’t fall in line with how they think. Funny, where is their empathy for us? I’m not asking them to sit down and have a drink with me. I’m just wondering if they remember the adage that respect is earned. You want to earn respect then you also need to treat that person with respect. You want to educate? Fine. But educating with a two-by-four, even a figurative one, doesn’t work. It creates resentment and causes rifts. Don’t believe me, look at SFWA. If there was ever an organization about to implode if something isn’t done soon, that’s it.

Finally, if you are going to condemn someone by saying they are “an American” and therefore can’t know what Marxism, etc., is, please do your research first. Kate is an Australian. Sarah was born and raised in Portugal. She lived there during who knows how many revolutions. She was there when it was Marxist, Maoist, etc., etc., etc. Dave Freer just immigrated to Flinders Island (Tasmania) after living in South Africa. Cedar and I are the only Americans, born and bred. Oh, and I’ve spend time as a student behind the Iron Curtain and in the Soviet Union before the Berlin Wall came down and Glasnost reined.

I won’t condemn Ms. Buhlert based on where she lives, what her politics are, or anything of the like. What I will question is why she couldn’t do even the most basic research into people she was going to attack. I also wonder why she feels it necessary to pull out the Nazi card in the comments. Oh, I know. She was looking for hot buttons she could use to prove how evil we are over here.

If anyone takes offense at what I’ve said, come discuss it with me. The comments section is open. In the five years or so MGC has been around, we’ve banned a grand total of five people and at least two of those bans are the same person trying to game the system. Bannings come after warnings and only when the commenter either refuses to address the post or comments or engages in nothing but personal attacks. So, if you want to discuss it, here I am.

Oh yeah, someone tell me how I managed not to make the list of evil folks? I can understand why they left Dave off. They’re afraid he’ll fling coconuts at them. But do they really think I’m the nice one here?



  1. Life is too short to waste following trolls back to their lairs. Well, unless you enjoy it.

    I got the impression there was some kind of stink, but I figured the troll had just gone home after his drive by and all our invective was wasted on him, since he wouldn’t be back to read it.

    1. I didn’t actually go after him. His comment came up on my FB feed since it was on a mutual “friend’s” wall. After reading it, and seeing how he was gloating, well, I had to call him on it. Then, instead of admitting he’d been wrong when he came back to MGC, he tried to be “cute” and still refused to deal with the actual issues raised in the post.

      Of course, maybe I was just hoping he’d turn into a really good troll and we could all have a rousing game of whack-a-troll 😉

  2. I’m amused by this entire bit. The other side is Oh So Sercon: our band of merry pirates is having a blast over all this.

    Oh, and BTW, I think your, Kate’s, Sarah’s, and Cedar’s hoo-haws, glittery or not, are Absorutely Mahvelous. . . . (cue Fernando in 3. . .2. . . 1. . . .)

  3. SFWA’s current problem is not that they are trying to educate with a 2X4, it is that they are trying to force obedience.

    They don’t seem to realize the termites of Indie publishing have seriously damaged their weapon.

    They don’t realize that now that Indie publishing has demolished the gatekeepers’ status, people can be _honest_. That a sizable number _always_ thought the literati were pathetic little Marxist puppets. This current batch, with their sex-and-race obsessions . . . Well, pity about the 2X4, they need it taken away and applied to their own heads. Not to enforce obedience, but to knock off their blinkers and selective noise filters.

    Actually, they need to read some real history.

    1. Ignorance is curable. Lord knows the number of things I’m ignorant of needs to be measured in scientific notation, and I’m learning there are more and more things I know nothing of everyday. It’s a good thing, in that I can keep learning no matter how long I live.

      I’m hoping time and experience will teach those on the other side of the political aisle better before history starts to rhyme to the tune of the ’30s and ’40s. The end result of ideological governance by force is tyranny, oppression, and death on a great and terrible scale. I don’t want to see that happen again in my lifetime, or any of this generations progeny in the future (however long humanity may last).

      There is a vast difference between saying as we do that “I believe you are wrong, but I will defend your right to believe as you will, so long as you don’t try to force that belief on anyone else,” and when they say “You are wrong, and we will punish you however we can until you toe the line.” I’d much rather work with (or for) and organization that doesn’t care about my beliefs, rather than one who cares very much about them and most especially For My Own Good.

      Some, like the German woman linked, think we’re “scary,” as if we’re dangerously unhinged and liable to go off at any moment like a grenade with a bad fuse. I don’t find that to be the case. Most of the talk about revolution and treason is worrisome to us, too. We don’t want that.

      But when it comes to existential threats, we’re not the passive type, a great many of us. We watch what progressives do, and worry. When we hear “gun control” some wonder when that will lead to calls of registration (happening in some places), disarmament, which then leads to vulnerability. When rights are infringed, eroded, and outright trampled upon it does nothing to ease the anxiety. When the Constitution is ignored (that tattered, outmoded scroll of at best well-intentioned old white males that has protected our freedoms for over two hundred years), we wonder, what will they do to us next?

      Most of us just want to live our lives, raise our kids, do our jobs, and read good books. Hardly revolutionary. Leave us alone to do these things, and we’ll be happy to let the other side spend its own money on gender awareness studies. We’ll stand beside anyone who upholds the law and against folks like that fool who shot up an SUV because he thought their music was too loud (I still don’t believe there was any shotgun).

      It’s never worked out well when one part of a population gets into power, and (ab)uses that power to punish the other side. Especially when it’s “for their own good.” Or “for the children.” Or “for the minorities.” I’ll decide what’s best for me and mine, thanks. Without harming another soul. I just wish I could trust the other folks to do the same.

      1. ‘we’ (a very disparate group, equivalent to the Ancient ‘barbarians’ = which for your German woman = anyone who is not an ideologically pure part of my in-group, with a vagina – I think she means vulva, but both usually go together) _HAVE_ to be labelled as dangerous, and therefore scary. The alternative is to admit that 1)no persecution is called for 2)rational debate (which let’s face it, they don’t have much chance of winning) have to would be what one did instead of flinging insults

        1. Like another friend and author..I find the fact the wee german lass forgot Tom Kratman in her diatribe.

          1. Well, from what the Colonel has said elsewhere, she sort of kind of likes him because he was polite when she commented on his blog where everyone else was mean and evil to her. My question is, if she is this much of a lib and GHHer, why is she following blogs like Larry’s and According to Hoyt and the Colonel’s and even this one?

            1. Perhaps she has doubts about her stated position. She has just not allowed herself to think them through. Possibly because her circles back home might then start to shun her and she does not want to risk that.

              1. Or, more likely, she realizes the Colonel would demolish her with logic and reasoning she can’t hope to imitate, much less surpass.

        2. Yep. And since they can neither discuss it rationally, much less debate it and they certainly can’t admit they might be wrong, they go for the most hot button insults they can find.

        3. End justifies the means, eh? We are dangerous and unstable, can’t be trusted with firearms, children, positions of power, a microphone at a football game, incandescent light bulbs, job/school interviews (to see beyond skin color), or our own health insurance, then. We enslave, demean, and dominate people Not Like Us. Oh yes, and we fear those we have “kept down” coming into power (or even parity), because they might do to us what we did to them. *shakes head*

          There seems to be an element of Stockholm Syndrome there. As progressivism trends towards Communism/Socialism/Marxism, those who believe those things don’t see the danger. Like college students wearing Che tee-shirts, too many don’t see the value in history. Not even the history of their elders which remains within reach. We are dangerous, but abdicating one’s responsibility to make good decisions is completely safe…

          And if we be barbarians, then it is meet that we remain so. As my good Cimmerian friend has been known to say, barbarians are more courteous than civilized men, for to do otherwise in barbarian company is to risk a split skull* (with apologies to Robert E. Howard and my friend Jimmy Peak, respectively). *chuckle*

          * Lord knows growing up I received “admonishment” for discourtesy early and often, until I learned better. I must possess an exceptionally hard head. *grin*

    2. What’s worse, Pam, is they are trying to enforce obedience based on the whines and cries of a vocal minority. Unfortunately, this minority is also the group that at least seems more active in the administration of the SFWA, probably because everyone else is too busy trying to be — gasp — writers readers want to read.

      As for not realizing what Indie has done to their relevance, SFWA is like traditional publishing there. Just as it refuses to recognize there is a problem having agents and publishers as members of a “writers” organization, they refuse to recognize that there is now more than one path to legitimate publication for writers. And then they wonder why they membership numbers are so low when you consider how many folks actually write and sell sf/f.

      Unless they keep pushing at me, this is likely one of my last, if not my last, post on them for awhile. It is clear they don’t want to discuss or debate. They want to drown us out by screaming and yelling. Any respect I might have had for the organization has disappeared when it fails to reprimand membes who call those oppose them Nazis and white supremacists and then wish them dead and yet they have no problem not only censuring but also expelling folks like Vox and others who aren’t falling into lockstep with the politically correct message of the day.

  4. As the audience may know, I identify as a liberal. That said, maybe I’m thick… but if you folks at McCain write message fiction, it’s subtle enough that it doesn’t trip my alarm for such. Of course, I grew up on Heinlein and Niven and Bradbury and Le Guin, so my tolerance may be high.
    -phil s.

    1. And therein lies the rub: is it message fiction, or is it a good story that reflects the writer’s opinions, political, societal, or otherwise?

      1. I’ve read a couple of works that either required a large suspension of disbelief (historical fiction) or assuming that the author’s economic or social ideas could work IRL. But the storytelling was so good, and the premise so unusual, that I dove in and enjoyed the books for what they were. The authors didn’t persuade me, but they earned my respect and left me wanting more of their work.

        1. I’ve read some like that as well. Usually when the message isn’t the main focus of the book but plot and characterization is. The message is there, but not screaming like a banshee at me.

    2. McCain? I’m scratching my head on that one.

      Um… I try NOT to write messages into my writing, although I’m sure some could be found if you dig. Like… I like heroes. And this is not a bad thing. Story telling, I love. I have the background to preach, training, schooling, the whole nine yards. In a church that doesn’t allow women to preach. I have absolutely no inclination to do so, and if I wrote that crap into my stories, they would be burnt before seeing the light of day. So.

        1. kilteDave is correct, it started out MGC and autocorrected, and I didn’t catch it. Stupid Android 4.2 keyboard has autocorrect which doesn’t leave you the choice of “keep it the way I typed it, you stupid machine!” — unfortunately the alternate keyboards I’m aware of all have even worse foibles.

          1. I’ve found that if I know it’s going to autocorrect the word, I can overpower it by adding a bunch of nonsense letters – so for MGC I type MGCftysmhg and then backspace to MGC after the autocorrect screams and gives up. Tedious, but it works.

    3. Phil, speaking for myself — and I think everyone else here — I try to write stories that are entertaining. I hope they are human with their own strengths and weaknesses. I don’t go into any project saying I need to press Message Button One. Maybe because I don’t like being beaten about the head and shoulders. Maybe because I grew up on Hitchcock movies and he gave me an appreciation for the subtle. That shower scene in Psycho is still one of the most intense scenes I’ve ever seen and you never really see anything. It is atmosphere and music and shadows and your imagination. That is what I want to do in my books.

  5. Amanda, you’re nicer than me…. Err, that may not be saying much. [Evil Grin]

    1. Nah. I just refuse to completely lower myself to their level. But sometimes it is hard, especially when they start insulting people I care about.

  6. I feel the need to quote from Mario, of “Glove and Boots”.

    “Trolls? I’m getting my crossbow.”

  7. I have to admit I have a tendency towards explaining too much, and perhaps that can come across as message fiction. Sometimes it is what I think, more often it is what the character thinks and I’m trying to explain (or figure out) why she thinks that. Should probably try to pay attention to that.

    And I love devil’s advocates. Especially those ones who can, and do, argue both sides, and for both sides, in the same conversation.

    1. Oh, if I EVER complete the story that I took up (yes, I’m working on it, but I’m slow), I’m sure it will be denounced by such as them for being too gender-binary, too Capitalistic, and probably too Jingoistic.

      Piss on ’em.

  8. And BTW, when it comes to The Prophet of the Author, Heinlein the Great (which way should I bow?), I always figured that he had a pretty strong tendency towards being the devil’s advocate, at least way more often than messaging what he perhaps personally believed.

      1. Well, good for me, whichever, from where I live I guess that’s pretty much the same direction anyway. 🙂

        And hey, for a special bonus, I have a rare blood type too, if not quite the same as he had, I’m AB- (I think he was AB+). So I donate, since that is the duty of us members of the Church of Heinlein, isn’t it?

  9. This is particularly amusing when you consider that the SFWA is really just a promotional tool for a group of traditional publishers. If it ever represented the views of science fiction fans as a whole, those days are long gone.

    1. I absolutely agree. If you were to ask the average sf/f fan if there was a writers’ organization for the genre, they wouldn’t have a clue. Nor would they know who won the Hugo, etc. Heck, most don’t even know who publishes the authors they like to read.

  10. Actually, you know… dead serious about the “vagina” thing here…

    WTF are feminists thinking to chose, as their embodiment of female power and purpose, the single part of us where we put tampons and a man puts his penis?

    Not our wombs, which are the center of unbelievable female power to create life itself, but our vaginas?

    1. That may have something to do with paganism. Vaginas and menstrual blood have been used in old folk magic a lot. One example I remember from reading about folk magic of my own country was a spell for cattle: in the spring, when the animals were first let out to the fields, the lady of the house was supposed to stand above a narrow gate, one leg on each side, so that they would walk beneath her spread legs, directly under her vagina because that was supposed to make them fertile and to protect them from beasts (and woe if the house was a rich one, think about doing that for an hour or two. Also hope that the damn gate was well constructed so if the critters started to crowd through it stayed stable.).

      No idea if that was actually anything like common usage ever, some of those spells were more fiction than fact. But the idea existed. May come from the idea that a woman could make a fool out of a man through the power of her sex.

      So it all, once again, gets reduced to sex. Woman is her sex more than anything else.

      1. Correct that: what is most important about _any_ person is their sex, and gender identity, and who they sleep with, and how they do it, and so on. At least one gets that impression when reading these complaints.

          1. Nope. We have only their hormones to blame. That and the social movement that teaches them not to control…

            We have two things we can blame: their hormones, the social movement that taught them not to control their hormones, and the parents who did not teach them any better…

            Damn it!

    2. Um, because invoking the Power of the Mother Goddess doesn’t work when you are also trying to argue for responsibility-free nookie along with Grrrrrrllll Power? And it lets them be “inclusive” of the trans community (both ways)? Ida Know. The last time I tried to follow their emotional discourse (since logic is a construct of the patriarchy, you know), some brain cells died and I don’t have that many left as it is.

        1. One could argue that Latin, and hence Latin derived words, are constructs of a patriarchy.

          The Roman legalization of infanticide (by exposure), and filicide (sp?), suggests that they would have made abortion legal if they had the tech.

    3. It is because feminists are misogynist.

      May I be crude?

      Vagina comes from the Latin vaginus, literally meaning sheathe. The whole ‘also means cunnus’ is an idiom or something.

      So, using vagina intrinsically suggests that the purpose is to house the matching item.

      Hetronormative values, of a sort, in other words.

  11. What gets me is the double standard that has reared its ugly head in all this. No one on the other side gets upset when one of their own calls someone with a differing opinion names or suggests they should be hurt or killed.

    In that very post she accuses us on this board of “wishing Heinlein were alive.” Um, well, yeah. I’ll admit to that. Should I be glad that he’s dead?

  12. Hell Amanda, if she read my stuff, either her head would explode or…she’d take great delight in snarking it and painting me as evil.

    1. Considering she has yet to master the art of snarking — and has absolutely not come anywhere close to the mistress of snark, our own Kate — I think her head would explode. Hmmmm, maybe you ought to link to her post and all her little friends and have them follow the links back. Yeah, I kind of like that idea.

  13. My favorite bit of Buhlert’s piece: “In this one, Cedar Sanderson, who unironically refers to herself as a “Lady Writer” as well as a race and gender-blind reader”

    How dare you be so unironic, Cedar!

    1. Christopher, I’m still trying to figure out why she was picking on Cedar, the nicest of the women on MGC. She truly is a “lady”.

      1. Maybe she’s jealous of the red hair? I know *I* am. 😀

        On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 7:31 PM, madgeniusclub wrote:

        > Amanda commented: “Christopher, I’m still trying to figure out why she > was picking on Cedar, the nicest of the women on MGC. She truly is a > “lady”.” >

      2. It’s because she identified herself as “Lady”. That’s a no-no to the GHHs, because it reinforces the patriarchy.

        Kind of like when Connie du Toit was blogging, and she referred to herself as “The Mrs.”, because it skivved them off.

        1. I was dubbed the Lady Sanderson by someone else, but the whole lady editor outrage debacle irked me to no end, so when it came up again, I decided that I would be a Lady Writer. And yes, I did it knowing that it would be an irritant. But I don’t care. I was raised to be an old-fashioned lady, and I am unrepentantly female.

        2. Wayne, I’d forgotten about that. Another example of do as we say, right or wrong, like it or not, or we will go after you for not conforming.

  14. In the Air Force we were encouraged not to (as opposed to it being a *rule* not to, in the non-rule, rule making culture of the military where the end result is identical but the order isn’t *really* an order, just a suggestion) use the term “lady” or “woman” but when it was necessary to specify to use either “male” or “female” for other service members. Not then, a woman airman or a lady airman or the ladies and gentlemen in the room, or whatever… just “male” or “female”.

    That “female” is wrong *too* is irrelevant in the end. If everyone starts to use the correct term, the term will be changed.

    Why? Because it’s a tribal identifier. It’s not the direct meaning of “woman” or “lady” but it’s the signifier for which ideological group you belong to that is at issue. There is nothing the least bit wrong with “ma’am” either. And it’s not *really* about passive aggressive power games where one wins by arbitrarily controlling the language of your enemies. Though it sure seems so. Mostly it’s just, simply, a requirement for tribal identification.

    And actually, you know… testing my loyalty by asking me to be loyal to the “vagina”, while said “vagina” is prancing about in public in a giant bright pink vulva costume… I’m sorry sister, but it’s a GIANT BRIGHT PINK VULVA COSTUME.

    Fer pities sake.

    1. YES!

      Of course, they don’t prance. They preen and strut and then fall off their six inch f*ck me heels and whine because some gentleman then stopped to help them to their feet. How dare he be so sexist as to think they might need help!

  15. Please allow me a brief purging of the soul.

    I’ve hit SFWA fatigue with all the non-scandals and self-sabotage that made up the last year or so of the SFWA. Aren’t there predatory contracts, group health insurance, and a shrinking share of the book market for a writers’ association to deal with? Actual professional issues, not this HR sinks , er, runs the company BS that’s going on. All this double-secret probation stuff is getting old, especially the attempts to impose it on people who aren’t in the SFWA.

    But I’m sure the fighting will get fiercer as the ship named SF sinks, because this BS is doing nothing besides driving people away. And, honestly, SFWA, as I break with the genre and stick to known writers I trust to deliver entertaining stories, it’s not me, it’s you.

    1. Nathan, there are. But that is part of the problem. SFWA is convinced that the sample contracts it posted back in 2009 are still valid today. It continues to put its head in the sand about what makes a professional writer. Instead it is too busy trying to be the social conscience of the genre and disrespecting anyone who has an opposing opinion. It is, in short, self-destructing.

  16. “Sarah drew the comparison that is tantamount to saying that one group has the right to say who should live and who should die. I’m not sure where Buhlert got to Godwin’s Law.”

    Ms. Buhlert appears to be taking a broader-than-literal definition of Godwin’s Law, and assuming that comparing an opponent’s arguments to the principles of Stalin and Communism (which, to be fair, Sarah did in her post) equates to comparisons with the Nazis, for purposes of dismissal and delegitimization.

    Myself I can’t say I’m entirely averse to that idea, because (a) it includes, at least tacitly, the admission that Stalin *was* as bad as Hitler (something a lot of people seem to skip over); (b) I’ve never subscribed to Godwin’s Law as a tool for argument evaluation — sometimes comparison with Naziism or Stalinism is *appropriate* and *correct*; and (c) at least Mr. JWH avoided what I would have expected as the immediate defense of pleading Internet hyperbole, what Andrew Breitbart called the “Clown nose on, clown nose off” defense when speaking of Jon Stewart — anybody who agrees gets to treat your words seriously, but anyone who challenges is told, “It’s just a joke!” and their complaints thereby delegitimized.

    Much of modern PC “argument” can be understood by seeing how frequently the tactic of “delegitimization” — the rejection of an argument not through substantive disproof but through negation of the arguer’s right to make it — is used in its conflicts, both internal and external.

    1. Only in the eyes of my fellow MGCers. Sigh. The GHH crowd has yet to come for me. Instead, they continue to attack Sarah — and Larry — calling them all sorts of things ranging from Nazis to white supremacists and more.

  17. “Oh yeah, someone tell me how I managed not to make the list of evil folks? I can understand why they left Dave off. They’re afraid he’ll fling coconuts at them. But do they really think I’m the nice one here?”

    Oh we got the group condemnation. Second class, I know, but I’m used to it from their kind. And I’m male, and beyond the pale, just by breathing. She’ll be having hissy fits about the gender breakdown stats I am working on at the moment, soon enough. I dare say I will be burned effigy (a town near Bremen, I hope, as that is her entire, sheltered little world) then.

  18. Well, maybe I can put you on one of my lists of evil people if it would make you feel better.


    Politics. If we have any political differences, I can always use hyperbole to blow them out of proportion. Even supposing we were very similar politically, I’m certain that we could sit down and find some differences.
    I don’t see that this would be worth the while. I might well rather view you as a political ally than a political enemy anyway.

    As for football, you’ve spoken well enough of my second favorite team that you cannot be entirely evil.

    Much of the remaining categories left are matters of taste, stuff I don’t care to talk about, or the famous “I’m pretty sure most, if not all, humans are some degree of evil” ones.

  19. There, there. *We* think you’re evil, and not just dark-overlord evil, but renders-little-brown-babies-into-SUV-fuel evil. And don’t you trust our opinion more than some snippy little blogger’s?

      1. I marked his first two messages as “spam” but he came back with a third. I could not find how to ban someone and, apparently–based on a search turning up some forum topics making requests–there isn’t one.

        So, at least for the time being, I have settings so that only “registered users” (including OpenID) can comment. I’ll probably set it back after a bit. Maybe he’ll get bored and go away.

  20. All of the SFWA/glittery hoha garbage has me wanting to compile a list of authors that aren’t worth my time to read.
    But how can I do that, when I’ve never actually heard of any of them, or seen any books they’ve (evidently) written?

    1. And that’s why I have to wonder if they are doing this partly because no one has heard of them and they are now trying to be relevant.

  21. Now, on to at least part of the actual topic:

    Finally, if you are going to condemn someone by saying they are “an American” and therefore can’t know what Marxism, etc., is, please do your research first.

    When I was in the Air Force, I went through a 47 week, intensive Russian Language course (8 hours a day of class, another 4-6 of homework, and no, I’m not exaggerating). The instructors in this class, 95%, were Russian ex-pats.

    We could get breaks by getting the instructors to reminisce about “Mother Russia.”

    If anything, Sarah has been excessively nice in her description of the evils of Marxism (as actually practiced).

    1. David, by the time I graduated with my BA, I was a grand total of 6 hours shy of having a double major in Russian. One of my main instructors was also an ex-pat and the tales she told could and would curl your hair. Actually being there and seeing the country, both major cities and out in the country, is something I will never forget. Nor will I forget the people there. And yes, Sarah has been exceedingly nice.

      1. I don’t have the experience either of you have. But I do have an aunt who was born and raised in Ukraine. Sweetest lady you’d ever meet, but tells stories that would curl your hair about what went on over there. Sarah could say much, much worse- but Her Evilness is too nice. *chuckle*

  22. I know this if badly OT but I really have to thank Sarah for sending me here. I’m just a reader, a SF/F consumer who hates pretty much all of the current offerings out there. I feared interesting SF/F was dead and buried save for a precious few authors. I have a much dog eared and grimy library containing such luminaries as RAH (PBUH), Niven, et al. Nothing much later than Ringo, Correia and dear Sarah. I read them over and over again because I must read and if there’s nothing better, to the archives I must go! But lo and behold I come here and find lively and intelligent discussions with much non politically correct thoughts and plain, simple language. My joy knows no bounds. Plus links to the author’s home pages and books? Sublimeitudiness to the Nth degree. I really thought Sarah was unique but now I see not so much and that makes me happier than I can express. I’m giddy with pleasure over the idea that I now have a treasure trove of new (to me) authors and their offerings to peruse. It’s looking like I’m going to have to make some room and construct a few new library shelves. Very much a goodness thing.

    I must confess here though. To paraphrase Larry I am most definitely a hateful, cismale, gender-normative fascist. One who has been married to the very same wonderful lady (see, there I go. Shameful.) for 38 years. Nope, no GHH though I’d be totally open to that If you know what I mean and I think you do. At least in theory. Is there a Grand Unified Theory of the GHH? Kids, grandkids and even a not very bright Labrador Retriever (BIRM) named Angus.

    I am also fortunate enough to have disposable income. That hardly makes me unique but it is perhaps informative that the only 3 authors I have given my money to in many years are John Ringo, Sarah Hoyt and Larry Correia. It’s not just because I agree with their views (not totally anyway) but because they refuse to preach at me. They tell interesting stories without any of those brain eating additives.

    So. To make a long comment even longer and get back to my original OT point. Thanks Sarah. You have introduced me to a whole new group of folks I am most excited to read. Something I thought was impossible. Will wonders never cease?

    1. We’re thrilled you’ve found your way to the blog, Six, and hope you hang around. I promise you will find that the one thing all of us dislike here is being told that we have to do something because it’s what all the “cool” kids do. As for me, well, I’m of the age to be considered too old to exist by most of the GHHers — in other words, old enough to have lived something of life, raised a wonderful son (my first mistake because I raised him to be independent, proud to be male, to be a gentleman in the truest sense of the word, to go to the aid of a woman needing it, and who also proudly serves in the military. Oh, I like guns and sharp pointy things too. Bad me).

  23. Larry was too busy campaigning for a Hugo? Nope. That was so last month. Today I was too busy turning in two pro rate paying short stories, collecting yet another Audie nomination (my 4th), and doing a Book Bomb for a friend that probably sold more books today that most of them will sell in their lives. Other than that, I wasn’t doing much. 😀

    1. But that is just because you are an evil white male who loves guns, Larry. Sheesh. Oh yeah, I forgot Nazi and white supremacist. Did I miss any of the other slurs they threw at your yesterday?

      BTW, is it crass for me to start the e-arc chant for MHN here? 😉

  24. Kate’s Australian? My apologies, I did not mean to pick on someone who was incapacitated.

      1. Guys, I know you would probably have liked to play whack-a-troll with Harding but I’m tired of his drive-by insults. Now, let’s see if he tries to come back or if he goes to FB to talk about how mean we were because we didn’t let him have his say. Funny, they have ho problem banning us, when we go talk about the issues on their blogs, but they get so upset when we ban them for coming and doing nothing but insulting people and never discussing the issues.

        1. No issues. We can all do without the drive-by insults.

          The thing is, if one came here with actual arguments instead of PFM-grade twitter-sized soundbite posts I doubt such a person would get the same response. *shakes head*

        2. Oh, no. Banning was appropriate with that last comment. I mean, if that guy’s so blatantly jingoistic and intolerant of other nations and cultures, he hardly has a place here among people who are just trying to love and accept people for who they are, y’know?
          I imagine he chortled as he entered the comment, whispered softly under his breath “‘Merica!” and hit the “submit” button. Then lifted a cool can of PBR to his unshaven lips, toasting his erudition and intelligence, while a thin ribbon of liquid escaped, unnoticed, to further dampen a greasy t-shirt.

          In all seriousness, someone who moves to pre-grade school sandbox attempts like the one he left us with wouldn’t be any fun to play with anyway. Guy’s worse at this than my fifteen year old daughter, and I despair of her ever living up to the family heritage of sarcastic engagement.

      2. The sad thing is that he may have been stupid enough to think “Australian” was some sort of disease/mental illness.

        On the other hand, anybody that stupid deserves banning.

        1. I dunno. Perhaps I am that stupid, but even if I am, I would think it wouldn’t matter as long I managed to be civil and follow the rules.

          To be charitable, the person may have figured that if it was all right in his or her set to use ‘Southerner’ as a racial epithet, then it would be all right to use ‘Australian’ similarly.

          I gather that Australia and the South had a common source of immigrants. That after the Revolution, the UK started transporting political prisoners and prisoners to Australia rather than to Georgia and such.

          1. Except all he has done is attack on this blog and refuse to discuss the issues raised here or on Kate’s post last week. I’m tired of being the ones who have to take the abuse because we aren’t the “cool kids”. Most of all, this is my sandbox, at least where this post is concerned, and I will not let my friends by insulted.

          2. Kinda reminds me of the only Australian joke I know:

            A British tourist visiting Australia was being interviewed by Customs, and the officer asked him if he had a criminal record, to which he replied, “Oh, I didn’t realize that was still a requirement.”

  25. Actually, having be referenced to the original GHH story, I can’t help but wonder if the definition has drifted a bit. In the original, the GHH was possessed by the romantic heroine whose HH was G enough to make the hero stop straying. That’s FAR to heteronormative for these folks.

    1. Yeah, but they do seem to think that either having a HH (or acting as if one does) is a basic requirement for stopping all the straying off to the dark side of sexual relations. _They_ act as if they’ve got the glitter of The Truth, and every other philosophy, credo, culture or *GASP* independent thinking is false, and doubly ungood not-glittering.

Comments are closed.