Previous Entry Share Next Entry
OK, sometimes 'they're both from the same country, they must be the same person' *is* valid
james_nicoll
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
This is my first comment in this post, and I'm remaining anonymous as I've no wish to start getting more abuse from winterfox and her friends. I knew her for years on lj, for the most part avoided interacting with her as I found her bullying toxic in almost every community she joined. That was until I posted a review of a work that she disagreed with, at which point I got abused both in the comm, and on her other platforms, and had her bring it up any time I tried to participate. As a WOC I'm used to having my voice dismissed, or being told my opinion is worthless, but I hadn't expected to have it happen in a community that was supposed to be all about supporting the voices of people like me.

Your continued dismissals of her bullying, and your rather pathetic attempt to claim that anyone who criticises her must be jealous, or a shitty fanfic writer is so far off base it would be funny, if it wasn't so similar to the way abuse apologists always try to dismiss the actions of abusers. No - all of us criticising her aren't white, or privileged, no matter how hard you try to pretend we are. We aren't trying to stop some poor fledgling writer from being successful, we're outraged that an abusive bully is seeking support from the community, and that other members are expecting us to ignore or forget the way she's hurt people. Her talent, or lack there of, is completely irrelevant, this is about her behaviour, and no matter how hard you try to reframe the discussion to paint her as the victim here, she is not.

She has lied and bullied and hurt people in a consistent and obvious pattern for years. And she has deleted the evidence, you keep demanding links, but as anyone who's bothered to keep up knows, she hid most of the worst attacks, and deleted everything incriminating here on lj. From the stupid, like when she ran around claiming she wasn't cis (as she didn't bother to look up what the word meant and thought it was the same as queer) to the many times she called other WOC white-identifying, or accused them of expressing white women's tears. Any time she was called out, she deleted the offending comments and pretended they never happened. She has expressed no remorse, nor has she apologised to the many of us she hurt. Why should people keep quiet about this? You seem to think everyone should just be silent, but you have no right to expect that. And as for why many of us are remaining anonymous, you can't really be so stupid as to not understand that people are wary of commenting with their names under the circumstances. As has been said many times winterfox is a bully, and I for one have no wish for her to start in on me again, the way she has done in the past.

(reviews anon)
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

Hi Different Anon! I'm afraid I'm going to have to ask you for links!

our continued dismissals of her bullying

Link to where I did this. Prove or retract. (Hint: never happened.)

rather pathetic attempt to claim that anyone who criticises her must be jealous

Also never happened. Unless you think everyone criticizing her is an *anon* and not, say, established white women writers including Williams/Sullivan and Kiernan. So, link?

a shitty fanfic writer

Tell you what. Post some of your fanfic and we'll see.


all of us criticising her aren't white

Maybe, maybe not. But the established writers sending letters to editors are. Which is actually the main struggle, and what I was explicitly referring to.

other members are expecting us to ignore or forget the way she's hurt people

Are we once again talking about people who aren't me? Because I've in fact said:

What is the endgame here: Bees is such a venomous asshole that...? What? Nobody should publish her work, regardless of its quality? Nobody should read it? Those are actually positions I am fine with, but I'm also fine with continuing to publish her work if is what I need/want for a project (and rejecting it when it is not) and reading the stuff she publishes until it bores me and I stop (that is, either individual works or her work as a whole). I also read the work of people who literally wrote from inside prison cells too.

So what other members have done has little to do with me. I've said the opposite of what you're whining to me about. (See, this is why Links Are Important.)


no matter how hard you try to reframe the discussion to paint her as the victim here,


So, to sum up, you are cool with established white writers trying to make sure via poison pen letter and public blog posts that Bees's career is over. That's not something she is a victim of. Please tell me if I've misunderstood you.

And she has deleted the evidence, you keep demanding links

Actually, I demanded links once, regarding her RH blog, which is a. largely intact and now publicly available and b. otherwise findable via Archive.org. I even FED someone an archive.org So, why don't you show me where else I've demanded links, especially to anything regarding the Winterfox/LJ days.

What I've done is *given* links, links especially prepared by failfandom anon in a one-sided way, and then was criticized for doing that as well.

when she ran around claiming she wasn't cis

Damn her! What is English, her second language? Third? And she doesn't know a Latin term that in recent years has gotten a new life as a term of gender identity. (You've never deleted anything stupid, right?)

(Aside, you might also want to entertain the possibility that many cis queers at some later date declare for trans after exploration or whatever.)


many times she called other WOC white-identifying

That is definitely bad, but honestly shows the hard limits of identity politics. It's also hardly a unique stance for RH. It's a common plague in identity politics discourses.


You seem to think everyone should just be silent

Link to where I said this. Prove or retract.

And as for why many of us are remaining anonymous, you can't really be so stupid as to not understand that people are wary of commenting with their names under the circumstances.

Speaking of stupid, as was already addressed way before I got here, it's easy enough to just coin a pseud for this discussion. And further, if RH wanted to lay into you, she could! After all, she could also post anonymously, on James's LJ, right now! Right in reply to you! All she need do is put —RH at the bottom.

Of course, *anyone* can do that as well.

(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

The endgame, for me at least, is making sure that she reaps what she's sowed. The communities she destroyed were exactly the kinds of places that would have helped and promoted her, but her tendency to spew unfettered bile not at books in reviews, but at authors and at other reviewers in response to differences of opinion about the merits of novels – not direct racist or sexist attacks, merely simple disagreement – means that these same people have every right to know that she is now in a position where they may inadvertently support her. She doesn't just get to reinvent herself and disown all that history, because that ends with her using and profiting off people she harmed.

There has been no public proof of private bad behavior on either side of this. If you get to demand links, so do I. Please, show me the public evidence that writers are engaging in poison pen letters to destroy Bee's career. At this point, there is only rumormongering on both sides.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

Hi, thanks for the semi-rational answer. (I suspect you overestimate the influence of the communities however.) I agree with you 100%—one reason why I made my ello post was to stop a greater public display on the part of the Angry White Women who would have framed this issue quite differently; another reason was to hobble further shenanigans on the part of Bees. How much can she get away with now?

As far as public evidence, there is Tricia Sullivan's post which reads, in part " I informed my publisher of the identities of the people involved (both of them new professional writers) in strict confidence. I also informed one of the editors to whom I’d recommended them—I haven’t had a chance to speak to the other yet, but as I don’t think he’s commissioning right now it’s less of an issue." So there you go. (The two writers are Bees and her "associate.") Sullivan has contacted her publisher—who does anthologies as well as novels—and an editor, and is planning another. I know that Williams has done so as well.

If for some reason that link is insufficient, please use LJ inbox to give me an email address.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

There is a high likelihood that I overestimate the importance of those communities, although it's impossible to say because they never got the chance to develop and mature. I know that one of them was expressly formed for the purpose of discussing and promoting the writing of authors of color, and that before it collapsed it was frequently cited as one of the best things to come out of the 2009 Racefail. It was entirely populated with people, both fans and pros, who are interested in the kind of work Bee produces and are invested in talking about it with a wider audience.

And yes, I do appreciate that now that the link has been made, she is vastly less able to prey on these people. It was, however, deeply unclear that you made your post for any such reason, especially as most of your comments here appear to downplay her toxic behavior.

That is indeed evidence. I withdraw my complaint. I do note that Sullivan's post also appears to contain an accusation of similar behavior on Bee's part, although she remains vague as to whether these were professional or fan interactions. ("If a person comes to you and tells you that I have a problem with them and that I am spreading vicious rumours about them, please do me the courtesy of notifying me before you assume that I am the spreader of vicious rumours.") I would welcome further public clarification of this issue. Further, assuming Sullivan's presentation of events is correct, the people she contacted are people to whom it is logical for her to speak. If Bee has been spreading rumors, and I acknowledge the total lack of hard proof here, speaking to her publisher may equally be construed as Sullivan doing damage control for her own career. And as far as the two editors are concerned, Sullivan describes as people to whom she specifically recommended Bee. In contacting them, she was pretty clearly withdrawing her recommendation based on new information and that is her absolute right. Both of these are not by any definition the same as sending poison pen letters, and so the point remains muddled.

While I appreciate the offer of further evidence in private, I'm not entirely sure it would serve anything other than my own curiosity. I'd simply become yet another person vaguely discussing insider knowledge while most commenters here, especially most of the anonymous people describing personal histories with Bee, remain unenlightened.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

Hi, and thanks.

About the vicious rumors, my understanding is that Bees was very eager to keep her secret, and encouraged people to decry the obvious (that she was RH) as a racist claim. (See the subject of this very blog post.) So I think, and this is supposition, is that the rumor being spread was that Sullivan was being racist for telling the truth. It was foolish, stupid, and wrong of Bees to do so if this is what happened—though I admit laughing in my sleeve a bit to see people swear up and down that there was no way Bees and RH could be the same person, but when I thought it was getting dangerous, I stepped in with my ello post (though honestly, I still thought it was funny that some people got egg on their face. But better that than a kick to the head!)

Occasionally, Bees would write me distressed at the (true) rumors; I always told her to come out.

Edited at 2014-10-14 12:28 am (UTC)
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

So, just to be clear, Bees was definitely lying about the motives of people who connected her work as an author to her reviews in an effort to discredit them. Your supposition is that she did the same thing to Sullivan, who confidentially contacted her own publisher in response, which seems like a logical response to rumors that she had made racist accusations with no obvious motive, something that could have damaged her career. She also contacted two other editors to retract recommendations of Bees's work she had earlier made in response to lying and rumormongering actually perpetrated by Bees. What part of that is equivalent to sending poison pen letters?
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

Your "in response" is an assumption not in evidence. The timeline isn't perfectly clear and involves an unnamed person alluded to in Sullivan's post.

Sullivan showed RH her book about Thailand in ms form. RH had nothing good to say. There is a falling out, though it is unclear whether it is immediate. Word spreads that Bees is RH from several quality vectors, to people keen to get in on RH.

(The friend, whose ID I have but story I don't, plays a role here.)

Kiernan, who has no real connection to the other players, hints at spilling the beans to wreck Bees. So it is obvious that leaks are everythere. Then RH rallies her troops.

The poison pen letter I've seen comes from Liz Williams, who promises a shitstorm, leaving unsaid that she has been brewing the storm for more than a year. I noted Sullivan because it was already public.

Now as far as why it is bad to expose a closed pseudonym of someone who splits her time between two dictatorships, even if they deny it and cry race, well, I'll leave that to you.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

"Hi Different Anon! I'm afraid I'm going to have to ask you for links

As has been said repeatedly, she deleted everything here on lj, so no I can't provide you with links as there is nothing left to link too, due to her hiding the evidence.

So what other members have done has little to do with me.

You are supporting her, right here in this post where you're dismissing the pain and concern posted by people who have been hurt by her. When you make "there, there" comments to a person sharing a painful story about the abusive threats she received. No I'm not whining, I'm angry at the way you're repeatedly dismissing the people who are talking about this, and the way you keep coming back to the idea that this is all about "established white writers" trying to do winterfox down. That may be what this is about for you, but for some of us it's about the painful reality that abusers get excused again and again, and the concerns of their victims get ignored by people like you.

"Damn her! What is English, her second language? Third? And she doesn't know a Latin term that in recent years has gotten a new life as a term of gender identity. (You've never deleted anything stupid, right?)

Stupid, no, that's your words. But she appropriated a minority identity, and used it as an excuse for some pretty nasty trolling. She told people to stop talking if they were cis, and identity policed with it on a regular basis. You might think that identity policing, or her repeatedly bashing other WOC over what she perceived as our inner whiteness is okay, but some of us believe that that kind of behaviour crosses a line, and that she doesn't get to use her own minority as an excuse for her bullying. Have I ever posted anything stupid, sure, have I deleted things, also sure. Have I denied making those comments, and pretended they never existed, no, also when I was that wrong I apologised for it.

"Speaking of stupid, as was already addressed way before I got here, it's easy enough to just coin a pseud for this discussion.

Wow, really, I never thought of that, commenting in an open post means that people who disagree with me might respond. No shit, Sherlock. However there's a pretty major difference between someone responding to me here, or what happened to me and many others before, which was twitter posts, other blog posts, coming to my journal and blog to leave abusive comments, or attacking me in posts in comms. Thanks, but I'm not signing up for that again.

"Link to where I said this. Prove or retract."

Did you use those exact words - no. But the way you are dismissing and mocking people in this post is dismissing their concerns. You've repeatedly responded to commenters without addressing the subject of their comments, you ask for links or dismiss people commenting anonymously as though their words have no meaning without proof. You have characterised this as white pros going after a minority, a witch hunt, and as people jumping on some sort of anon bandwagon to harrass winterfox. You don't seem to have even considered the possibility that people have genuine reasons for speaking up now, that have nothing to do with the established pros you keep banging on about.

You say the main struggle is about the letters written to her editor, well that may be the most important thing to you, but it's largely irrelevant to the wider conversation. So while you did not explicitly demand people be silent you are contributing to an atmosphere of making it difficult for people to speak up. You are by your comments here making it harder for people, and you can't be so naive as to not realise that your actions will have an effect of silencing some people, as they won't want to have to deal with comments belittling their experiences.


As for the dig about fanfic, sorry to disappoint you, but that's not my thing, never written a word of it in my life so I can't link you to any. But thanks for re-enforcing my point that you think you can dismiss everyone posting comments you don't like, because you've got some weird ass assumption that we're all fanfic writers trying to tear her down for reasons that apparently only exist in your imagination.

(ra)
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

As has been said repeatedly, she deleted everything here on lj, so no I can't provide you with links as there is nothing left to link too, due to her hiding the evidence.

No, I asked you for links about things you claimed I said, not about WF. You might have noticed that my very next sentence was "Link to where I did this."

What does "Link to where I did this" mean? Does it mean "Show me links to Winterfox's LJ comments?"

Every time you claim that I said something that I did not, I am going to ask you for a link. You may not put words, or positions, into my mouth.

You are supporting her, right here in this post where you're dismissing the pain and concern posted by people who have been hurt by her.

Does this mean that you are in favor of established white women authors sabotaging the careers of fledgling WoCs (and also queer and genderqueer whites)? Is there a middle position at all, or do you simply expect to shout "I'm hurt!" and have the perpetrator (note, not alleged perpetrator—I'm assuming you're accurate about Winterfox) hustled off from writing and publishing forever?

When you make "there, there" comments to a person sharing a painful story

I did no such thing. That person wasn't sharing a painful story in that thread, and my "there, there" wasn't in response to a painful story. The link is right there; I am responding, obviously, to the claim that I have made her sad.

Every time someone says this, I'll correct it.

Stupid, no, that's your words.

No, that's your word. This is what you wrote: From the stupid, like when she ran around claiming she wasn't cis (as she didn't bother to look up what the word meant and thought it was the same as queer)

That's what you said. That's a link to what you said. (On the off-chance you quickly edited it, I have a screencap.)

Now you say "But she appropriated a minority identity, and used it as an excuse for some pretty nasty trolling."

So, did she make a stupid error, or did she claim to be trans for political gain? The interesting thing is that the answer doesn't even matter so much as the fact that you said one thing, and when called on it, decided that you never said it and that I did.


Did you use those exact words - no.

Then don't say that I did.

But the way you are dismissing and mocking people in this post is dismissing their concerns.

You might feel slightly less dismissed if you paid a bit more attention to either my words, or hell, your OWN words.

You've repeatedly responded to commenters without addressing the subject of their comments

Link. Prove or retract.

you ask for links

I do. When you tell me that I said something I know I did not say, I will ask for a link. If someone references the RH blog, I will ask for a link. I've never asked for any link about anything that happened on LJ, Dreamwidth, private comms or anything like that. If you think I have...provide a link.

dismiss people commenting anonymously as though their words have no meaning

Your words actually do have very little meaning.

You have characterised this as white pros going after a minority

Correct. That is what is happening. Without those white pros, this blog post never would have appeared, this conversation never would have happened.

a witch hunt

I've never said anything like that. Provide a link. Prove or retract.

as people jumping on some sort of anon bandwagon to harrass winterfox

The first half is obviously true. The second is not. For second half: link. Prove or retract.

You don't seem to have even considered the possibility that people have genuine reasons for speaking up now

Sure, I have. However, if you keep making the discussion about things I never said, we'll just talk about links instead.

You are by your comments here making it harder for people, and you can't be so naive as to not realise that your actions will have an effect of silencing some people, as they won't want to have to deal with comments belittling their experiences.

400 comments of silencing, eh?
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

Nick, I'm glad to see you taking the basic ACLU position regarding Benjanun Sriduangkaew and her writing career.


I'm trying not to fall into a trap of "they all do it:" but honestly, to me, right now? the only one looking even decent out of this whole mess is Nick.

(don't get a swelled head, In a day or two I'll probably be annoyed with you about something or other)




(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

"That's what you said. That's a link to what you said. (On the off-chance you quickly edited it, I have a screencap.)

I said the act was stupid, not that she was stupid, take your own advice and actually read the comment. And I'm not sure why you needed to grab a screencap, as anon comments can't be edited. Though nice touch, trying to dismiss my credibility by implying that I'm likely to want to hide evidence, or change my words.

She identity policed in social justice comms, claiming to be trans, as to why she did it, I'm not her, so I don't know. She claimed the identity for a long period, and then when called out, said she hadn't known what it meant, but seeing as she'd participated in discussions of trans* issues while claiming that identity, I do not know if it was a genuine error, or her deliberately doing it. What I do know is that she used it to bully people, and to claim an authority she didn't have in social justice discussions, and that afterwards she has pretended it didn't happen and deleted the evidence.

"I did no such thing. That person wasn't sharing a painful story in that thread, and my "there, there" wasn't in response to a painful story."

It's the same person, you can tell by the sig, so yes you absolutely did do the "there there" thing to the person who shared a painful story.

"Does this mean that you are in favor of established white women authors sabotaging the careers of fledgling WoCs (and also queer and genderqueer whites)? "

Nice strawman, like I said before, what these white writers may or may not have done in response to winterfox's bullying is not the issue I'm talking about. I don't want her stopped from writing, I never said that or implied it anywhere. I simply don't agree that her behaviour should be excused or minimised, and I don't like the rhetoric, that we should ignore her past history and support her simply because she is a minority writer. She has never shown remorse, nor apologised, if she had shown any indication that she regretted her actions it would be different. But instead she carries on, by your own words making false accusations of racism to attack those who wanted to connect her identities. I don't want her to run out of the industry, I want people to stop telling us that we should ignore her past and support her.

"Without those white pros, this blog post never would have appeared"

Except that this started with winterfox, her lies and her bullying, if she hadn't done those things, there would have been nothing for those writers to post about. This started with winterfox hurting and harrassing people, both those white writers you are so obsessed with, and the many WOC who shared communities with her, why on earth should everyone keep silent about this. People have been promoting her (under her real name)as a good example of someone who cares about social justice, and is a caring and supportive member of the community and asking the rest of us to support her too. Of course there was going to be backlash when the truth came out, she hid her past bad behaviour and constructed a fake persona to keep her identities separate. People feel hurt that they were conned into supporting someone under false pretences.

"Link. Prove or retract."

Just read the threads, people keep talking about the hurt she's done to other WOC, and you keep responding by banging on the same couple of points, about the white writers and poison pen letters, or going off onto tangents about fanfic writers or Cassie Claire. It's a nice game of distract and deflect, but you still have not responded to the most substantive points raised.

"400 comments of silencing, eh?"

Many from people too worried by this to post logged in, and there are many more people I know both online and off, who have watched the behaviour of you and winterfox's other apologists both in this thread and in other spaces, and who have said they're far too uncomfortable to speak up. In a large part because of the way you belittled the people posting here, with your "there, there" comments or infantalising insults, like accusing people posting of whining.





(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

I said the act was stupid, not that she was stupid, take your own advice and actually read the comment.

I am going to point out that I never said that you said that she was stupid. And ask you for a link showing otherwise. What I said:

Damn her! What is English, her second language? Third? And she doesn't know a Latin term that in recent years has gotten a new life as a term of gender identity. (You've never deleted anything stupid, right?)

What did I say was stupid? A thing, not a person.

And I'm not sure why you needed to grab a screencap, as anon comments can't be edited.

They can be deleted and reposted, before a response is completed.

Though nice touch, trying to dismiss my credibility by implying that I'm likely to want to hide evidence, or change my words.

Not only are you likely to do it, you actually have done it, with your "stupid" schtick. That said, you're much more likely to try to change my words, and I will correct you every time. If I am suspicious of you, it is simply because you lie a lot and refuse to back up anything you say even when there are links available.

I do not know if it was a genuine error, or her deliberately doing it.

Well if you don't even know if it were purposeful, perhaps it's not the best example of how terrible a person she is.

It's the same person, you can tell by the sig, so yes you absolutely did do the "there there" thing to the person who shared a painful story.

Not *about* the painful story which was not part of the thread and that was buried in some collapsed thread. I shared a painful story too, of a writer and editor calling on the editor of a major trade publication to drown me in a toilet because I wrote a poem about anti-globalization protests. And, then the insulter followed up by saying that while she is normally against such terrible violent hyperbole, that I personally really deserved it, and somehow I victimized her by bringing it up after a few years. By your own standard, the only thing you may discuss with me is that.

Nice strawman

It's not a strawman, it's a question! Which you finally answered, and for which I thank you. I'm glad you don't think established white authors should attempt to have a fledgling WoC writer from the developing world kept from publishing. You just consider it unimportant. Well, you're an awful person then.

I want people to stop telling us that we should ignore her past and support her.

And yet, here you are arguing with me instead of them.

why on earth should everyone keep silent about this

Who said you should? Seriously, a link, please! (I know you're not saying I said this this time.)


People have been promoting her (under her real name)as a good example of someone who cares about social justice, and is a caring and supportive member of the community and asking the rest of us to support her too.

I seriously doubt that RH's current publishing name is her real name. And who is telling you all these weird things? Certainly not me.

It's a nice game of distract and deflect, but you still have not responded to the most substantive points raised.

Well, no. I just disagree. I think a trio of white, established, Western writers, contacting editors to tell them not to publish a fledgling PoC writer is the main and most substantive point. And it is certainly the most substantive one—there's actual substance to it in that people can check and actually see what happened. Two, it sets a precedent for the established to blackball the marginal.

Many from people too worried by this to post logged in, and there are many more people I know both online and off, who have watched the behaviour of you and winterfox's other apologists both in this thread and in other spaces, and who have said they're far too uncomfortable to speak up.

The lurkers support you in email, do they? You do know that everyone has partisans on the sidelines who respond positively when people post on contentious subjects, right?

The mere fact that I have something to say that isn't on the script you wish for everyone to follow doesn't mean that you're being silenced.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

Yet another new anon

They can be deleted and reposted, before a response is completed.

No, no they cannot be. An anonymous commenter has no ownership of their comment after they post it and thus absolutely no ability to alter it in any way, including deleting it. Choosing anonymity means sacrificing that kind of control over your own statements. The only person who could delete the anon comments here is James Nicoll, and I'm sure you don't mean to imply that he's altering the conversational record here in that way.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

Yet another new anon

...same o' literacy problems.

No, no they cannot be.

Yes they can. As you go on to say:

The only person who could delete the anon comments here is James Nicoll

So we're agreed. A comment can be deleted and reposted. (I never said "You could have deleted and reposted" to the other anon—I really do type exactly what I mean, you see. All the time.) Thus, it is appropriate to screencap. Really, given the relative lack of screencaps regarding WinterFox, I guess I shouldn't be surprised at how confusing this somehow is, but if you talk shit on the Internet, you can expect to have the person you are talking shit to make a record in case its needed (as proof after a deletion, to go to an attorney, to print out and turn into an origami hermit crab, whatever) as a matter of couse.

As far as what is James is doing, who knows? He's unscreened every comment I've gotten, but none of them have been beyond the pale except when it comes to whiny dipshittery. If someone were banging on the doors with all sorts of crazy shit, I'd presume he'd leave those comments screened. As a simple matter of compassion and safety, I would hope that if an anon contacted him (w/ proof, like say an IP) and asked for him to delete a comment so it could be reposted to correct some error or resolve some potentially legal issue, that he would do so as well.

But, plain and simple, anon comments can be deleted and reposted.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

'I think a trio of white, established, Western writers, contacting editors to tell them not to publish a fledgling PoC writer is the main and most substantive point.'

I think it could be made even more substantive if, when you are formulating this capsule of the narrative, you routinely included something you said earlier: the fledgling writer smeared people as racist, and was probably smearing one of the trio of established writers as racist.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

What was the timeline there again? Can you recite it, accurately, without me going through old comment? Or is RH guilty of time travel, and thus deserved to be outed after responding to threats of being outed with the race-play?

It is foolish, stupid, and, wrong to encourage people to say "You're racist to think [an accurate thing that you know and I don't]" period. However, it appears to have been done in response to the Sullivan/Williams/Kiernan nexus looking to out Bees for the crime of...agreeing to look at and read Sullivan's book about Thailand and apparently some stuff to do with the unnamed "associate" described in Sullivan's blog post. That is not to excuse it ethically or even tactically in any way. But it happened after, not before people started sharing Bees's identity with people annoyed by or targeted by RH.

So, if my issue is that these authors tried to do this, why is it somehow substantive to mention what RH did subsequent to the information campaign beginning?

The crux of the issue appears to be this email exchange between RH and Sullivan in 2012, just released. After this exchange and RH's re-emergence as Bees who began publishing in late 2012, Sullivan was told and then [something with associate*] and the campaign began.


By August 1 2014, Caitlin Kiernan—not a UK author, not part of the group geographically—announced on Facebook that "I have just been handed the identity of one of the most infamous anonymous assholes on the internet, @requireshate (and other aliases). I may or may not post it here. This person has given me shit, and treated people whom I care about horridly. They've hidden under the banner of "social justice," masquerading as a decent human being. It's good to find out she can't hide any longer. And, turns out, she's a writer who really should have known that, sooner or alter, her loathsome behavior would come back to bite her on the ass." She since deleted it. (I started capping everything I saw after this deletion. I happened to copy the text without a cap.)

I started hearing the RH/Bees-racist formulation after Loncon in London, in mid-August. Of course, people could have said it before that, and they also could have come up with the idea on their own. It's a hobby for middle-class white people to denounce one another as harboring racist attitudes, after all. But to the extent that RH was working her "ur dur racist" countermeme, it was mid-August 2014 through September. That is, after Kiernan was handed Bees's ID.

Incidentally, Liz Williams declared that she'd rather "be a small scale racist and politically incorrect than an aspiring fantasy serial killer" in 2012, so it's hardly a smear in the general sense.



*Not sure what this is yet, but am checking in to it.




Edited at 2014-10-14 08:41 pm (UTC)
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

Well, if RH smearing people as racist had nothing whatsoever to do with the outing/poison-pen/blackballing/etc then, yes, you should probably leave it out.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

Oh, and that was an excoriating critique, tough for anyone to take on the chin, but if that, solely and in and of itself, is what prompted this anti-RH nexus, then yeah, it's three established authors trying to spike the career of a fledgling author for the pettiest of reasons. You know what, though? RH's writing is actually readable when she's not treating the writers she's reviewing as if they're cartoon villains to be beaten with her cartoon hammers.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

Shit, Nick, I can't read that--what kind of super-vision do you have? (Or is there a trick for enlarging the image?)
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

On imgr? If you go to the right with your mouse, a little gear icon should emerge, and from there a dropdown menu will offer "full resolution" or something like that.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread) (Expand)

I seriously doubt that RH's current publishing name is her real name.

You don't know for sure, even though you bought a story from her? I used to work for a small publisher where a lot of our authors were pseudonymous, but we had to use their real names for contracts and payment, so we knew who was writing under their real name and who wasn't. Although I suppose Haikasoru might be large enough that that's all handled where the editor can't see it?
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

Obviously, I cannot discuss specifics, but let's just note that all sorts of "entities" can sign a contract, thus the name Harlan Ellison® can appear on tables of contents, and The Kilimanjaro Corporation on the copyright acknowledgment.

In Japan, the use of closed pseudonyms and dba is utterly ubiquitous. I basically don't know the real names of any Japanese author I've published via Haikasoru.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

Largely intact, my hind foot.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

I scrolled back on my phone to April 2012, and included in what I saw are posts calling authors "shitbags of bigotry" in the headline. 2011 stuff, such as what I linked to, seems Waybackable.
(Frozen) (Parent) (Thread)

  • 1
?

Log in