Previous Entry Share Next Entry
OK, sometimes 'they're both from the same country, they must be the same person' *is* valid
I think this has reached the point where nothing new on any side is going to get said and I would like to reclaim 'recent comments' for other subjects so I will be freezing this when I get home tonight

This might affect the author's rebranding except as far as I can tell editors already knew and didn't care.

Does anyone remember what, if any, repercussions there were from Blish revealing himself to be noted critical gadfly William Aethling, Jr.?

I have no idea what Nick means by shenanigans but this bit?
Unfortunately it means no Hugos or Campbells for her.

The odds of her winning a Not a Hugo Campbell Award were always slim because authors get exactly two rolls of the dice for that one but there's the other Not a Hugo Campbell for the novel John W. Campbell would have been least likely to buy while alive and I can assure you if Campbell ever bought a story from a woman from Asia, I am completely unaware of it.

The Hugo, who knows? There was a lot of cane-shaking at Rowling for sullying the grand traditions of our genre with books the general public actually wanted to read and yet she got a rocket.

[A note: due to problems with spam, I have to personally unscreen all anonymous comments and since it is Thanksgiving I cannot promise to be superdiligent about doing that for the next couple of days]

Also posted at Dreamwidth, where there are comment count unavailable comment(s); comment here or there.

  • 1
No, it wouldn't. Calling for that sort of thing is a nuclear option, in my opinion, but by no means always unjustified. I think it's a damn sight more justified when you're trying to ruin the career of a white dude who can walk out the door and get another job tomorrow (viz Pax Dickinson, for a non-fandom example) than when it's the career of a woman of color. Structural oppression is a thing, yo, even when you've been wronged personally by someone.

I don't fucking know what the answer is. I do, however, know that people don't seem to want to ask the questions. And while that's entirely reasonable in the case of victims, folks who've never been hurt by RH are among those baying the loudest for her blood.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

Wait, so, you think that reporting a rape threat is a 'nuclear option'?

I'm befuddled. That's the kind of rhetoric I hear from MRAs.

I do not mean this in a trolling way. I mean it literally. I expect MRA types to say "you should be absolutely sure what's going on in every factor and that nothing hinky was invovled because a mention of rape is a nuclear option.'"

And the expectation there, rhetorically, is to scare you out of honest reporting lest you ~ruin a life~. I will be honest: it was what prevented me from reporting my own assault as an adolescent.

I am absolutely astonished to hear it deployed in a progressive space with a veneer of progressive rhetoric. "You might ruin her life! Sure she threatened to violate someone but are you sure you want to wreck her life? She's so talented and has so much to offer?" Swap 'she' with 'he' and it's word for word.

That is, frankly, frightening. I hope you think about whether you meant it.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

agreed agn !

the attitude that we shld judge 'our own" for x value of community LESS harshly than those bad ppl over there

is what is DESTROYING coms right & left

BUT DAWKINS/HARRIS/RANDI/WHOEVER IS AN ALLY ! ! theyre not RLY sexist not like those patriarchal religious dudes

& the attitude that women shldnt call other women out for behaving badly is just as bad as the scienceblogger stuffs


sauce for the goose , sauce for the goose !

its like the scenes in movies where the bad guy after gloating has the tables turned - then begs for mercy from the former victims ! !

(we know how that goes - what happens if the good guys spare the villain in the movies ??)
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

Different Anon, from earlier.

I'm gonna be straight with you: only in the bizarro world of SFF fandom would publicly tweeting acid-throwing, dog piss jokes, and dog rape comments to colleagues NOT get your ass fired.

And, since you think only victims can talk about this... Again in the normal world, anyone who witnesses that kind of online comment can call a company and say, "I saw your employee Y use a Death Threat!" and boom, fired. That is how it normally works. You, uh, do know that--right? Because WF does. It's why she enjoys the shock-jock approach.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

The answer is this: Stop defending your friend in public like this. If you want to support her privately fine, but in public the only thing that we can go on is what is public, and what is public is that RH has unequivocally been nasty to a large number of people, for a length of time, and that she is now deleting the evidence of this fact in the face of being outed in the professional sphere.

There is no way that you can change anyone's opinion unless an actual record of RH being wronged is provided. You need to accept the fact that the concept of privilege and oppression is not so pat that simply having a particular identity gives one leeway to hurt people and then be immediately forgiven. You need to accept that this may not play out in RH's favor, and that RH's behavior is the reason for this, not her race, not her gender.

You sound like you want to be a good friend. I get that. I've had to examine my own loyalties in the face of poor behavior on the part of friends, and it has not been pleasant. When you know someone close to you has done wrong, you have to accept it, and realize that trying to protect them from people who are rightfully angry will never go well. The best you can do is be sympathetic and give private support. But you do not step in and try to minimize the damage.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

The people baying loudest for RH's blood are not the people who are "rightfully angry". Frankly, if they were I'd be reconsidering my position a lot more. But Ms. Williams is the one sending nasty letters to editors, Ms. Sullivan is egging her on and also attacking friends of hers, and in general the people who are being terrible in public (not on this thread) are people with NO DOG IN THE FIGHT. That's the part i'm fucking tired of.

But. Honestly I shouldn't have stepped in, not because Bee doesn't deserve to be defended, but because by defending her i've inadvertently suggested that any of this should actually matter to the wider world beyond the people directly involved. It looks like this is not going to ruin her career (fortunately, since her writing is worth ten of Ms. Williams' or Ms. Sullivan's.) No one is going to change anyone's mind in a situation like this; sometimes those damn windmills are just too inviting.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

It looks like this is not going to ruin her career (fortunately, since her writing is worth ten of Ms. Williams' or Ms. Sullivan's.)

As someone she threatened with actual violence, this is a really sad thing to see. "I'm so glad that her misdeeds that hurt people aren't going to have any real repercussions, because she's a really good writer, and that's enough to make for abuse, threat, and fear in other POC."

This is why I don't trust SFF fandom.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

Who's being terrible in public? From what I can gather all of it is vagueblogging and she said/she said.

Stan all you want, but if there are no details, the one who seems delusional will continue to be you.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

It looks like this is not going to ruin Harlan Ellison's career (fortunately, since his writing is worth ten of Ms. Willis')
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

You think Liz Williams doesn't have a right to be angry because she has no dog in this fight? Well how about this. Your bestest pal Requires Hate psychologically abused and victimised Liz Williams's best friend so severely that she attempted suicide. I think that gives Liz Williams the right to be angry, don't you?

Now perhaps you'd like to try and trollpologise for that.

(a different anon)
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)

I didn't know that, but that being the case, it seems to me that Williams has at least as much right to be angry and act against RH due to her friendship as Alienne has to defend RH based on her friendship.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)

(no subject) (Anonymous) Expand
(no subject) (Anonymous) Expand
So could you explain why it's OK for RH to send nasty letters to editors about why writers like Williams and Sullivan shouldn't be published, but not for the targets of such attacks to put their own side of the story?

(This situation, as some of the comments below make clear, is far messier and more complicated than you imagine. You have a very naive and one-sided view of events, and are doing yourself no favours by repeatedly putting that view forward in the face of overwhelming evidence that RH has been behaving in a grotesquely abusive manner.)
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

Yes, this.

I get that it pains you that your friend, who you think means well, who you think wants to be better than this, has a history of perpetuating racialized, sexualized, violent language and threats against people who are not "up" from her but are "across" or "down" as you would put it. That she's threatening and insulting against people who you think of as not necessarily deserving it, as not "punching up," and that upsets you. (As a side note: would it be forgivable/understandable to you if she was threatening rape "up"? If so, what if she was perpetrating rape "up"? Where is the line?)

But functionally, you're doing exactly what a lot of POC advocates say not to do: you are working out your issues in public, right in the messy middle of actual POC who are being hurt. It's not dissimilar to an American white guy vocally sorting out his ideas about "reverse racism" in an arena with American black people in it. I think that's hard for you to see, because you're seeing yourself as championing Winterfox, who is not white, nor male, nor straight.

But Winterfox has used racialized, sexualized, violent language against people, people who are pushing back. And you're going "wait, wait, your pushing back against being sexually threatened makes me feel bad, because she's my friend and this is super awkward, so stop it while I sort this out." Which is frankly wrong. It's wrong to put your feelings about your friend's threats over the feelings of the actual queer POC women actually being threatened. This is not my space to tell you to shut up, so I won't do that, although I will request that you stop putting your feeligns above the feelings of the victims. When you say "but she's a really nice person," can you hear what you're saying? When you say "she won't tell you herself but I know she feels bad," can you hear what that sounds like?

You've said that her sexual threats aren't so bad because she has it a lot worse than white men who make similar threats, and I should be nicer because I'd be nicer if she was a white man.

I'm saying that you're treating me like a white man's abused girlfriend. You're saying "it's okay if you don't want to get back together with her, but she's a really nice person, do you really want to ruin her future? She's such a good person really on the inside when she's not mad, when she's not hurt, when she's not lashing out from justified anger she's such a good and smart and creative person, don't you see how good she is on the inside? When nobody is making her mad? Look past your short-sightedness and your black eyes, see how much it hurts her that she had to hit you. See how much good she can do if you just won't get in her way."

Can you hear yourself?

Do you hear how you're parroting the worst abusive lines?

(Do I have to say it again? That I am a queer, female, Asian woman? That she is not fucking "punching up" when she hurts me? I probably do; you continue to say that most of her victims are not POC, based on what evidence I don't know. So here it is again: we are here, we are real.)

I don't think that a good world will come about by letting everyone drop to the lowest common denominator. Plenty of cis white men are abusive and say those lines. The solution is not to let everyone else say those lines too.

Stop. Think about it. Ask yourself why your friend who feels so bad and is hurting so much is blaming others but is not apologizing to anyone she hurt. Ask whether she's apologized to me. Ask why you think it's fair that she gets no consequences for upending my life, but that even hinting at her issues is an unfair "nuclear option." Ask whether you're cloaking simple friendship and loyalty in the garb of justice. Ask why you assume that the people who are angry at her are not her victims.

Ask what you have invested here. And why. And whether it's what you want to have invested.

That's probably all I'll say here, so I sign off:

Video Games Anon (or: Yes, The Dog One)
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

Co-signed. Thank you for saying it.

And just for the record (to balance out all these privileged white people baying for RH's blood): I am a queer brown woman. I do not want RH's blood. But I want accountability. I want justice for RH's victims. I want to see the community demonstrate that it actually cares for the people RH has hurt.

I'll wait.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

Very well said.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

  • 1

Log in

No account? Create an account