What’s the word on the big wide sea?

I’ve hopped into my boat and hoisted the sail and set off on my navigation of the archipelagos to listen to what can be heard on the many Isles of Interest. The answer is: nothing much.

The Hugo Awards have moved on from the pups both melancholic and hydrophobic but have the pups moved on from the Hugos? Based on the overall reaction: yes. The two major organs of the two Puppy campaigns of yesteryear have remained silent on the topic aside from brief references in the comment section.  That’s healthy for them.

I count around eleven finalists who Vox Day has ranted about by name before (+/- a couple I guess) but given the highly visible presence of John Scalzi and N.K.Jemisin on the list, if he was going to have a rant about the Hugo finalists it would be those two. The Hugos are being studiously ignored at the Rabid end.

The newer Scrappy-Doo element was more overt about the nomination announcement but that has been well covered elsewhere.

Maybe then they have all moved on emotionally as well as functionally?

Oh, not quite.

A Felapton Towers intern points towards a Facebook post by not-at-still-bitter Larry Correia: https://www.facebook.com/larry.correia/posts/2109322645745320

“If I had made up a fake April Fools Day list of Hugo noms trying to point out what an insular, inbred, political circle jerk they are, turns out it wouldn’t have looked much different from the real one.”

Magnanimous in defeat as always…

The comments follow the usual canards: “It’s all Tor!” and Scalzi bashing.

Some highlights:

“Dave Truesdale Social, political and gender views trump literary quality. Many in various Arts fields tend to be liberal in the first place. You layer in the infiltration of the current far Left political views currently overwhelming society at large and SF in particular and these folks will stick together come hell or high water. They smother anything not in line with their views, talk and chat online together, stick together at cons, and you end up with a built-in, ready-made “informal” bloc of like-minded awards voters.”

“Dave Truesdale And yes, as Richard D. Cartwright says, Tor buys a lot of advertising each year, AND they get reviewed and promoted for free in the most widely read genre and media outlets who are also sympatico with their Leftist worldview. And they also buy memberships for their large staff (don’t know if everyone at Tor get a paid membership from Tor’s budget or not, but I imagine a lot of them do, which are solid Tor votes nevertheless).”

I presume people who attend Worldcon in a professional capacity on behalf of a publisher would get their membership paid, just as I assume self-employed writers would treat con attendance as a work expense. Aside from that, I find the idea of Tor paying willy-nilly for a bunch of employees to get voting memberships highly unlikely (happy to be shown to be wrong on the basis of some actual evidence). I would have hoped David Truesdale would only make such claims on the strength of something more than “I imagine” but it seems I’d have hoped wrongly.

Meanwhile, Brad T hasn’t mellowed either:

“Brad Torgersen, I had forgotten that today is the day the list comes out. Wow, yeah, it would be difficult to parody this list, because the list itself is a parody. Basically, if you publish with TOR, Orbit, put stories thru TOR-dot-com, or that SJZ mag Uncanny, and are female, you’re gonna get a Hugo nom.

Clearly, when we pointed out that the Hugos are a politically-strangled award increasingly dominated by identity politics, we didn’t sufficiently state the scope of the problem! ;)”

It is fascinating that somebody who said that what they really cared about was the quality of the stories rather than the group-identification of writers continues to complain NOT about the quality of the stories but about the group-identification of the writers.

Finally, Sarah Hoyt returns to an old and debunked complaint:

“Sarah A. Hoyt Yes, but you guys miss the point. the point of their getting the Hugos is that the universities many of them teach at don’t know how corrupt the award is, and will be impressed by it in their resume. Period. Full stop. Readers have nothing to do with this.

Richard D. Cartwright Sarah, so you are saying that the Hugos have degenerated into a university cv puffing award?

Sarah A. Hoyt Richard D. Cartwright yep. That’s why they fought so hard. it’s their livelihood at stake.”

I can’t see many academics in the list (Puppy fantasies about me notwithstanding), although one book in Best Related Work is from a university press and one Fan Writer is a PhD student/Research Fellow (but not in a literary discipline or one were a Hugo nomination would carry any weight). There could be more with some academic aspect but it’s clear few (maybe zero) Hugo finalists over the past years are overtly using that status to further academic careers. The very nature of Hoyt’s claim implies that such finalists wouldn’t be promoting themselves *secretly* in this way. It is a fantasy of Hoyt’s that she has mistaken for fact.

So time has not yet healed old wounds and grudges remain fueled by fantasies. However, the noise has lessened and the urge to distance themselves from the failures of half a decade has moved them on somewhat.

180 thoughts on “What’s the word on the big wide sea?

  1. They may have moved on from the Hugos, but no doubt they’re excitedly awaiting the winners of what is now widely regarded as the most prestigious prize in SF/F circles: Killercon’s Splatterpunk Awards!

    Liked by 5 people

      1. I’m working my way through one of the nominated anthologies. One of the stories has a transgender nurse conditioning a guy to develop a decapitation fetish, and at this point I’m not sure if that’d be considered SJW message fiction.

        Liked by 2 people

      2. @Doris

        My Disease-Ridden Spit handled the sex toy with great care and appraised it’s thought-provoking characteristics with a frown on her face, as if she was handling a very dangerous wild animal.

        Well, that’s definitely not a Tingler.

        Liked by 3 people

      1. One of the nominated anthologies has a story called “Terrorsluts for Eternity Versus the Ungodheads of the Interdimensionals”, and the protagonist’s name is My Disease-Ridden Spit (opening sentence: “My Disease-Ridden Spit handled the sex toy with great care and appraised it’s thought-provoking characteristics with a frown on her face, as if she was handling a very dangerous wild animal.”)

        I’m genuinely torn up that I didn’t read this stuff early enough to put on my Hugo ballot.

        Liked by 2 people

      2. ““My Disease-Ridden Spit handled the sex toy with great care and appraised it’s thought-provoking characteristics with a frown on her face, as if she was handling a very dangerous wild animal.”

        Misplaced apostrophes? Ewwwwww.

        Liked by 3 people

      3. Thanks, Doris – that actually makes me feel much more sanguine about the quality of work on offer here. (Is “sanguine” the right word, in this context? I suspect it is.)

        Liked by 2 people

  2. Torgersen believes women — oh, wait, I’m sorry, “females” — can’t get on the ballot through their talent and skill. But remember, Brad’s not misogynistic! Why, he’s married to a woman, after all! How can he possibly be disdainful of “females” if he married one?

    Liked by 6 people

    1. Yeah, and he can’t be racist since his wife’s black, despite palling around with Teddy Boy who considers everyone of her (and his kids’) ancestry to be sub-human!

      He was happy to work with someone who considers his children sub-human.

      The fact that NONE of them helped Hoyt the “female” out when she was in charge of SP is very telling.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. Also, as someone who actually works at a university, I can promise you no one in the Academy knows what a Hugo is, or would care. I had to explain to my promotion committee just what the Magazine of F&SF was, and why getting published there was a big deal.

    Liked by 7 people

    1. This matches my experience. Academics usually have zero idea what a Hugo Award even is and it certainly wouldn’t influence any hiring decisions.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. If Torgerson ever gets a nom for prestigious award it will through the most heavy handed sort of affirmative action. He’s not too incompetent, but will never be really good either, because he doesn’t but effort into his work. YMMV.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Well, Torgersen did get a Hugo and a Campbell nomination under his own steam back in 2012 or 2013. But he didn’t win and threw a fit and we’ve been seeing the results ever since.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Precisely. It stopped there because Torgerson didn’t put enough effort in subsequent works (and it’s truly hard, no doubt). Instead he wanted a participation trophy.

        Liked by 3 people

  5. So not bothered enough to blog, but prepared to grumble away here and there? Sounds about right. Realistically, the major players aren’t going to forget the humiliation of it all in a hurry. (And to be fair, we’re still chuckling at them now so fairs fair)
    Hopefully that’s the end of it, although I suppose we still have the B-Team trying out the old playbook to see if it still works.

    It’s a bit sad that nothing much positive has come out of the Sad side – not even the alleged Dragon award recs site. In fact I think the only constructive work has come from the Appendix N/pulp rev types who have at least come away with a bit of a community, with blogs and zines and so on, and perhaps Superversive who already existed but have ridden the wave quite well. Ironically both of those came more from the Rabid side who in theory were much more “burn it down”. Compare that to the Sads refusing to let their project out of their hands even though they couldn’t do it themselves.

    Liked by 4 people

      1. A slate so prestigious and influential that one of the nominees never heard about it till 3 days after the finalists were announced! Compiled by someone ineligible to vote!

        Liked by 3 people

      2. Didn’t see this so sorry for the duplicate: congrats Camestros.

        @Mark Hepworth – false. I am a big fan of Lois Bujold and Seanan McGuire which has been stated numerous times. They are both wonderful people and great writers.

        @Lurkertype – false. I have a supporting membership and can and will vote.

        @Laura – true. Happy Frogs endorsements are about the hottest thing you can possibly have in fandom right now.

        Like

      3. @Jon

        In which case it’s interesting to learn how you intend to cast your own vote. Thank you for sharing.

        Incidentally, you know you need to rank *all* the finalists, not just choose a top one, right? I mean, I’m sure you’re familiar with how the Hugos work…..

        Liked by 1 person

      4. I know how the hugos work. I’ve attended worldcon and the hugos before (without incident as everyone at Worldcon is aware). Top of the ballot is all that matters though if you can get enough. I’m not sure why you feel the constant need to insult/patronize.

        Like

      5. Right now, I’m the hottest thing in SFF, because I live in thr same area as Camestros AND have a fevre.

        Liked by 3 people

    1. Yes, whatever you think of the Pulp Rev/Appendix N folks and Superversive, at least they’re doing something. The Sads, meanwhile, are bitching on Facebook.

      Liked by 3 people

    2. @ Mark Hepworth Is the affiliation of Superversive and AppendixX/neopulp with the rabids accidental and due to purely personal factors (Beale giving Wright and Johnson a platform) or is there some other reason. Is the toxicity inherent in them, or do Superversive and AppendixX represent something worthwhile that could exist in a detoxified state?

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Micael Gustavsson: Is the toxicity inherent in them, or do Superversive and AppendixX represent something worthwhile that could exist in a detoxified state?

        For the most part, what I’ve seen of the PulpRev guys on Twitter and elsewhere, they’re concentrating on what they love, rather than what they hate, or on politics.

        On the other hand, I’ve seen a huge amount of nastiness, toxicity, and politicizing (racism, sexism, and homophobia) by the Superversive account on Twitter, and I think it’s pretty much baked in on that front. Which, considering that the whole “superversive” thing is supposed to be about positivity, I find sadly ironic.

        Liked by 2 people

      2. @Micael Gustavsson

        Interestingly tricky point! I think JJ is on the right track, although the PulpRev types also have some toxicity lurking around the edges, it just isn’t always as front and centre.

        The personal factors of VD handing out a platform are probably strong in how the movement grew and was populated.

        However, I do think there’s something inherent in PulpRev that makes it difficult to avoid toxic elements. Its main premise is a *rejection* of modern SF as being flawed (they now like to talk of the Campbellian Heresy, i.e. that the purity of the pulps was wrecked by the influence of Campbell, no less) an attitude which frequently ties into “…because of SJWs”. A very common fallacy they have is to look at claims that older SF had issues with e.g. representation of women, find that there were actually one or two good women writers in the pulp era, decide that invalidates the claims and so those pesky SJWs are a) wrong and b) are ignorant of the period. Those sort of things mean they’re generally defining their movement *in opposition* to something else, which is never healthy.

        I don’t think it’s absolutely inherent – for example, there are a fair number of unconnected Appendix N types out there who are just enthusiasts for the period without any of the extra grief – but given how it’s developed I think the current movement will always be trying to fight someone.

        (Superversive – they existed pre RP and JCW was already associated with VD before then, so I’m actually not sure how to diagnose their creation)

        Liked by 2 people

      3. I’d agree with Mark that the Pulp Rev crowd does contain some toxicity, because they cannot celebrate the vintage SFF that they love without attacking anything post 1937. After Ursula K. Le Guin died, Jeffro Johnson spent no less than seven blogposts ranting about how she sucked and how she’s everything that’s wrong with SFF.

        The Pulp Rev types also the conspiracy theory that the vintage SFF they enjoy was deliberately suppressed rather than that it simply fell out of favour as tastes change. Never mind that I had no problems reading Edgar Rice Burroughs, Leigh Brackett and C.L. Moore in English in the 1980s and 1990s, in spite of living in a non-anglophone country where English books were rare. Plus, the Pulp Rev people also like to rant about Communists who supposedly ruined the genre, based on an 80 year old manifesto in a fanzine, and they keep finding Christian elements where there simply are none.

        Still, the Pulp Rev folks at least spent a large part of their time talking about what they love and trying to build up an eco-system for the type of fiction they enjoy, which is a very good thing. If they could lose the lingering toxicity and the tendency to attack anything that’s not their preferred mode of SFF, they could become a community which may eventually create something worthwhile.

        And of course, there are a lot of people who are into Appendix N, vintage SFF and pulp fiction who simply like what they like and have no connection to the puppy movement. Hell, I like pulp fiction and have written pulp pastiche on occasion and I’m far from a puppy.

        Liked by 3 people

      4. It’s definitely notable with Jeffro Johnson. He used to be the most reasonable of the puppy fan writers, the one who mainly wrote about the books he loved. But then he became increasingly bitter.

        Liked by 1 person

      5. Luckily, insisting on finding Christian elements that aren’t there is not a thing among German teachers, even those who also teach religious education.

        Like

      6. Through a set of odd circumstances, I went to a private boarding school in Virginia. That said, my son recently graduated from a public high school, and my daughter will graduate from the same public high school in a few months, and the pattern still seems to hold true there as well.

        Liked by 1 person

      7. Huh. I went to a public school in a fairly conservative area and I didn’t get that. Might have just lucked out with non-pushy-religious English teachers, and being in HS before the “Moral Majority”. My 9th/12th grade teacher was a devout Italian Catholic, but didn’t bring it into the classroom.

        Liked by 1 person

      8. @Cora: Yeah, Jeffy and Le Guin. I remember he took one tiny line (“Smiles, bells, parades, horses, bleh.”) out of “The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas” without quoting in context or linking to it, as proof that Le Guin was an awful writer…which was an act like plucking an eye out of a beautiful face and then waving the bloody bit around and screaming, “What do you MEAN, that’s a beautiful face? Does THIS look beautiful to you!?”

        I don’t mind his Pulp Rev sentimentality, I’ve enjoyed pulp myself. But he seems to spend a lot less time discussing its virtues than trashing the horrid demons that he imagines destroyed it (communism and feminism, I gather). He has garnered one fan who upon noting a female commenter (who might possibly have been me) being critical, has been advising Jeffy to purge both his comments AND his favorite pulp writing of all women. Though he allows that the loss of Leigh Brackett would be a pity, he thinks that following that sacred principle would be worth it. (He doesn’t seem aware he’d lose C. L. Moore, too, but I’m sure he’d be willing to sacrifice even MORE of what’s left of pulp to purify it of girl cooties).

        Jeffy prudently did not answer pro or con to this suggestion; I doubt he wants his blog to be known as a go-to destination for the incel crowd, but he probably feels he can’t afford to lose them either.

        Liked by 2 people

  6. Novel: 1/6 from Tor
    Novella: 5/6 from Tor.com. OK, that is rather unbalanced, but it’s true they do dominate the ‘thin book’ field, which is wherhe most people find novellas nowadays.
    Novelette: 1/6 from Tor.com.
    Short Story: 1/6 from Tor.com.
    Series: 2/6 from Tor (including the one most likely to appeal to those of Puppyish tastes, I think).
    YA: none from Tor.

    (Are any of the Campbell authors published by Tor?)

    In short, Tor’s efforts to take over the Hugos seem singularly ineffective.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Yeah, the novella results made me do a double take, until I remembered that tor.com actually is the top market for novella length stories right now! And since they can contract any number of major authors to write something for the imprint…

      Liked by 3 people

    2. Nothing “SJW” about, f’rex, Six Wakes, All Systems Red, Wind Will Rove, Fandom For Robots, Stormlight Archive, the DW episode. And the Retros are all over Heinlein, Asimov, and Campbell, who us SJWs are supposed to hate and abjure.

      (I keep looking at the finalist lists and going all Panic Blob at trying to decide)

      Liked by 1 person

    3. Yes, Tor only dominates in novella for obvious reasons. Meanwhile, Orbit dominates in novel as in the past few years (there is a reason that Tor snapped up Devi Pillai), while short fiction is a mix with a slight dominance for Uncanny and Clarkesworld.

      It’s also telling how the pups and the Pulp Rev folks are completely ignoring the Retro Hugo, even though they are honouring all of the writers they claim to like.

      Liked by 1 person

    4. Given that Tor is the biggest publishing program in the sf/f genre (and I wouldn’t be surprised if there are figures showing Tor publishes more novellas than any other individual company), this doesn’t seem like lopsided representation.

      In fact, in response to one of the Puppies’ claims about Tor’s disproportionate representation on the Hugo ballots, didn’t someone run the figures and demonstrate that, in fact, if you assume fair balance on the ballot would be proportionately similar to quantity of works published by a company, Tor was UNDERrepresented on Hugo ballots? I’m sure I read that post somewhere back when all the yipping was going on 2-3 years ago.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. And it should be noted, btw, I say this as someone who is not a friend or fan of Tor. Unlike the various Puppies, who’ve all attacked Tor (repeatedly) on the basis of erroneous claims and murky hysteria while never actually having had anything to do with the company, I wrote several books for Tor. It was far and away the worst experience of my publishing career. But being a rational person who tries to maintain a relationship with facts and reality, I usually fee obliged, though I find it unpleasant, to speak up when the Puppies make erroneous and fabricated claims about Tor.

        Liked by 3 people

      2. A century ago, the city I live in, Cincinnati, approved a plan to build a subway system and (eventually) started construction. About 90 years ago, after many problems, stop-and-go construction, and financing setbacks, the plan was abandoned after 7 miles of tunnels had been dug, and we do not have a subway system here. 90 years later, we still complain constantly about the abandoned subway plan. 90 YEARS LATER.

        My unsolicited advice to the Puppies: Do not be like us! Put it behind you and move on.

        Liked by 4 people

      3. @Laura: could it be that Pups are jealous because they’re simply not good enough to be published by Tor? So they presume it must be some SJW conspiracy that keeps them from getting those sweet, sweet Tor nominations. Not their own incompetence at writing, PR, writing, the way SFWA and WSFS differ, writing, the fact that “Worldcon” isn’t a monolith and is composed of different people every year, writing…

        Regardless of your bad experience, they did think enough of you to publish you at one time, and you are demonstrably a good and successful author.

        I mean, one of their betes noire is Jim Hines, and he’s with DAW but manages to get nominated though that’s neither Tor nor Orbit (and was started by a guy with a few Retro nominations this year).

        It’s also a distinction in maturity levels that you had a terrible time with them and still hold to facts. The opposite of Pups/Scraps.

        Liked by 1 person

      4. I think its also because they are (in part) about how self-publishing is much better. It doesnt help their argument if selfpublishing doesnt help them win awards.
        They would have to got back to the “quality discussion” which they surpress everytime it come up – they dont agree on good works, except patting each other shoulders.

        Liked by 1 person

      5. Everybody who self-publishes should know that there are some trade-offs. One of them to that awards nominations will be harder to get, though most genre awards have had self-published finalists by now. You’d figure the pups would have known this, when they got into self-publishing.

        Not to mention that this whole traditional publishing is dying rhetoric was tiresome three or four years ago, when you was occasionally hanging out on self-pub blogs and it has gotten even more tiresome.

        Liked by 1 person

      6. @Cora: but it’s been amply demonstrated that pups/scraps/pulp revs know next to nothing about the history of the genre (among other things). And the things they do know, they refuse to accept, particularly if that will give them fun whining talking points.

        Liked by 1 person

  7. As always with Hoyt, I’m moved to ask: “What color is the sky in your world?” But hey, Torgersen’s taken a big step forward – he’s noticed that Orbit exists.

    Liked by 2 people

      1. And now that he’s learned that some people are published by Orbit, they get slotted smoothly into the conspiracy theory as if they were there all along. It’s actually a nice little demonstration of how conspiracy theorists work!

        Liked by 4 people

      2. Maybe Orbit is just some variation in computer greased pig Latin for Tor. Like Orgersenbit would be Brad’s name in this new language…

        Liked by 2 people

  8. It’s good for me to check in here periodically in order to be reminded what a crapulent soul Sarah Hoyt is. Looks like she and Martha Wells have published more or less the same # of SFF books, although it looks as though Wells has been in the biz longer. But over the last 15 years or so I’ve periodically tried to read one or another of Hoyt’s books, and I’ve never succeeded in finishing a one. On the other hand, I’ve read each of Wells’ books, other than the tie-ins, and there’s not one I haven’t enjoyed.

    So, short version: Hoyt’s writing sucks. Big time. Wells’ books are much much better. Of course, YMMV, etc.

    Honestly, this seems like nothing more that Hoyt, and the other puppettes, bitching because their stuff isn’t liked by enough people to get a nom. And to top it off by saying it’s due to tenure-based competition strikes me as ludicrous. I suspect that few of the nominees are in academe to begin with, and as delagar points out, most academics don’t give a shit if their colleagues win a Hugo or a Nebula. Pulitzer, yeah, National Book Award yeah, but a Hugo? Don’t make me laugh.

    Jeez.

    Liked by 5 people

  9. There’s an amusing bit in one of them that thought there was no men on the Best Novel and then laughed that they overlooked Scalzi. Last I checked, Kim Stanley Robinson was a dude — granted, he’s also rather left-wing, but still…

    Liked by 2 people

    1. There’s always at least one dude. And Stan could out-mountain climb, out-whatever-macho all of the Pups and Scraps any day, despite being older.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. Don’t forget Yoon Ha Lee. Aldo a dude, though trans and Asian and therefore he probably doesn’t count.

      Like

      1. You must have noticed that one of their biggest go-to insults is to make anything putatively masculine more feminine. They feminize males they don’t like, stick them with girlish nicknames, and so on. To them, a gay man isn’t a man who prefers men, but a sis, a nance, a girly man. In their lexicon, femininity is a handy stick to beat other men with.

        On the other hand, a woman with masculine traits is unnatural to them, so that’s an insult, too. Horrors! A ‘female’ who might not want to bunk with them! Hard to imagine, right? So they get the converse set of nicknames and are marginalized in the other direction. (Nicknames are so important to them. They are used as a convenient signal and reminder of an individual’s crimes against humanity, according to the RW PC squad.)

        Liked by 4 people

      2. @Kip: Yes, homophobia is often misogyny at base. Evil fellow travelers.

        I wonder why the RWers are so, so concerned with loudly reassuring themselves and each other of their manly male masculinity. It’s like they’re insecure about it.

        And why they’re so fussed about what other people do with their own genitalia. I certainly don’t care about theirs; the only naughty bits I need to know the activity of are mine and my husband’s (and frankly I don’t even want to know everything about his!)

        Both the nicknames and the policing of gender roles are very adolescent. Most of us outgrow that.

        Liked by 1 person

  10. SF is still looked down on by the academy, so winning a Hugo is worth nothing for tenure, and might be worth negative points in some cases. And almost all the writers are just writers, not academics anyway, or are academics in other fields. As usual, Hoyt’s ranting about a straw man of her own making (which probably lives under the bed with her imaginary Marxists).

    She did get nominated for whatever the gLibertarians call their award, which she’ll promptly lose to “Artemis”. The US Libertarians have basically gone all fascist nowadays anyway (https://medium.com/@elliotgulliverneedham/why-libertarians-are-embracing-fascism-5a9747a44db9) so she with her desperate nostalgia for the “good old days” of Estado Novo imperialism fits right in. Y’know, the fun years where Portugal had the lowest income and rates of literacy, and the highest infant mortality and premature death. Good times. MPGA!

    Interesting that they still continue to say they’re against identity politics when they’re claiming they should win because of their identity politics. How’s about writing some decent stories — that’s how Larry and Brad got nominated honestly the first time?

    The usual sour grapes, is all.

    Now that they’ve FAILED so hard, they can go puff themselves up about the easily-cheated Dragons, which IIRC have fewer actual voters (certainly by percentage) than the Hugos and Nebulas. Dragons, libertarian, and whatever that is Doris is reading…sounds REAL wholesome and Christian!

    Cam said: “I would have hoped David Truesdale would only make such claims on the strength of something more than “I imagine” but it seems I’d have hoped wrongly.”

    FFS, Cam, after the whole Fieldsy Flap, only your basic decency and relentless optimism would cause you to hope this. Dave’s never had any trouble claiming things he’s only imagined!

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Whatever happened to Truesdale, anyway? I seem to remember a time when, although I frequently disagreed with his posts, it was a case of, “I think that argument is flawed, because…”, not “You’re two not very big steps away from chewing your own tongue and barking.”

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Truesdale always had that “I’m really a moderate, it’s a total coincidence that I’m usually punching Left” thing going on, he’s just stopped bothering since THAT panel went very badly wrong.

        Liked by 1 person

    2. Talking of the Dragons, I actually have something that’s eligible this year, but I’d feel really weird about nominating myself, let alone trying to get others to nominate me or use all my e-mail addresses.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. But nominating yourself and your pals is the whole POINT of the Dragons! It’s how they’re supposed to work!

        I might do if I’m arsed to bother.

        Liked by 2 people

    3. The only academic working in a related field on the Hugo shortlist is Nnedi Okorafor, who is a professor of creative writing. Plus, Lynne Thomas is a university librarian. That’s two nominees.

      Like

      1. But I think they were bitching and using this “academic conspiracy” stuff before Nnedi was nominated?

        I mean, I didn’t think “Binti” #1 was Hugo-worthy (ending WAAY too convenient), but I accepted that she puts words together in a lovely way and other people really liked it. I didn’t think she was doing it for tenure.

        Liked by 2 people

    4. Well, there’s Adam Roberts, who is both author and a scholar of SF. But I don’t remember him ever being nominated for the Hugo’s nor being involved with all the puppy crap. And he’s already tenured.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. Yup. I’m just seeing how many we can come up with. It’s a tiny percentage.

        And has anyone mentioned your university position yet, Toby?

        Oops, I wasn’t supposed to say that, was I? CAM, of course. Not Toby at allllll, nooooo.

        😉

        Liked by 1 person

      2. I think Adam Roberts used to belong to the Hugos are populist, shallow and not literate enough crowd, but I might be mistaken. I am also quite sure he commented on the rabids with a single, “Nazis, I hate those guys”

        Liked by 4 people

      3. Roberts is a professor at the University of London. He has published scholarly works on SFF, but his specialty is Victorian literature and Samuel Coleridge. He’s a strong advocate for SFF as literature, besides writing it himself, but his colleagues in British academia aren’t necessarily. One of his fellow lit faculty at the University of London was on the judging committee for the Booker one year and when complaints about genre fiction (read SFF published in the category bookselling market,) seldom being on the lists for the Booker were brought up, sniped that genre fiction “had its own awards” — i.e. things like the Hugo. That gives you an idea how much such awards are valued in academia. Many academics are still easily confused by book marketing practices and packaging and old class systems from the 1960’s.

        That is not to say that there aren’t a lot of academics aware of Hugo winners and nominees, positive towards them and often studying their works, but literature faculty are judged in terms of scholarly articles about literature and how well those do in academic journals and scholarly presses, not an award given out by fan convention goers. Creative writing professors certainly are more helped by doing their own fiction and possibly by winning awards for it, but the Hugo has little to no weight in this area because it is not a literary award judged by scholars. It’s a convention award voted on by fans who go to and/or pay the folks who do the convention. Likewise, the Nebulas are simply a bunch of judged awards financed by an author’s group. Both of the awards include awards for t.v. and movies, which definitely lacks interest for academia. While the awards may get some small respect for having awarded some appreciated authors over the years, they simply aren’t seen as academically relevant. And for some professors, depending on the university, winning or having nominations for the awards might be seen as detrimental (which is why many SFF authors, whether lit professors or some other type of professor, often used pseudonyms for their SFF writing, back before the online era.)

        Nnedi Okorafor is a professor of both creative writing and literature, so her scholarly articles and books are involved as well as her creative output and it’s publication count and location of pubs that affect advancement and tenure in lit fields. She’s won several literary awards and honors in addition to her SFF media based awards and nominations. Having Hugo nominations doesn’t hurt her at all, but it doesn’t particularly help her in academia either. Even though the old 1960’s book-selling system that insisted category publishers of SFF were a mass market paperback ghetto in culture (and comics are for kids, etc.) has mostly gone bye-bye, it is still unlikely that the Hugos will ever have much weight in academia because they don’t consider a bunch of fans going to a convention qualified judges of artistic literary skill or even cultural impact, even if some of the voters are also authors.

        This whole attempt to claim that the Hugos have been taken over by a cabal of academic liberal elites turning it into a high faluting in-crowd literature award that ignores the will of the people that the Puppies tried to use is profoundly silly and ignorant. And given that Hoyt has a Masters degree in Languages and Literature herself, she knows full well she’s selling a bunch of bilgewater about academia and the Hugo. But it boosts the group identity, I guess.

        Liked by 3 people

      4. Kat Goodwin: given that Hoyt has a Masters degree in Languages and Literature herself

        Really? And she still didn’t know what the word “hydrophobia” meant? That doesn’t reflect terribly well on her alma mater.

        Liked by 1 person

      5. As for how little valued genre fiction is in academic circles, the best example is Mary Bly, professor of literature and daughter of two literary writers, who writes historical romance under the pen name Eloisa James. Mary Bly/Eloisa James had to keep her pen name secret, until she got tenure and even “disguised” herself via contact lenses instead of glasses, when she appeared in public as Eloisa James, because if the rest of the faculty knew that she was writing romance novels, it might well have cost her her chance at tenure. And I’m pretty certain that Eloisa James has won romance awards at some point.

        Liked by 2 people

      6. @Kat: Ah, so Hoyt is not only virtue-signaling to the Pups* but trying to hide the fact that she’s one of those dreaded educated academic types too. The “look over there!” tactic.

        *(give it up, Sarah; you saw how they cut you dead when you were in charge of SP, and as a foreigner and a FE-male, they’re never going to completely accept you)

        Liked by 2 people

      7. Technically, Roberts cannot be tenured, as no one in the UK is. He has a permanent contract, but that isn’t exactly the same thing. (This is a nitpick. The general point, that he does not need a Hugo to gain promotion even in the unlikely event that it would help him, is clearly correct.)

        Like

      8. WorldCon is a movable, international con that has been organized in some years by Brits, etc. But the Hugos are seen as mainly an American award — most years, the bulk of voters, attending and associate, are Americans or North Americans. So for a Brit professor and Brit SFF author, who also publishes literary satire and scholarly non-fiction, a Hugo again awarded by a bunch of mainly American SFF fans for a convention is largely meaningless to his university. The best one he could get would be the Hugo for Related Work, since that does sometimes include scholarly publications, but even that would not count for much.

        Roberts apparently also does, like Nnedi Okorafor, teach creative writing along with Nineteenth Century Literature and SF Literature, which I didn’t know before. But again, for a fiction award to have an impact on a British academic career in creative writing, he’d need something like a Booker nomination, not a Hugo. So again, it all gets very silly. But that’s the point — it doesn’t have to be factual; it just has to feel satisfyingly condemnatory — the Other are unworthy schemers and we are not, etc. Even if it gets debunked, like RP’s claim that Camestros is Prof. Meadows on completely false IP addresses, the key thing is that they stood up to the evil schemers and then were picked on unfairly — the claims may or may not keep getting pedaled, but the emotions have been invoked and remain. That’s why they tend to get worse — to keep up the emotions. So even though Hoyt has enough academic knowledge to know that the claim she made is ridiculous, she’s still making it. And even though most of them probably know it isn’t true, it helps with the myth of the in circle lunch crowd of the Other, etc., so they play along. And if it’s debunked at them, they just shrug and go on to the next one, while tossing off the comment that everyone else should get over the claims they made up. It seems to be the symbolism of the act, not the substance of the particular act, that becomes critical.

        Liked by 3 people

      9. “but the emotions have been invoked and remain. That’s why they tend to get worse — to keep up the emotions.”

        So much this. It seems the facts are irrelevant to them — it’s only keeping the wheels of the outrage machine greased that they care about.

        Liked by 1 person

  11. I’m surprised Torgersen thinks it would be hard to parody the Hugo list, since that’s pretty much what he did back in 2015. And a man who once solicited an author with “we need some women on our list; suggest something you wrote this year” can hardly complain about the way anyone else is picking stories.

    I’ve seen people on Reddit complaining that they thought the Hugo nominees for Best Novel were weak this year, and maybe that’s true (I’ve only read three so far), but there is quite a lot of very strong short fiction this year, and only a few have anything close to a heavy handed message.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I don’t think the Novel lineup is weak as such, but with the honourable exception of Lafferty it’s all returning finalists/winners, half are sequels/continuations, all American…it perhaps lacks that one out-of-the-box marmite book to spice things up. It’s solid, but perhaps solid is what this year needed?
      Also, when I see those sort of criticisms the people making them seem to think there’s a jury or committee capable of deciding the tone of the list.
      Anyway, as you say the short fiction shows much more variety, and I look forward to making some really tough decisions!

      Liked by 1 person

      1. And Lafferty’s is by far the weakest IMHO. It’s a whodunnit and I read it twice in 3 months b/c I couldn’t remember whodunnit or anything beyond “clones find their previous ones are dead and the computer’s wiped”. I’m not entirely certain I remember who it was after the second time.

        Plus, “Stone Sky” was amazing.

        Like

  12. We’ve been having a family concern this week, so it was nice to come here and have a laugh. Unfortunately, I was unwisely drinking water when I read it. It was the all the nominees are professors who put a Hugo nom in their cv’s part that did me in.

    I don’t get how you parody this stuff, I really don’t. Timothy deserves extra cat treats.

    Apparently, the outrage party and its financial opportunities have moved over to comics now, so that’s probably helped out WorldCon.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. It only occurred to me afterwards that Hoyt believes both that Hugo nominees get nominated so they can boast about it in their academic careers AND that I use a pseudonym because I’m secretly an academic and don’t want my college to find out!

      Liked by 7 people

      1. @Lurkertype:
        I think you can simplify that statement: Conspiracy theorists know not the meaning of “cognitive”. There; lossless compression 🙂

        Liked by 2 people

  13. When the pestiferous Puppy personalities started leaving their little piles on the carpet of the Internet a few years ago, it occurred to me that some of my political positions would probably have many of them insisting that I drop everything to read their books, rush to their defense, and demand that they be given their due deference, damn it. [Pounds table for emphasis]

    Nope.

    That’s not your standard-issue nope; I sprung for the options on that sucker. It’s a nope so emphatic that I’ll likely never bother checking out any of their titles, and I’m someone who’s *usually* able to do the whole separate-the-author-from-the-work thing. The Puppy movement was my introduction to many of these writers, and it suffices to say that their first impressions weren’t conducive to fostering a healthy author-reader relationship with me. I’d much rather hang out here or at File 770, and I’ve even left comments from time to time. As a rule, I find the people who frequent these sites more appealing than I do those at places like MGC, and since I typically dislike engaging in political discussions on the Internet *anyway*, it all works out.

    It also never ceases to amaze me how the Hugos are both worthless and the most coveted items in all of creation. It reminds me of a story by one of those dead Greek guys. Something about a fox, I think…

    Liked by 6 people

    1. The fact that a lot of conservative leaning writers and fans were pissed off by what they did is another fact the puppies like to ignore.

      Liked by 4 people

      1. Not to mention that when some of those conservative leaning writers told the Puppies to take them off the voting slate or had to turn down nominations they felt were rigged by the Puppies, they refused, sicked harassment mobs on them and insulted them. It wasn’t even about conservative values versus liberal ones — it was about feeling powerful, and they didn’t care who got hurt, including risking their own families with the extremists who circulated around Gamergate and treating people who were supposed to be their friends like crap.

        I’m sure any time now we’re going to hear that Tor has started a child slave ring out of a pizza parlour, but at least now Orbit will be part of the conspiracy, which offers a bit of variety.

        Liked by 4 people

      2. As well the conservative writers *should* disapprove even more — who’d want to be associated with hateful, ignorant no-talents who claim to share your political views? The decent, talented conservatives have had to spend several years saying “I’m conservative but not a Pup! Please don’t hold them against me! I’m not a stupid bigot!”

        Liked by 1 person

  14. We’ve moved on, but judging from these comments, you guys haven’t and never will. 🙂

    Like

    1. Well, Mr. Chupik, seeing as this post was inspired by a sour-grapes Larry Correia Facebook rant where both Sarah Hoyt and Brad Torgersen weighed in….who has or hasn’t moved on, now?

      Liked by 6 people

    2. Christopher M. Chupik: We’ve moved on

      If that were actually the case, Cam wouldn’t have had any material for this post. I’ve seen Puppy complaints about the Hugo ballot all over Twitter. Clearly it’s not the case that the Puppies have moved on.

      But your denials are so cute. Please continue making them. 😀

      Liked by 5 people

      1. JJ, don’t you know that quoting a person’s actual words to prove they’re full of it is in fact the most SJW dishonest virtue signaling tactic EVER? Have you no sense of decency, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?

        Liked by 9 people

      2. Really, is that the best you can do, JJ? I mentioned the Hugos a few times and moved on. So did a few of the other Puppies. Cammy did a whole post about the people who aren’t on the ballot.

        And you know what, it won’t be his last either.

        Like

      3. @Chris

        Well, Larry did a whole post too – it’s quoted up top!

        Let’s be realistic – this whole kerfluffle took up quite a lot of time and energy from a fairly small pool of people. You’re still going to grumble around the edges that you don’t like the Hugos. We’re still going to remember the fun and exciting consequences of you not liking the Hugos. It’s going to come up from time to time, same as that thing Uncle Bob said to our Alice twenty years ago will keep coming up at family meals.

        At this point it’s pretty much just academic for me – it’s interesting to see the final evolution of the movement(s) and also instructive because Puppies weren’t the first movement of this sort and won’t be the last – there are similar kerfluffles going on in comics, in furry fandom, etc etc, and from my POV there are lessons to be learned *and applied* from our experience.

        I don’t see the point of anyone actually getting offended that there are still reservoirs of ill-will sloshing around – it’s inevitable.

        Liked by 6 people

      4. Let me put it yet one more way: not only have the Pups not moved on (except in the sense of ‘retreated’) the same FALSE claims are still being made, still circulated and still believed even though they are easily checked. It isn’t just that the pups haven’t moved on but we can see WHY they haven’t – they are still avoiding to critically examine their beliefs and come to terms with their mistakes.

        Liked by 4 people

      5. Christopher M. Chupik: Really, is that the best you can do, JJ? I mentioned the Hugos a few times and moved on.

        Of course you did. You’ve moved on so much that you felt compelled to come here and comment. Bless your heart. 😀

        Liked by 4 people

      6. I think Mark Hepworth is right, we’ll see at least a few years of Puppy reaction, each year the Hugo ballot is announced, along the lines of “OMG, look at this Marxist garbage that only got nominated because the authors are bi-racial transgender liberals publisher by Tor, the Hugo are a travesty, John Scalzi’s career is over, WorldCon will disappear from the planet within the decade, (subtext: I am bitter, enraged, hurt, and offended that I never got one of these coveted awards I denigrate to demonstrate how cool I am),” etc., etc.

        Each year, the rants will be fewer and briefer, until they pretty much disappear altogether. But it’ll take a while. The Puppies put 4-5 years of effort into trying to get Hugo Awards or become Hugo brokers; it could easily take that long (or longer) for them to stop barking at the new ballot each year.

        Liked by 4 people

      1. Says the guy who has written more in the past week on Sad Puppies than any of the Puppies have written on this year’s Hugos.

        Like

      2. And? You are the one claiming the Puppies have moved on – wether I’ve written one post or a million doesn’t change whether they have moved on or not. Seriously put a modicum of thought into what you are saying! Your rejoinder that a blog that writes lots about the Hugo’s and related Hugo Kerfuffles is still writing about Hugo kerfuffles is unremarkable – I’m going to keep writing about Larry et al until I get bored of doing so.

        Liked by 4 people

      3. And all from a regular at a website that was running a bonkers conspiracy theory focused on me personally for several days earlier this year! Yeah…really not convinced that Brad or Dave of any of the other ‘Fieldsy’ theorist have moved on! 🙂

        Liked by 3 people

      4. Camestros wrote: “And all from a regular at a website that was running a bonkers conspiracy theory focused on me personally for several days earlier this year! ”

        Not to mention the nauseatingly ugly verbal attacks they directed at Foz Meadows, as a corollary to their absurd conspiracy theory. I’m curious, were those lip-licking speculations about Ms. Meadows, her sexuality, her marriage, and her sex life “just” homophobia, or were the Puppies still acting out because she wrote a couple of critiques of the Puppy campaign on her blog 2-3 years ago? Is that something ELSE the Puppy crowd still can’t let go?

        Liked by 3 people

      5. It seemed pretty obvious to me that FieldsyGate was all about the Puppies’ continuing resentment of people who had called them out on their appalling behavior during the Sad Puppies campaign, and they used Antonelli as a willing dupe to take out their aggravation on two of the people who had done the calling out.

        As a side note, demonstrating once again that he is utterly incapable of learning from his mistakes, has not the slightest comprehension of just how seriously harmful his actions were, has no remorse whatsoever for them, and is unwilling to accept any responsibility for that harm, when the Hugo Finalists were announced, Antonelli “joked” on Twitter that Camestros should thank him for getting the Hugo nod. 🙄

        Liked by 3 people

  15. People who have “moved on” wouldn’t write Facebook posts griping about the finalists, spin insane conspiracy theories about the value of an award, or show up in comment sections to stick out their bottom lip and declare that they have-so-really-they-mean-it-this-time moved on.

    Liked by 4 people

      1. I like Camestros as well, as i’ve said several times. You don’t have to just look at what I say just because of my identity and attack just for the sake of it. It’s starting to look ridiculous with a few folk. Cam getting something doesn’t diminish me and I’m happy for him. Why not just agree when you do actually agree?

        Like

      2. Actually, Jon, I make fun of you because I think you’re an abusive bully whose only saving grace is how bad you are at it, not because of your “identity”. You know this, I know this, yet you play ignorant every time.

        Anyway, that’s more of my time spent on you than strictly required.

        Liked by 4 people

      3. I am bullied quite a bit, i don’t do any bullying. It’s usually folk calling me names (like you just did) and me treating them with respect and dignity back (like I’m doing). It’s time to stop. If getting creepy packages sent to my house and having a convention discriminate against me over my beliefs is not going to make me go away, you saying a couple words on Cam’s site here certainly isn’t going to make it happen. I’m going to participate in SF/F for good, I have great fans who love my books, and I’m going to keep coming out with them and celebrating them and others’ books. So what are you trying to accomplish?

        Like

      4. How quickly he keeps forgetting his own words.

        Yet again:

        “Commence Operation: Troll The Shit Out Of SJW Authors On Twitter. If you want to participate, ping me.”

        Screen caps, Jon. They’re a thing.

        Liked by 8 people

      5. Jon Del Arroz: i don’t do any bullying.

        As Contrarius has pointed out, everyone here can read, and many of the people here have read your incessant harassing posts on Twitter. So you can deny it all you want, but the Tweets and their screenshots are still out there, and everyone knows about your continual bullying and harassing behavior toward SFF authors and fans.

         
        Jon Del Arroz: It’s usually folk calling me names (like you just did) and me treating them with respect and dignity back

        Yes, yes, “respect and dignity”, like the respect and dignity you showed the Hugo Finalists by recording nearly a half hour of you mocking their names, their gender, and their sexual orientation, and mocking Worldcon fans’ age and appearance and calling them not “real fans”. Yes, that’s certainly an example of you treating others with “respect and dignity”.

         
        Jon Del Arroz: If getting creepy packages sent to my house

        It was one package, Jon, ONE. a prank confetti package sent by someone who knew you personally and thus had your home address.

         
        Jon Del Arroz: and having a convention discriminate against me over my beliefs

        Once again, Jon, you are well aware that you were banned from Worldcon not because of your beliefs, but because of your actual continual bullying and harassing behavior toward SFF authors and fans and expressing your intention to go to Worldcon and do more of the same.

        Liked by 4 people

      6. Bad look literally advocating for crimes against me JJ because it’s “only once”.

        Like

      7. Please do not misrepresent so severely what people say to you here Jon. JJ did NOT advocate for any crimes to be committed against you. All they did was point out that the confetti bomb incident occurred once and apparently from somebody who knew you.

        Liked by 4 people

      8. Jon Del Arroz: Bad look literally advocating for crimes against me JJ because it’s “only once”.

        You really are a pathological liar, aren’t you? You just can’t keep yourself from lying. Everyone can see what I actually said, and it wasn’t “advocating for crimes”, it was correcting yet another one of your lies.

        Incidentally, I saw the numerous lies you wrote about me in your latest blog post. It’s interesting how you never provide links to the things you lie about which other people didn’t actually say — because of course, if you did that, then the people who read your Tweets and your blog posts would know just what a pathological liar you are.

        And the fact that you think saying that you never claimed to be a Good Christian makes all of your lying, harassment, mocking, and abuse acceptable behavior is really just staggering.

        Liked by 2 people

      9. So, not only does he think that people on an internet comment section don’t have access to the internet, he thinks that people cannot read what JJ said in this very comment thread and he can get away with lying about it.

        Liked by 2 people

      10. Jon, receiving appropriate responses to your bad behaviour is not “being bullied”. You really need to lose the persecution complex; it’s not a good look for you.

        Liked by 1 person

  16. Truesdale: “You layer in the infiltration of the current far Left political views currently overwhelming society at large…”
    Yes, it’s true the US has become a socialist utopia. Look at our national health program, our free colleges, our strong gun control program, our government-sponsored solar-powered energy grid… Oh, wait, that’s the alternate Earth you guys aren’t supposed to know about. Never mind.

    Liked by 7 people

    1. Gasp! Although fair enough really – I’m in Australia but I haven’t really engaged with Australian fandom as a thing in itself. Something I should do really, it’s just not how things worked out.

      Like

    2. I’ve emailed them about the omission. They look a reputable site so I’m sure they’d want to have complete info.

      waltzing the Hugos, waltzing the Hugos…

      Liked by 3 people

      1. He’s in the article now: “writer Camestros Felapton for Best Fan Writer and regional Victoria-based artist Mia Sereno (Likhain) for Best Fan Artist.” So you were right, Lurkertype…

        Liked by 3 people

      2. All right, I told them that Cam was from Sydney. Who told them that Cam was from Bortsworth???!!!

        From the Books+Publishing Editor:
        Apologies for this omission, and thanks for letting us know. We’ve received conflicting reports about where Camestros Felapton is based, and the information is not readily available online. For this reason we’ve left out that detail.

        Liked by 3 people

      3. Huzzah for timely correction and accurate news sources!

        Might be Sydney, might be Brisbane, might be Aberdeen, but always Bortsworth in his heart.

        Like

      4. This is almost as good as the alleged FBI form letter stating that there is nobody by the name of Jerry Cotton (a German pulp hero and fictional FBI agent) working at the FBI.

        I shudder to think what will happen if someone named Jerry Cotton ever starts to work at the FBI.

        Like

      5. @Cora
        “We can neither confirm nor deny that a person named Jerry Cotton is employed or nor employed in any capacity by the FBI.”

        Liked by 1 person

      6. Pretty sure there actually IS an FBI form letter saying they don’t employ Mulder and Scully. And I think MI6 has a standard wording about the fictitious Mr. Bond and the entire 00 program.

        Like

  17. The thing I find most fascinating is the mental gymnastics required to… I don’t even know – is polythink the right word? – what they think about the Hugo. It’s simultaneously important enough to look impressive on a CV but not important enough for a university to actually check into, and worthless to writers except it boosts their career somehow and it’s unfair that Puppies can’t win the award even though it’s worthless and ran by Tor except that the Puppies, of all people, were able to game their way past the shadowy cabal somehow and end up on the final ballot, and getting No Awarded across the board showed how worthless the award was but was also used to gin up more hatred and inspire a further round of hate-voting on the part of the Pups because they really really want this worthless shiny statue that will make their writing more valuable and boost their academic careers and please excuse me while I pass out.

    Liked by 7 people

    1. Like I said higher up, it’s the symbolism of the thing — our righteous group against the Other’s sneaky and pointless machinations — rather than a consistent line of thought. They just keep throwing stuff up, whatever one of them wants to try, even if it’s a criminal act. And if called on it or people just joke about it, that’s bullying them, victimizing them, hysterically focusing on them, threatening them, scheming against them, censoring them, etc. They have to keep topping each other to keep up the emotional pitch of besiegement. Scientists have been studying it for decades. And when the logic collapses, it doesn’t matter because that wasn’t the point of the thing.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. I’m not going to go look, but I’d wager that one of them soon will echo this, only they’ll say that’s what we do. I’ve noticed over the years that when one of them gets zinged on something, they re-use what was said about them and turn it into a tu quoque sort of mirror accusation, whether it can be made to apply or not. There’s a sort of cargo cult faith over there that anything that stings should be used against the ones who stung them.

        See also Trump: “No, YOU have short fingers!!”

        Liked by 1 person

      2. @kiptw:
        Or like the whole ‘Fascist Communist Muslim’ kind of thing… the words don’t really mean anything to them except as insults, and so obviously their enemies are all of these ‘bad’ things, even if the bad things are mutually contradictory.

        Liked by 2 people

      3. They want things not to change because if it changes towards equality, they think they lose. So the Other calling out the hierarchy system, or just doing slightly better in it than they are supposed to do, is always illegitimate, inferior, over-emotional, untrustworthy, greedy, perverted, overly political, divisive, violent, scheming to control and revenge, fake, secret members of whatever the most popular bogeymonsters of the moment are — communists, ISIL, supposed Semitic cabals, etc. The Suffragettes got it, the Freedom Riders and MLK and co. got it, the gay rights movement got it — every social justice movement towards equality gets it thrown at them. You can point out that conservative right-ward ideology, all stripes of it, has always been on the wrong side of history in every issue of social justice and equality in every country, and they’ll ignore it or do things like create desperate alternate histories of the U.S. Civil War. You can point out that they are electing politicians who then try to hurt them, from polluting the land and water to turning them into serfs and taking away government aid they rely on, and they’ll scream every justification for that being a good thing that they can think of.

        It’s not a logic thing; it’s a fear thing. You haven’t challenged what you see as problems and inequalities — you’ve challenged who they are. It’s why we can’t get effective and fiscally improved policies through in countries and why we’re in most of these current messes. And why we have a lot of conservative con-artists making a lot of cash manipulating that fear. The more change we’ve got brewing towards equality, the more they freak out, even though they may have greatly benefited from social justice movements and cultural shifts towards equality in the past. But apparently they don’t want their kids getting any more equality from that sort of stuff. Or they’ll give lip service to the idea but claim equality activists are “fake” and scheming, etc., and so will destroy all — just like they’ve done during every single social change towards social justice and equality. Rinse, repeat. The alt right is running around doing supremacist rhetoric from like 1962 and sometimes the 1920’s and acting like they invented it. That must be pretty galling for traditional conservatives in many countries. But they’re bound at the hip now.

        Liked by 3 people

Comments are closed.