Why I don't like Social Justice Warriors

After my post about the Social Justice Warrior’s cannibal feeding frenzy, https://monsterhunternation.com/2014/11/10/sjw-cannibal-feeding-frenzy/ I’ve had a few people ask me why I bother writing about these people. That’s a good question. The short answer is that I can’t tolerate bullies.  The long answer is complicated.

I read Sarah’s post this morning, http://accordingtohoyt.com/2014/11/14/table-settings-at-the-cannibal-feast/  She is also talking about the SJW blogger getting caught being a total asshole scumbag jerk face, but to the SJWs the problem wasn’t that she was doing these horrible things, it was that she was doing these horrible things to the wrong people. Because when these horrible things are done to people like me or Sarah, then they are double plus good.

But one of her commenters said something that really struck me, and I want to quote it here.

Synova – Some of the comments by people who had been subject to the full treatment just made me want to cry. I didn’t think it was funny because the guilty parties and enablers aren’t the ones who are hurt. Yes, we can scoff at Scalzi when he makes a rational counter-argument and is made, ultimately, to retract and abase himself and agree in public and start proselytizing in public that no… you really can’t trust your own brain and if something seems wrong to you or you feel like defending yourself it is simply proof that you’re guilty.

But there were people who reported rather severe PTSD type reactions to even sitting down at a keyboard to write because they were so terrified of offending… again. Because *rationally* they’d done nothing wrong the first time, but they were forced to an irrational acceptance of their guilt. So now they’ve “accepted their privilege” and “checked it” and confessed and repented (they could come to the Dark Side and be welcomed, but they don’t know that, and have been taught that the Dark Side is evil, and that’s why shunning is so very evil within closed communities… being exiled is a horrific punishment) but since they had NO IDEA how they could have done something wrong in the first place, they also have no idea how to avoid it the next time.

Imagine doing this to a child.


The kid is walking through a room doing nothing much and suddenly POW… and then you tell the kid… well that was YOUR fault. You screwed up. You stepped on that spot on the floor.


So the kid looks at the spot and it looks like every other spot. But the kid is told that, no, the fact that she can’t even SEE the spot is what the problem is. You can’t SEE the spot… that’s why it is YOUR fault. Also, a good child will try to learn. You’re a good child, aren’t you?


So the kid says, yes… it was my fault. I could not SEE the spot. Not seeing the spot makes this my fault.

Afterward, it’s still impossible to see the spots, and walking across the room becomes fraught with danger. Sitting down at the keyboard gives this very “good” person the shakes and panic attacks… where are the spots? She still can’t see the spots but she MUST agree and believe that those spots exist.


I have a LOT of sympathy for those who were hurt, just like I have sympathy for any abused person.

Bingo. My problem is that I like stepping on their spots.

The issue with the Social Justice Warrior contingent isn’t just that they’ve got their causes, it is that they take those causes and use them to brow beat not only their opposition, but also the innocent bystanders, the undecided, and newcomers.

They’ve gotten away with it too, because they had cultural allies in high places, like academia, publishing, film, and the media. If you enter one of those industries they try to frighten you into staying within their arbitrary and capricious lines. If you color outside their lines, their punishments are slander, threats, rumor, lies, harassment, and whatever career damage they can come up with.

You know, all the stuff Requires Hate did to the wrong people. The threats, harassment, and slander weren’t special or unique. My side is used to them. Hell, according to the SJWs I’m a racist, sexist, homophobic, wife beating, rape apologist. None of those things are true, but it doesn’t matter to the SJWs. I’m a foe, and thus must be shunned. They stick as much stuff like that out there as possible in order to build a narrative about their targets. It is pervasive. The uninformed read those things and believe them.

Requires Hate only became controversial for getting caught using those tactics on people who’d obeyed and tried to color in their lines. That was a violation of the SJW’s social contract of not eating their own until they stray from proper goodthink.

The SJWs say they stand for equality. Only they don’t. That’s a smoke screen. They are champions of diversity, provided that everyone is diverse in exactly the same approved manner. At their core they are petty, vengeful, tyrannical thought police, who simply can’t abide someone sinning. They’re an unholy cross between puritans and communists, with a heavy dose of Zanax, and severe self-esteem issues.

Social Justice Warriors are control freaks. Nothing more. Their bizarre antics have given true feminists a bad name. Their mad accusations of racism against anything and everything causes real racism to get lost in the background noise. By accusing well meaning, good intentioned individuals of horrible crimes, they legitimize and empower the real criminals.

The most interesting part of last week’s big expose of Requires Hate was the comments from various left wing or moderate authors living in fear of being slandered or having their careers destroyed. All I can say to them is welcome to the party, buddy. Now do you understand why thought police are so dangerous? You can’t cheer when they go after those you disagree with, and then act surprised when the pack of vicious attack dogs you’ve fed, raised, and nurtured eventually turn on you. Attacking is what they are programmed to do. One day you will make a wrong move, or a move they at least perceive to be wrong, and then you’re going to get bitten.

Of course, once people like me and Sarah commented on this, the SJW Harpy Brigade took to Twitter to complain how horrible it was “White Men” feel they get a say in the matter… Let that bigotry soak in for a moment. Sure, this is our industry, and it affects our livelihood and our friends, but no opinion for you, because of skin color.

SJWs stifle artistic creativity. When artists, authors, designers, and creators are afraid of crossing the invisible lines, art suffers. What some of you haven’t realized yet however is that the lines just aren’t invisible, they move based upon how much the SJWs like you. Basically, if you are on their shun list, no matter what you do, you will give offense and cause outrage. And if you are one of them, you have a dispensation to sin freely.

If the SJWs decide you are an enemy anything you do is automatically sexist, racist, homophobic, or something, and they will tell thousands of complete strangers all about it. Regular nice people don’t like being accused of horrible, vile things, so usually they fall back in line. Of course, actually reading the books or knowing anything about the author is unnecessary before slandering them, which is how come to them I’m a white guy with white privilege who writes about manly white men doing white things for white people.

For those who end up on the shun list, if you have a minority character you are guilty of “tokenism” or worse, “cultural appropriation” which is a totally asinine concept, especially in a nation based upon cultural appropriating every winning idea and strategy in the history of the world. My children are Portuguese, Danish, Finnish, Russian, Jew, Mormons, descended from conquistadors, Vikings, cowboys, pioneers, and prophets, and we had Indian food for dinner last night before watching a Japanese TV show while I glued together pieces of a Spanish war game. My ancestors introduced the chili pepper to Thailand and my wife’s ancestors were legal to shoot on sight in Missouri. Who the hell do you think you are to tell an American not to culturally appropriate stuff?

However, if you are a SJW approved writer you can write tweets that are so blatantly, absurdly bigoted and racist that if you do a find and replace of White Man for Jew it would read like a Heinrich Himmler speech.

The SJW’s campaign of suppression is insidious and far reaching. They don’t just come after you after you’ve created, they scare you before you start.

Back when I mocked the foolish demands of End Binary Gender lady on Tor.com https://monsterhunternation.com/2014/01/28/ending-binary-gender-in-fiction-or-how-to-murder-your-writing-career/ and then defended myself from the White Knights who rode up to defend the poor damsel in distress from my Big Evil Swarthy Menace https://monsterhunternation.com/2014/01/29/5687/ I heard from a whole bunch of authors, ranging from just beginning to superstars, but mostly political moderates or liberals, thanking me for talking about this. These authors are frightened of writing about certain things or writing about them in the wrong way. Basically, they were trying to be good kids, and they didn’t know where the spots were. And these authors couldn’t comment themselves because they knew that would draw the SJW attack dogs.

Interesting side note, it was fun to hear from a bunch of liberal authors how End Binary Gender lady wasn’t such an innocent damsel in distress, and how she was actually an attack dog bully who’d harassed people at conventions. Fast forward a year and we see her implicated as one of Requires Hate’s minions. Fantastic.

This stuff is pervasive. It is everywhere. Don’t do this. Don’t do that. I got involved in the End Binary Gender nonsense because I actually like encouraging writers, especially new ones. SJWs like scaring writers. They’ll lecture you on forbidden topics and forbidden words, because the most important thing in the creative process is that the author walk on egg shells, worried that he might inadvertently sin.

Some of my fans follow various SJWs on Twitter and send me links to the most ridiculous quotes. An award winning SJW author recently tweeted about how she wasn’t going to play the videogame Destiny because it used Dark versus Light. Then there were a whole mess of comments which basically said You Go Girl! That’s Racist Colonialist talk!

Now there are plenty of reasons to hate Destiny’s writing (I actually felt bad for Peter Dinklage during some of the nonsensical exposition) but racism isn’t one of them. Somehow to an SJW dark vs. light or black vs. white used as a theme to represent good vs. evil is actually racist and based upon human skin tone… So now aspiring authors are afraid to use this because they don’t want to be racist. Too bad this is like one of the oldest continual themes in human storytelling, dating back to when we figured out fire kept away the things in the dark that wanted to eat us.

In actuality every human culture, from every continent, has some form of good vs. evil myth represented by light vs. dark. Because I write Monster Hunter, I’m a folklore nerd, so within a couple of seconds of reading that I thought of myths from Africa, India, South America, and all over Asia where the good guys were represented by “light” and the bad guys were represented by “dark”. The Bible, the Torah, the Talmud, the Koran, the Bhagavad Gita, that is a theme is all over religious writings from every corner of the world, from Amaterasu to Zoroastrians, light good, dark scary. Light you can see. Dark you can’t. Duh.

Hell, there’s a Dark Side of the Force for a reason!

But you should totally not use that old and powerful theme that appeals to all of sane humanity in your work, because outrage. Stay in your lines, peasant.

Recently another author tweeted something about oh good, another story where a white man says things, does things, then shoots things. Yeah, that sounds pretty horrible, except it describes stories as diverse as Unforgiven to Blade Runner, or Raiders of the Lost Ark to the Godfather, or Inception to Apocalypse Now. So maybe, just maybe, there is more diversity to storytelling than the skin deep bullshit SJWs fixate on.

Basically, the SJWs want you to be screwed, no matter what. If they can only control criminals, then soon enough they’ll make sure that everything is a crime.

The solution?

For creators, don’t play by their rules. Write what you want. Write about what inspires you. Make up whatever characters you think make for the most interesting story.

When the SJWs come for someone, and you know that they are liars, stand up for the truth. When they form an angry mob, at minimum don’t join in. If you’re like me and not adverse to confrontation, fight back. Tell the truth. When they say something bug nuts crazy, you’re not doing anyone any favors by validating their stupid opinion.

Don’t let them set the terms. When they say you’re something-ist, and you’re clearly not, tell them so. Never accept their lies. When they start explaining how you’re guilty because of invisible privilege, micro aggressions, or original sin, then all the observers will realize just how full of shit they really are.

When they judge someone based upon the color of their skin or their sex, rather than the content of their character or the quality of their ideas, call them on their bigotry.

Don’t let them determine what constitutes an acceptable response. They will show up, insult you, and then demand polite debate. An SJW can malign and insult you all day, but when you respond in kind, they call you rude, aggressive, hateful, and so angry, why you need to be dismissed! This is a one way street. They do it to individuals, groups, and even entire political movements. SJWs will pick the most bat shit crazy person on the opposition’s side and use them as the poster child to tar the whole movement. And if one of those people doesn’t exist, they’ll fabricate one.

When you’ve reached that point, you’ve got nothing to lose. Mock them relentlessly. When you discover that you’re dealing with a Concern Troll, just skip ahead to where you are going to end up inevitably anyway. The onlookers will appreciate your honesty.

SJWs are predictable in their responses. When I inevitably get attacked for this blog post, it’ll be all about how I’m something-ist or something-phobic, and want to keep Group X out of Industry Y. It is all about dismissing their opponent. The truth is optional.

Their predictability makes them vulnerable. Their toolbox is limited. That is why they can’t just condemn Requires Hate’s dirty tricks, because they those same dirty tricks are all they’ve got to cow the opposition into silence.

One thing you need to realize before joining in this fight, the goal isn’t to convince the SJWs. Swaying the decided is a nearly insurmountable task. The real goal is to convince the undecided, and debate is a spectator sport. When one side has nothing but lies, slander, and intimidation, all you need to do is expose them for what they really are.

Above I talked about the eternal human theme of light vs. dark. You’ll note in most of those mentioned religious texts from all over the world light and truth go hand in hand. The darkness hides the truth. SJWs thrive on ignorance, bigotry, hate, and fear. It is time to turn the light on and watch the cockroaches scatter.

MHN made the FINALS for the GoodReads best of 2014. Anybody can go vote.
Another anthology I'm in, Shared Nightmares, includes an excerpt of my story "Father's Day"

351 thoughts on “Why I don't like Social Justice Warriors”

  1. We see enough “passive aggressive” nonsense that it’s refreshing to see someone respond with active aggression. When someone honestly wants to debate (and there’s a chance that they might actually, you know, change their mind), let’s debate. If they want to fight unfairly, let’s fight for real. You sir, are a master of the mock-comment takedown, and it’s a pleasure reading your responses to trolls.

    Keep up the good work (and I don’t even mind if it means that it takes longer for you to take more of my money 😉

    1. Wait, what? This is cutting into my future reading pleasure? I did not sign off on that! I enjoy seeing the Correiakin unleashed on the ignorant of the internet, but only if it doesn’t interfere with the wordsmithing that takes my money. I need my fix!
      With that in mind, I’m loving the anthologies. I get a taste of the good stuff and I get exposed to some authors that I have not read from. Thank you, and keep up the excellent collaborations.

      1. From the sound of things, this is his way of taking a refreshing break. You know, so he can get back to writing and be even more productive. Some of us like to take a walk or maybe play some video games. Larry likes to throw down with internet trolls. Whatever works, huh?

  2. If you’re a Conservative Christian and don’t immediately support Same Sex Marriage, you’re an evil person who wants the Laws changed so that gays can legally be killed.

    Oh, the “Liberals” were silent about the person expressly applied that thought to me.

    IE I wanted to legally kill gays.

    1. The whole gay marriage thing is so irritating. If you don’t support something that (until the last couple of decades) hasn’t ever been legally recognized for the thousands of years we’ve had laws, we obviously want to lynch every gay person around for simply being alive. ARGH!

      1. And yet these same troglodytes cannot countenance any criticism of the Religion of Peace(tm), followers who, if given a chance in this country, would do the same to gays they do in other sharia ruled countries: put them to death.

        I remember laughing at former Iranian President Imindeedanutjob when he was allowed within our borders by this despicable administration to speak at the UN when he said, paraphrased, “We don’t have a homosexual problem in Iran.” No sh*t Sherlock. You killed them all.

        Excellent piece, Larry. Bookmarked for later tossing (like a grenade) at SJWs trying telling me that I have “white privilege” or other such nonsense.

      2. I’m in favor of gay marriage. I’m also appalled at the Left’s demonization of everyone who isn’t in favor of gay marriage. The sad thing is that the Left is very likely to doom the hopes of gay marriage because their strategy to gain it is so offensive to most of the population — including me.

      3. Yawn. I love it. This is why when conservatives say they are anti big government and libertarian I just laff. They are not libertarian.

        The whole “support” gay marriage issue is illustrative. Don’t support gay marriage? Don’t marry a gay person.

        And yes, in Texas conservatives want to put gay people in jail. They put it in the Republican platform. You know… because they are for small government.


        BTW – I am currently listening to a good Christian SJW. You can get it for free at audible. Encyclical Letter Laudato Si’ of the Holy Father Francis: On Care for Our Common Home – Written by: Pope Francis.

        Free is good correct? Enjoy.

        1. Add another reason why not to like Social Justice Warriors: they try to hide their lies in a ten-month-old comment thread, hoping that nobody will notice.

          Unfortunately for you, SJW75126, I noticed. You wrote:

          And yes, in Texas conservatives want to put gay people in jail. They put it in the Republican platform.

          That is a lie. Here is what the 2014 Republican platform said about homosexuality:

          Homosexuality- Homosexuality is a chosen behavior that is contrary to the fundamental unchanging truths that have been ordained by God in the Bible, recognized by our nation’s founders, and shared by the majority of Texans. Homosexuality must not be presented as an acceptable alternative lifestyle, in public policy, nor should family be redefined to include homosexual couples. We believe there should be no granting of special legal entitlements or creation of special status for homosexual behavior, regardless of state of origin. Additionally, we oppose any criminal or civil penalties against those who oppose homosexuality out of faith, conviction, or belief in traditional values.

          You don’t like any of that platform, naturally: it’s completely opposed to what you stand for. But there is nothing in that platform about “put[ting] gay people in jail.” You deliberately lied about that.

          Either retract your lies, or stand exposed as a liar for all to see. Your choice.

          P.S. Unlike you, I cite my sources. The quotation above was taken from:


          Accessed on September 24, 2015.

          1. Well, sometimes it’s an attempt at a “last devastating reply” that they hope their opponents never see. Which can be amusing on comments systems that give notifications that you’ve been replied to.

            “So… why didn’t you say this (time length) ago, little one? Did it take that long for you to make one up?!”


          2. You guys really do live in a whole different world don’t you? Did you miss the Lawrence decision?

            Not surprised. So we have this idiot that used to be Governor that wanted to be President that might be a prisoner named Rick Perry. He claims to have written a book called Fed up. In it he discusses the Lawrence decision where the Supremes overturned the Texas sodomy law and restored liberty to those of a different orientation. (Can I get an AMEN for liberty?) So why Gov Rick was running someone asked him about the Lawrence decision. He says:

            “I wish I could tell you I knew every Supreme Court case. I don’t. I’m not even going to try to go through every Supreme Court Case. I’m not a lawyer but here’s what I do know, I know they’re spending too much money in Washington, D.C.”

            I am thinking he didn’t really write the book. But that he doesn’t know a major case from Texas…. Well … not unusual. Remember we had George W. Bush before Rick and he was about the same.

          3. Yes that’s part of the goofy big government stuff they put in their platform. But no – they also put in their platform….

            “We oppose the legalization of sodomy. “We demand that Congress exercise its authority granted by the U.S. Constitution to withhold jurisdiction from the federal courts from cases involving sodomy.” That’s the 2010 platform. And Rick Perry talks about it in his book although he is too stupid to remember it when questioned.

            And in fact, that’s what Texas did. That’s what the Lawrence decision was about. Texas wanted to put people in jail because they were wrong people making wrong love. What is really he-haw funny is these fundamental bible thumping wingnuts are anything but Christian. But they think they are.

            This hate mongers use to try to put anti gay rights measures on the ballot to get the religious haters all stirred up too. It worked too.


          4. Very well; I retract my statement that you were lying, except insofar as you used the present tense. You should have said “wanted to put gay people in jail” if you were being scrupulously honest. However, 2010 is recent enough that I’ll grant that the present tense is within the bounds of truth: some Texas conservatives probably still oppose the legalization of sodomy, even though the party has now removed that plank from its platform. (Some, clearly, do lean more libertarian and, while still opposing homosexuality in principle, do not think that it should be a criminal offense — if there were NOT a larger number of libertarian-minded conservatives now than in 2010, that “don’t legalize sodomy” plank would still be in the platform.)

            Moving from matters of provable fact to matters of opinion, however, you’re still wrong. When I cited the 2014 statement on homosexuality, you called that “part of the goofy big government stuff they put in their platform.” But the entire statement is all about what government should NOT do — create special legal entitlements, redefine what “family” has meant for centuries, and so on. Nothing in what I cited has anything to do with making government do MORE things; all of it is along the lines of, “Oh, and also, the government should NOT do x, y and z.” Which is inherently a small-government position.

          5. There is no special legal entitlement. That was removed by the supreme court decision and the application of the 14th amendment. Now people can marry who they love despite their orientation. And pretend libertarians try to figure out how to justify themselves. But it is just like the Hugos – they think it is wrong people have wrong fun.

            Same with reproductive rights. The religious right is welcome to their bizarre view of personhood. But they want to remove choice from those that differ from them. It isn’t the libertarian position.

            True libertarians have much more in common with liberals than conservatives. Pretty much a true libertarian is a liberal that doesn’t understand economics.

          6. If you find “I think all human beings should have the right to life, no matter how old or young they are, no matter how “useful” they are to society, and no matter who wants them to die” to be a “bizarre” view of personhood, I’m very thankful that I disagree with you. Who are you to decide that this human being doesn’t have the right to life because they’re less than nine months old?

          7. I don’t hate to disabuse you of your misunderstandings, but people have always been able to marry who they love, regardless of sexual orientation. No one was stopping them before. The issue at hand is simply federal and state benefits, so you can stop pretending it was about love.

            And a bizarre view of personhood? No, the bizarre thing is that you think that there is some physiological process by which the birth canal imparts this abstract concept.

            And you can also stop pretending that “libertarian” is ideologically clear enough to survive some sort of purity test. Then again, this does parallel your pathological need to identify TrueFans.

          8. Oh son, you can pretend all you want that a government-issued piece of paper makes you married, but true marriage is a sacrament of the church and the government has damn-all to do with it.

            And you’re claim about “reproductive rights” is just your way of hiding the fact that you’re supporting what is essentially murder of living humans.

          9. @Doug

            Nope Old Sun. True Marriage is a matter of law. That’s why they issue marriage certificates. There is no 14th amendment ruling requiring any church to marry this one, that one or anyone.

            And reproductive rights doesn’t have anything to do with murder. Although I have murdered billions and flushed them down the toilet according to some of the brethern. But that’s just in their own mind.

            @gnmay, you said … “I don’t hate to disabuse you of your misunderstandings, but people have always been able to marry who they love, regardless of sexual orientation. No one was stopping them before.”

            I suggest you read the Lawrence the decision and follow that up with the Texas Republican Party Platform as discussed above. Homophobes have been putting people in jail for having wrong fun for a long time. And would love to do so today. And then pretend they are followers of Christ. Irony is rich in the right-wing, no?

            Again – note whose on the side of liberty in this discussion and those that are making excuses. Big government anyone?

          10. Sorry, dude. The family, and marriage, came before the state. The state recognizes marriage, it does not define it.
            And you’re right, reproductive rights have nothing to do with murder. Just like property rights have nothing to do with kidnapping.

          11. I actually HAVE read the Lawrence decision, unlike you, and that matters not one whit to the fact you have rejected. Homosexuals have always been able to get married. Period. This was simply about state sanction. Now you can abuse the English language as much as you want, but that doesn’t change the objective facts of the matter.

          12. Gnmay’s logic is like “people can always make their own money – they just can’t spend it”. That is to say – there is no logic. Congrats on reading the case and missing the point. Perhaps you might try Loving v. Virginia now.

            The objective facts is the legal state of matrimony is provided by law. Marriage is not a privilege but a fundamental right (see Loving) and all rights are inalienable and required to be recognized by the states to all citizens (see the 14th amendment).

            This is simply not a subject for debate. It is simply a fact.

            @ 60guildere, we know what murder is because we know what the statue says – in each state. We are a nation of laws – not witch doctors. Can I get an amen for a nation of law?

            Interesting point/aside along these lines, when civil rights workers were murdered in Mississippi with after the fact complicity of the state, those guilty had to prosecuted for civil rights violations. Murder is defined by the state and in that case Mississippi was happy to look the other way for a long time.

          13. If you can’t understand the difference between what something really is and what something legally is, we’re done here.

          14. You’re confused again. I’m stating a fact. A statement of fact is not “logic”. That fact also remains unchanged, despite you desperately trying to move the goalposts with the silly semantical insertion of “matrimony”. Which still doesn’t change the underlying facts. Legally, homosexual couples could also enter into contracts which afforded them the same protections as heterosexual couplings.

            So again, since you seem to keep missing it – the whole gay marriage movement was simply about getting state and federal benefits that were not extended through state-sanctioned marriage. It wasn’t about “love”. I’m done repeating myself on that point as you routinely prove yourself impervious to simple facts.

            And no, marriage is not a fundamental right, despite how many hallmark cards Kennedy ripped off in his illogical opinion. To assert that it is shows that you have no understanding of logic, or rights.

            Everyone here is shocked by this ‘revelation’ I’m sure.

    2. Misappropriation of the word “Homophobic”. ‘Homophobic’ means feeling about gay people the way some folks feel about slugs or spiders: unreasoning fear and hate. Disagreeing that being told you’re unable to open a joint checking account is the moral equivalent of Sandy Bull’s firehoses isn’t homophobic, or any kind of phobic at all.

      1. I got in an argument with an attorney about exactly that point and in probably one of the most straw-grasping responses I’ve seen yet, he claimed that it’s what was in common use that matters, with no thought to the matter of people inventing words out of whole cloth designed specifically to demonize certain world views (like 1984’s “Double Plus Good”), and that “You don’t control the English language.” Um, I do control it, as do you, and every other English speaker and it is behooves us to call out those who invent words intentionally to demonize wrongthink.

        Unless, of course, one favors the publication of a Newspeak Dictionary.

      2. I’m not sure that it’s a misappropriation of the word “Homophobic”.

        IIRC The term was created by a Gay Rights Activist (not a Mental Health professional).

        IMO it was created in order to claim that anybody who didn’t support his views was mentally ill.

        IMO a word created for that purpose can’t be “misappropriated”.

      3. That’s a good point, Paul. Misappropriation would imply that there is an appropriate use for the word, and since, as you say, it was created to demonize those who disagreed, it’s a loaded word that has no neutral meaning. If it really did mean a true phobia, then belittling people or hating on them by using the word would be quite mean. We don’t, after all, throw “claustrophobic” or “agoraphobic” at someone and expect that to be a legitimate argument or use it to insult someone for crossing some line. If someone has a phobia, that’s an intense fear that they themselves know to be irrational and have no control over. If someone truly did have a phobia of gay people, they would be someone to be pitied and to try to get help for because they’d be suffering from an uncontrollable mental condition. (Besides, linguistically, homophobia should mean ‘irrational fear of sameness’.)

        But yeah, using a word like homophobia is designed to shut down any actual discussion by instantly demonizing the opposition and, as you say, implying that they are mentally unstable and therefore not worth debating with. As soon as someone uses that word, I know that it’s no point trying to talk to them about any issues related to homosexualit at all.

      4. *shrug* I have no doubt that, somewhere out there, there’s someone who gets the dry heaves just thinking about Boy George or the Indigo Girls (listening is another matter). The point is that allowing SJW’s to tar all dissenters with the stigma of psychological illness is to cede most of the argument. It’s like when Leftists whip out the ‘Racist!’ screech.

        1. After a brief check of the history of the term, it appears that it originally meant “men who fear being considered homosexual”.

          It became “general knowledge” as meaning “people who fear/dislike homosexuals” and apparently was used that way by gay rights activists.

          So it doesn’t have a “good usage” in the minds of the general public.

    3. What you’re basically seeing with SJWs is two groups. One group is your everyday racial and sexual bigot. They have perfected convoluted arguments about social justice to mask their racism and bigotry.

      The second group buys into these arguments as fighting oppression.

      From the outside it’s all the same – hate speech.

      There is no room for something like that in a genre like SFF. In fact it’s as odd a place to find something like that as I can imagine.

      These people have got to go; every damn last one of them. Anyone who supports them, or says “Thank you for that post,” or encourages and enables them.

      Politics is one thing, this isn’t that. I draw the line at hate speech. I don’t care if it’s a hundred of them. They all got to go. Don’t buy their books, don’t publish their books, don’t associate with them professionally. Say why or don’t, but isolate them. They have asked for that and they deserve it.

  3. The Social Justice Wannabes inevitably turn on their own. The problem isn’t just in the SF world, the SJW entryists are trying to take over organized atheism and skepticism. When decent people who agree with 95% of their political views don’t accept everything they say as dogma, they get smeared: http://www.michaelnugent.com/2014/11/04/chronology-of-misrepresentations-and-smears-in-the-atheist-movement-by-pz-myers-and-others/

    As Orwell noted “The real division is not between conservatives and revolutionaries but between authoritarians and libertarians.” I’m glad to see the authoritarian left is finally showing its true face.

    1. Well, that’s the Marxist influence on the SJWs showing its true face, there. Self-criticism – and the occasional trumped-up show trial – is an important part of the dialectic. And if you can’t find something to criticize and abase yourself for before the collective, rest assured the collective will find some pretext to do it for you.

      One of many reasons why I’m losing patience with all the “discussions” the Left wants to have on various social issues, and have settled for “Because FUCK YOU, that’s why” as an all-purpose response.

      1. There is one better answer. It is “Because…” And then you grab their lapels and head butt them.

        Otherwise, gotta agree. There’s no point in “discussing” things with these people. You don’t discuss what’s for lunch with a pack of jackals. You convince them you’re not food.

        In that regard I think Larry has done the literary world a huge favor. He’s proven that there’s a whole lot of money to be made head butting SJWs.

        Or you could cry on TV like that poor bastard scientist with the chicks’n guns shirt who only landed a fucking spacecraft on a comet.

        We should start a fashion craze for those shirts. It’d be epic.

      2. These folks don’t get that fact that for us, the issue isn’t bringing up topics like diversity, but using hate speech and blame to account for why those topics aren’t being addressed properly.

        For all the hysteria SJWs make using hundreds of thousands of words about SFF being an analogy to a homophobic, women-hating Jim Crow KKK, you notice not one of them has ever sat down and written a cogent fact-filled work to back up that assertion. The simple reason for that is they can’t. They can’t even come close. They’ve had to redefine the very meaning of words like “sexism,” “racism” and “hate” to even use their ludicrous theories.

        It’s all innuendoes that whites either have race privilege or are outright racists and that amounts to the same thing and where were the women and blah, blah, blah. No facts, just assumptions based on squat, profiling and myths.

    2. Not trying to pick at nits, but if you think the authoritarian Left didn’t show its true face until the year 2014 A.D…. well, I like your planet better than mine. Let’s live there.

      1. Fair point, I should have restricted that observation to the organized atheism and skepticism world. As an anarchist-leaning libertarian, I’ve never been aligned with the majority political views in that community, although some of the thought leaders like Penn Jillette are pretty sensible. It was always easy to see the authoritarian nature of many of the participants.

        What’s different now is that the SJW entryists have made a play for power by attempting to tear down the perceived leaders and smear their reputations. The greatest sin for the SJWs is to get out of lockstep with them. Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Michael Shermer, and now Michael Nugent are being subject to the lies and distortions that are familiar to many of you in the SF world and that we’re seeing in GamerGate.

        While I disagree with their politics, there are some on the left who are decent human beings. They are starting to see the vicious tribalism of those they thought were on their side. This is a very good thing.

        1. “Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Michael Shermer, and now Michael Nugent” get fair play turn around. They have been lying and bullying good people of Faith for many years with their screeds against religion and religious people. For years they have called people who believe in God illiterate, ignorant, anti-science, and mental. I have no sympathy for them.

        2. “Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Michael Shermer, and now Michael Nugent are being subject to the lies and distortions that are familiar to many of you in the SF world and that we’re seeing in GamerGate.”

          I am a minor fan of Dawkins, Harris and Shermer but not familiar with Michael Nugent. I will keep an eye out if he is in that category.

          Partick says: “I’ve never been aligned with the majority political views in that community, although some of the thought leaders like Penn Jillette are pretty sensible. ”

          Penn is funny but he is struggling with facts like climate change and what that means to the over simplifications provided by libertarians. I have listened to 3 of his books now. At the end of the day, Penn’s got a good heart. And he is funny as hell.

  4. I began writing a book many moons ago, a fantasy novel where the main character had dark reddish skin, like an Indian. but culturally, that’s not where I was coming from at all. In the world I created, his race had been seafaring people for ages, so it made sense for them to have darker skin. I was scared to finish it at one time because I am a white man, and I was going to use his skin color as a way that his race was identified and persecuted, and we all know that white men never experience discrimination.

    Thanks to people like you and Sarah Hoyt, I don’t worry about people reacting badly because white men can’t write about things like discrimination and persecution. Now I’m back to worrying about how to finish the damn plot…

    1. Bottom line… anyone who is not you is an alien to you. Even if that alien is your twin brother. If we couldn’t imagine another point of view what could we write about at all? And since we can imagine humans who are not ourselves, the degree of difference between imagining your twin brother or a peasant child or an occult priest or a man or a woman is so blindingly small… anyone who tries to tell you that your human experience only applies to your twin should be laughed at in the face.

  5. When I first started writing, I was actually trying to get away from writing about politics. I was kind of burned out on it and really wanted to appeal to the masses as much as any science fiction writer can. However, somewhere along the way, I realized that the Left wouldn’t really let that go. Everything, to them, is about politics. I even had a guy comment on my blog that everything was political (never did answer as to how pissing standing up was political, though I know what it would have been).

    Now, I’m not worrying about it. I’m a writer. I tell the stories I want to tell in the way I want to tell them. Call a character’s inclusion “tokenism” because I chose for him to be black. I. Do. No. Care.

    I figured out that the kind of stories I tell, the ones where heroes are actually heroic, wouldn’t appeal to the SJW crowd anyways, so they can go screw themselves sideways with an aircraft carrier. No lube.

    I’m going to sell my books, make money, and laugh in their faces from here on out.

    1. I applaud your integrity, sir.

      Incidentally, I’ve heard multiple folks from GamerGate declare that when they’re done reforming gaming, they’ll come over and help us in SFF.

      1. We’re up against the exact same sort of foes with videogames and literature, so it shouldn’t be too hard a jump to make.

      2. The fine folks at MHN can help speed things up with just 5 minutes of their time per day. Give 1 follow, 1 favorite, and 1 retweet to people in GamerGate daily.

        For a deeper and even more productive level of involvement, consider joining the email campaign to bleed advertising $$ from SJW sites like Gawker, Kotaku, Jezebel, etc. (It’s been highly effective.)

        And if you prefer taking the initiative, go ahead and start using GG’s successful tactics to establish a beachhead in SFF.

        Thanks for voicing support!

      3. Ah, the “power” lie getting applied to sexism like it gets used with racism. The nice candy-coated lie that bigots use to excuse their actions and (worse) to corrupt others into becoming bigots themselves.

        “Oh it’s not racism/sexism since you have no power so you can libel and slander people based on their race/sex and it’s okay!”

      4. Exactly. That’s how bigotry, sexism, racism, supremacy and demonization theories work. Don’t anyone be fooled by what this woman is selling, especially someone who quotes bell hooks “Men are not exploited or oppressed by sexism, but there are ways in which they suffer as a result of it.”

        So despite her wordplay, men actually do oppress themselves with their own sexism, kinda like Jews do with their own greed. Sarkeesian retweets this quote by one of her supporters: “The harassment of @femfreq constitutes gendered hate speech. Very specific and very disturbing.”

        Once again you see a cult that has no neutral definition of gendered hate speech; it its place is a simple lie asserted as truth. It furthermore asserts Jews responding to targeted anti-Semitic attacks are engaging in gentiled hate speech. It’s beer-garden logic.

        And people wonder what gamergate has to do with them. It’s nothing less than a full-scale assault on our Constitution and hate speech mainstreamed through our media as justice. How long before “No Jew won an Oscar tonight, no white man won a congressional seat in this state, let’s not watch a TV show with white men in it.”

        These people are plain dangerous and the Southern Poverty Law Center needs to wake up and stop looking at white militia.

      5. That’s true up to a point. It would be interesting if the SJWs racist Tweets were Tweeted forward to @splcenter every day. The deluge would be impressive in and of itself, and hard to ignore. That’s because under the SPLC’s definition of a hate-group, core SFF’s radfems constitute one. If they ignored them, one could start asking why, and why their definition is not race and gender neutral.

        1. …. everyone is aware of the Correia/Puppies/GamerGate connection.

          Yes, we are aware that GamerGate had nothing to do with the Sad Puppies movement until the SJWs started claiming that it did, at which point several GG’ers said, “Wait, what’s this Sad Puppies thing they’re claiming we’re connected to? Oh, another front in the culture wars? Well, heck, sign me up. Might as well.”

          So thanks, SJW75126 and all the SJW’s you represent, for being such good recruiters. Thanks for bringing the GamerGate people in to swell our ranks. Keep this up, and Sad Puppies 4 will be an even greater success than SP3 was!

          1. I like Gamergate. I support Gamergate. I think they’re right and Anita is full of shit. Vox? Hell. I’m friends with Adam Baldwin, and he made up the hashtag.

            Man, do you ever shut up? I go away for a weekend and you posted like 50 times.

          2. What’s it like to provide covering fire for a hate movement and be unaware of it? That must be kinda tough on the ol’ ego. At least it would be if you possessed any self-awareness. Why not go back to Glyer’s and tease him and his daffy crew with these words: “equal protection.” That’ll send them scrambling all over the place with the Googling.

    2. A few years ago a leftist political party in Sweden wanted to ban men from urinating standing up. D:
      Anyway, grats on being in the WSJ.

      1. I remember that. More importantly, I remember laughing at that (and I did ask if that was the politics of me pissing while standing, but I couldn’t remember the exact example).

        And thanks. It was kind of fun getting a chance to mouth off to James Patterson. I suspect that disqualifies me from “working with” him on any future projects of his. Oh well.

  6. By the end of this post, I found myself shirtless, wearing a kilt, clutching my claymore, with my face painted blue, shouting “FREEDOM” and I still have no recollection of how that happened.

    1. And the next day you’re in front of the cameras bawling an apology, and you have no idea how that happened, either.

  7. Larry, I get called a lot of things, but for some reason the skeletons seem to fear calling me a racist. Why do you get all that gooshy-filled, wonderful, cannon-fodder hate and I have to scrimp?

    By the way, great post.

        1. Maybe. I just can’t figure out how you could have missed being called a racist. I get called one at least once a week, and despite reading my name on the Wall Street Journal, I know I’m just a small fish.

    1. Well, if you’re not white, you can’t be racist. The most “they” can say is that you have “racist ideas”. [Sad Smile]

        1. Larry, Sarah and Vox are *believed/seen* as being White. Warp’s last name is “obviously” non-white (by SJW standards).

    2. Because they can figure out a Spanish last name, but they can’t figure out a Portuguese one, and if you say you’re Lusitanic they figure you come from a long line of oceanliners.

  8. One of the reasons (at least in writing) that ultimately they are going to lose comes back to how their vitriol influences those that come after.

    RH drove away new writers, gave others psychological damage, and (from the looks of it) attacked her competition for the savory sop of being the special high victim who thereby deserves all the praise they can heap on her.

    You, Brad, Sarah, and the ‘neutral’ writers like David Farland and Kevin J. Anderson support new authors, go on about how awesome their work is, and offer actual help.

    But its more than just that. (Though that is a huge deal) They may have each other convinced that their PC angsty drivel is cutting edge and fabulous, but it isn’t swaying the new (and soon to be former) readers.

    When I write action I ask “What would Larry do?” When I am trying to capture the awe inspiring nature of space and exploration I go to Brad’s writing. When I want to work on my prose I read John C. Wright. Through the simple fact that they’re obsessed with identity politics to the detriment of the story they are aborting the continuation of their ideas and worldview by driving away the up and coming who need inspiration and examples to aspire to.

    1. RH drove away new writers, gave others psychological damage, and (from the looks of it) attacked her competition for the savory sop of being the special high victim who thereby deserves all the praise they can heap on her.

      And in doing so, discouraged new Leftist writers: she did very little to discourage actual Rightist writers, who are used to this abuse and hence shrug it off.

      1. Oh, exactly my point – keep that trend up for a decade or two and they’ll make sf/f center/right by default. And that doesn’t even factor in issues of sales.

      2. Ha, yeah, the SJWs are working so hard to cripple/scare off new writers who actually care about that sort of thing, maybe by default all that’ll be left in a decade or two are those of us who know that those things matter less that telling a good story. So, in trying to brow-beat everyone to conform to their idea of what SF/F should be, they’ll end up causing the exact opposite of what they want. And SF/F will be better off for it. Maybe we should just leave them to it and let the SJW snake eat its own tail.

      3. I’ve read many a comment from people claiming they gave up on the idea of entering SFF as writers. It had nothing to do with Requires Hate. It was the Social Justice Warriors and their eternal crusade of harassing racism.

        1. Or it is that SF/F is long considered the bottom basement of fiction writing.

          I think that is changing. SF/F is broader, more entertaining, more diverse and more mainstream all at the same time. This may be a golden age.

          Not just books – look as some of the Network offerings like “Extant”. Good stuff out there these days.

      4. Me, I’m more inspired than ever to make it as a writer. Because the SJWs are accidentally right about something: #WeNeedDiverseBooks. We won’t get them playing by their rules.

      5. If I’m being completely honest, I must admit that I seriously considered not pursuing SF/F as my main genre when the Sad Puppies stuff got to its worst. My plan was to instead write Romance that heavily featured SF/F, despite not really reading any Romance, simply because, as a mostly female genre (at least perception-wise, I know there are some very successful male authors of Romance) it seems to have escaped the SJW calls for equity of numbers. Go figure.

        Thankfully I am not at the point where my response to that idea is ‘screw you.’ I may still end up writing Romance at some point, as it would be an interesting change of pace, but I’ll be damned if I let these morally bankrupt illogical cowards force me to change how I live my life.

      6. I didn’t know any better, so I wrote sci fi. I suspect if I ever sell enough, someone will scream about some of my protagonists (and I) being traitors to their sex (or species-ism, or something). Big woop. It would probably help my sales at the rate the Special Snowflakes are going.

      7. Oh, hell with leaving the field. Science fiction belongs to techno-optimists — back in the day when Leftists like H. G. Wells wrote great science fiction, they were heroic Leftists who looked forward to socialist techno-utopias, not wussy Leftists who whined “We’re doomed. Let’s just draw it out as long as possible.” Even Olaf Stapledon’s pessimistic Star Maker novels (it’s not generally realized that he wrote four or five of them — Last and First Men, Last Man in London, Star Maker, Odd John and Sirius, all loosely connected by continuity calls) had grandeur and epic scope.

        We are winning. Look at whose novels are becoming massive best-selling action series (Weber, Ringo, Flint, Correia, Kratman, McMasters Bujold, etc.) and who can only write sad little unpopular stories about sad little unpopular people eking out sad little unpopular existences and then dying sadly.

        Now is hardly the time for surrender!

      8. That’s one of the things I loved about Interstellar: no matter how bad things got, the main character never gave up.

    2. The “sense of wonder” of the core group of anti-white bigots driving all this lies in their narcissism of their race and gender. They may find it fascinating but it’s not going to sell SFF.

      The funny thing about all this is the old Golden Age writers they don’t like were a culturally close-knit group of folks obviously on the same page being they were mid-century Americans. They were not racially on the same page, or knit together by that. But the PoC “safe” group driving this is from Brazil, from the Philippines lives in the Netherlands, from India lives in Scotland, from Indiana, etc. In other words they define themselves primarily as not white and consider that as having things in common; a culture. If fact that’s the pure racialism and racism they look for in others and can’t find.

    1. If you do something creative in your own way and not theirs, that is standing up to them. If you live your own way without hiding and are unashamed of it, that is standing up to them.

    2. If I may suggest: Go about your business as if your detractors aren’t there, and as much as possible don’t respond to their slings and arrows. (That’s why writers aren’t supposed to respond to negative comments on Amazon. If they know they can get a rise out of you, they’ll keep poking you like a chimp in a cage.) Being “pushed around” doesn’t just mean letting someone tell you what to do; it also means doing something just because they said not to. Either way they’re influencing your actions. They have power over you.

      Don’t fall for it. Do what YOU think is right. Your success is a more telling response than anything you could say in the heat of the moment.

    3. I’m with you on that, Arwen. Dave’s advice sounds pretty good to me. I try not to let myself get dragged into online arguments, but it’s hard (especially when a reasonable discussion sometimes descends into being an argument, which is when I need to decide when to bow out of it).

  9. I continue to enjoy watching you fight this and have found some of your advice – how to spot various trolls, etc invaluable. However – the real reason I stopped by is off topic:

    I was strolling through my Kindle library and realized I bought but never read Bad Penny way back when you recommended it. Got into it last night, love it and am enjoying your cameo.

    Keep fighting the good fight…and keep recommending worthy authors.

  10. And the behaviour is driving away readers, too. I was perfectly willing to give writers like N.K. Jemisin or Ann Leckie a chance until it became clear that the SJ contingent thought readers like me *owed* my reading time to such books, purely because of their representational value.

    The problem with politicizing everything is that once you have, you become terrified of *de*-politicizing *anything* for fear of an opponent re-politicizing it *against* you in exactly the way you once did.

    1. I agree. It’s often a choice between a book by one of many SJWs and their allies or a book by someone else.

      I chose the ‘someone else’ every time.

    2. At the end of the day, I only want one thing from people: a ball and strike zone; that’s it.

      In SFF, we’ve already identified people who just won’t do that, not if you’re a heterosexual ethnic European man. Not only won’t they let me have a strike zone, but they claim I took away the strike zone of others based on their race and sex, which is a lie. Worse, they claim people now dead did the same thing, and that I am an accessory in that too. Each is a lie.

      I can’t and won’t play a rigged game. So anyone out there claiming marginalization and erasure, you’ve got your wish as far as I am concerned. You’re out.

      The crying babies out there need to go read the Constitution, shut the fuck up, and write some SFF.

      Out would be every person at this Stormfront-lite stink-farm:


      What kind of moron starts off “White guy here…”? Nobody steps into a batter’s box and declares their race or who they bed. They take their swings. Take your swings or shut up. Or don’t and continue whining until the sun dies. And stay away from my SFF you culturally appropriated until you learn what a ball and a strike is.

      I vote “someone” else.

  11. Unfortunately timely post given that the SJWs just collected another scalp – on what should have been the best day of Dr. Matt Taylor’s life.

    1. This. So much this.

      People are whining about a supposedly “sexist” shirt potentially discouraging theoretical women (who obviously don’t actually CARE that much about science in the first place, or else a simple shirt wouldn’t be enough to stop them) from getting into science, when their ridiculous witch hunt is discouraging an ACTUAL, REAL LIFE brilliant scientist who LANDED A PROBE ON A FUCKING COMET from doing his job, in real life.

      1. I just saw an article where apparently this guy’s sister talked about how he’s not so good with practical, everyday things, like sometimes he can’t find his car in a parking lot. Never mind that this is totally normal for a lot of people–this sort of thing is actually so common with brilliant people that it’s pretty much expected. And here they are apparently trying to use this to demean him in some way.

        I don’t think that shirt was the best fashion choice he could have made, but people are overreacting like crazy.

      2. It’s an ALOHA SHIRT. By default it’s a horrible fashion choice. But as far as choosing aloha shirts, that’s one that’s not retina burning, and nowhere near as horrible as some of the ones I’ve had the misfortune to see.

        The said shirt is sold out on the link that was put up over in ATH.

      3. Yeah. And these are the people who like to pretend they actually DO SOMETHING USEFUL.

        When they go to the Middle East – and not in Israel- and start campaigning for women’s rights there I may take them more seriously. Until then, they’re whiny bitches who should be beaten like the fat, helpless barking harp seals they are.

        So mad right now.

      4. Patriarchs: Psalms 21 – “Blessed are the sandwich-makers. Ye shall not insult the wise men in their shirts of fine linen – the comet-landers. For yea such was the Star of Bethlehem.”

      1. Thanks, DaveP. They also seem to be sold out at the moment. Wonder when that happened, and if it’s because I’m not the only one with the idea. I’ll keep an eye on the page and hope they’re back in stock soon.

  12. The SJWs who say they are against Stormfront use and support the exact same language and demonization theories. SJWs use the same demonization theories that mainstream and normalize hate speech that led to mass genocide in Europe and Rwanda in short gluts of only a few years, or even months.

    The SJWs who threaten to boycott conventions unless they institute racial and sexual harassment policies are the worst racial and sexual harassers and stalkers in SFF.

    The SJWs who claim they are against the reactionary fifties want a Comics Code of Authority in video-gaming and SFF art. That means no Frank Frazetta, no Daisy Duke.

    The SJWs who claim they want equality have no use for our Fourteenth Amendment. There is no equal protection in SJW-land.

    The SJWs who claim they are against segregation continually adopt formal racially segregated “safe” rooms, dinners, symposiums, writing workshops, anthologies, and web sites. They do the same for women and homosexuals. Conversely, any accidental white or male Table of Contents or anything else is insulted. There are no such formal entities for straight white males in SFF.

    There are gay, non-white and women’s awards and grants I cannot win, while the SJWs complain about exacting percentages of who wins come-one, come-all awards which, by their language, straight white males created for everyone, the same way straight white males created the Constitution SJWs have no use for, except to distort the Fourteenth Amendment to protect their own special groups.

    SJWs use insane arguments like the mere absence of women, gays or non-whites is proof they want in and are being excluded. That argument is never applied to anything dominated by women, non-whites or gays. Not anywhere in the world.

    SJWs argue women, gays and non-whites can’t really be bigots because they are punching up, which is like saying the Nazis weren’t racists until they came to power and that the KKK and neo-Nazis in America today aren’t racists. Conversely, mistaken identity and the historically inaccurate portrayal of a non-white character by straight white men in a novel is “racism.” By the same token curse words or tight tank tops on a woman are “misogyny.”

    In SJW thought there is no such thing as a white indigenous population anywhere in the world. Certainly not one that deserves its heritage left intact. Conversely, any non-white population in the world is said to be indigenous, even if it is the descendent of a Turkish invader in Egypt, or Mughal invader in India. Any non-white population must have its demographic and heritage respected and maintained. Any non-white population has the right to diversify any white nation even to the point of subverting its demographic.

    Any idea Africa is not diverse is laughed at as racist by SJWs, even while they continually portray white nations as a “monoculture” and Whitey McWhiteland.

    In SJW history there is no such thing as non-white colonialism, or white postcolonialism. Tolkien’s fantasy documentation of a very real thousand year event is said to be a demonization of “easterlings.” There is no such thing as a non-white slave trade.

    Nothing an SJW says makes any sense. That’s because their “privilege”-power arguments and ideology of man-hatred and heterosexuality originate from and have been refined for almost a half-century by psychotic lesbian gender feminists. These arguments are kafkatrapping black hole circular arguments that are employed by rote, not in actual rhetoric of debate. That’s why SJWs tolerate no dissent and censor their blogs and block people on Twitter. After delivering their torpedoes about privilege or racism, they speed away because they can’t answer questions put to their own insane, sociopathic and toxic theories.

    SJWs racially and sexually attack straight white men every single day. When straight white men retaliate that is seen as proof of a male ideology of anti-women, anti-gay and anti-non-white. Who do they think is going to respond to targeted group defamation: Arabs?

    Any disagreement with an SJW defaults you to reactionary, a “troll,” a conservative and extreme right-winger.

    None of this is merely my opinion or a cute reverse argument, but things I have learned reading them and then documented again and again to the point of iron-clad absurdity and the repetitious droning of an insect. If the U.S. had the same lack of First Amendment protection, the same hate speech laws as Europe and the U.K., I reckon SJW editors, award nominees, literary organization officers, serial convention panelists/organizers and bloggers could be prosecuted for hate speech at a rate of 50 to 1 in terms of the people who are in opposition to SJWs.

    1. >The SJWs who say they are against Stormfront
      > use and support the exact same language and
      > demonization theories.

      Yeah, but the Stormfront people set up their own forum and pretty much stay there, as opposed to griefing the forums and blogs of people they don’t like.

      1. Which instantly makes them so much better than the SJWs prats because they don’t BOTHER ANYONE ELSE. If nothing else, just for that reason alone.

        Wow. Never thought I’d see the day when actual racists were nowhere near as bad as the SJWs who scream, bark and bleat about racism nonstop in places where they’re not wanted.

        Seriously, woah.

      2. Intersectional gender feminism is doing just a little more than griefing forums. They have denied men due process at universities across America in star chamber hearings about sexual assault. They have shamed the NFL into enacting a parallel system of laws regarding domestic violence many times harsher than our legal system. They have openly and publicly colluded to read less fiction by white men. They are working like barbarians at the gates to tear down the 14th Amendment and law itself and in its place substitute a system of laws based on a hierarchy of oppressor/oppressed skin and gender they literally believe in. The cult that insists they are equal can’t even understand our Constitution let alone maintain it. The idea they could invent such a thing is laughable. Any abstract thought that involves comparing one thing to another is beyond them. This is a wave of sickness that is institutionally sweeping America and little by little undoing the gains of the past.

    2. James May said:

      “The SJWs who say they are against Stormfront use and support the exact same language and demonization theories. ”

      Now lots of people say that Stormfront is Butcher’s weakest, but I really liked Stormfront. In a way, I like early less powerful Dresden more than Dresden super wizard.

      But I don’t think SJWs as a group really have anything to say about that one or any of the subsequent ones.

      1. You know, I think the Internet Arguing Checklist might be missing a tactic. “Deliberately Misunderstand Stuff” (as in, deliberately confusing the racist organization Stormfront with Butcher’s book Storm Front) doesn’t really fit the “Make S**t Up” category. We might need to add a #9 to the list.

        1. Oh yes – I forgot – This is a puppy site. It is about politics. It just pretends to be about SF/F, yes? 🙂

          BTW – it was just a bit of TIC humor from your SJW bud. Chill.

          1. … it was just a bit of TIC humor from your SJW bud. Chill.

            As I said on a different thread, your history of repeatedly arguing in bad faith has lost my goodwill. I’m no longer willing to give you the benefit of the doubt regarding anything you write: if I think it could just be a joke, or it could be a snide remark with the “Failed Joke Defense” lurking backstage, I’m going with the “snide remark” interpretation. As with your little snide remark just now about how this site “just pretends” to be about science fiction and fantasy: your smiley-face isn’t fooling anyone about your real intent.

            And by the way, I don’t believe anyone here considers you their “bud”.

  13. This needs to be framed:

    “However, if you are a SJW approved writer you can write tweets that are so blatantly, absurdly bigoted and racist that if you do a find and replace of White Man for Jew it would read like a Heinrich Himmler speech.”

    Remove “approved writer” and replace “tweets” with novel, newspaper column etc… it fits every sjw out there

  14. https://twitter.com/StevenGould/status/533299699584077826

    I just love this one. This “Missing Stair” thing is one the SJWs pass among themselves on a regular basis and for a couple of years now. What they seem to never do is actually read it. The links in the page brings you to a community of party clubs of the worst depravity of bondage and submission where they do things I never even imagined, including cutting, burning, raping and bleeding. You’d think the SJWs might have gotten a clue from “Pervocracy.” Or maybe they just dig this shit.

    It turns out the Missing Stair is someone who raped-raped their tied up victim instead of fake raped. Remember, these are the morons who whine about “rape culture” and the president of the SFWA passes along an actual and real rape culture. But don’t wear a Bettie Page shirt at the Jet Propulsion Lab cuz you kill scientists like that.

    1. Brain cells, do yo’ stuff. Tap-tapita-tap-tapita… Error? Error? Error? Examine.

      Nomad: You are the creator.

      Capt. Kirk: You are missing a stair, possibly due to signal-boosting bondage and rape culture.

      Capt. Kirk: [referring to Uhura] What d’you do to her?

      Nomad: That unit is defective. Its thinking is chaotic. Absorbing it unsettled me.

      Spock: That “unit” is a woman.

      Nomad: A mass of conflicting impulses.

  15. I have actually seen a SJW say that this proves that they don’t engage in those tactics, since they have problems with RH.

    To receive the obvious counter that witch hunters don’t want to be burned at the stake as witches.

    1. That is the dumbest freaking logic I’ve ever heard.

      After all, if we have problems with RH, does that mean it proves that none of us engage in these tactics? I bet there’s a reason why that logic doesn’t apply to us at all.

    2. I’ve also seen a SJW claim the same and then follow up by adding that blacklisting people and secret mailing lists between publishers, journalists and other parts of the media are not bad or controversial because they’re omnipresent.

      They hold themselves to very different standards than the rest of the world and take pride is said double standards.

      What frightens me the most is that if they hadn’t unintentionally attacked me so many times I could have ended up as one of them.

    3. Actually, they don’t have a problem with RH. You can’t call Jemisin a “half-savage” because of cultural insult seniority, but Jemisin can say whites are “diabolical” and harass them daily by cherry-picking news stories on her Twitter feed to make whites look bad.

      RH can say white men are a good analogy to buffaloes due to stupidity. In turn the SJWs got angry cuz someone back when called RH a “rabid animal,” cuz you can’t say that about a gay Asian woman.

      RH’s site has been the perfect barometer to measure SJW racist harassment by their sheer lack of reaction to its Stormfront-like nature, which continues to this very day among the SFWA crowd and the precious PoC having their important PoC conversations huddled in their guaranteed non-white “safe” spaces wearing their meteor helmets. Unsurprisingly, the racist intersectionalist PoC in SFF have found a way to make whites attacked by StormfrontAsia the actual guilty party.

      In intersectional thought, the compass always points north: straight white men.

  16. I was into punk and alt long before The Great Seattle Marketing Blitz; when someone tells me I offend them or ‘make them feel unsafe’ because of some truthful or accurate thing I’ve said, I don’t get apologetic: I just feel as if I’m doing something right.

    Ayn Rand did in fact have a couple of things right. One of them was that you should never allow anyone to use their own weakness as a weapon against you, and that’s exactly what all the SJW bleating of “I’m offended!” and “You frighten me” is. They don’t really feel offended or frightened: if they did, they’d not tolerate ANYONE behaving like that. Instead, their core belief that offensive speech is subjective based on the color (preference, religion, et cetera) of the speaker and the listener shows that it’s not the speech but the desire to regulate the speaker.

    So to all: If someone says “You offend me!” … THANK THEM for the positive feedback!

    1. Reminds me of when I was publicly mocking someone for saying something dumb and counter productive to cover their mistake, they rolled out “I feel insulted”. To which I countered “Good, I was trying to insult you”.

  17. “Who the hell do you think you are to tell an American not to culturally appropriate stuff?”

    Words of Iron. If I were an American, I’d wear this on a shirt. 🙂

    1. Yeah, I liked that line. Because isn’t that kind of what America’s all about? Heck, even our entire population (or those who aren’t Native Americans) is culturally appropriated. The engraving on the Statue of Liberty flatly states our desire to culturally appropriate.

      1. There were some native american drummers at a function I
        attended some years ago. One of the drummers hung up his
        jacket on a chair before going to work. What did the jacket say on
        the back? “DALLAS COWBOYS.”

        Who is appropriating whom, eh?

        1. It’s like most of the people bitching about the Washington Redskins mascot. They’re a bunch of white, privileged statist jackasses.

          Most of the American Indians I know aren’t bothered by it. We’ll, they don’t like that the team sucks, but I can’t blame them for that one.

      2. It’s okay for Natives to appropriate from their white imperialist oppressors. It reminds me of a stupid poster I once saw. It read: “Department of Homeland Security: protecting America since 1492”. It shows three Native men . . . carrying firearms.

      3. Tome, I remember when someone asked the Seminoles what they thought about the University of South Florida’s team. Short version: “They can use the name . . . as long as they’re winning.”

      4. Gah, I hate when I miss a notification and I can’t reply directly to the message.

        The Redskins: I’m not a Redskins fan, but I admire the owner’s stance on all these SJWs trying to get him to change his brand. A few weeks back, on one of the nationally broadcast games, he had the president of the Navajo Nation and his wife as guests in his private box and the announcers took notice. Giant middle finger to the SJWs!

        The Florida State Seminoles: A few years back, some of the SJWs tried to stir outrage against them for their name. Turns out that many years back, the university went to the tribe and asked permission and their blessing in using the name, and the tribe gladly gave it. The SJWs had to slink away with their tails between their legs.

    2. Here in the Western word, we have a government from the Greeks by way of the Romans by way of the British. We speak that b*st*ard tongue of all languafes, English. Our religion is Jewish by way of the Romans with a Reformation from the Germans. Our provinces and states have names taken from the Native Americans. We don’t care who your ancestors were. We’re bound by ideas instead of blood. Cultural appropriation? How could we *not* be?

      1. The term also gives the impression that there’s theft going on, that what was ‘appropriated’ is somehow gone from the original culture: that, somehow, black men stopped playing Delta Blues because of Elvis and Led Zeppelin and the Boy Scouts killed off all the Indians.

        This is, of course, total bullshit.

      2. We get to enjoy German beer, English literature, French chocolate and Italian cars while dropping the English cars, the German literature, the Italian beer, and the French.

      3. I happen to like British cars. They are a religious experience, as you spend quite a bit of time kneeling, bowing, and often times speaking in strange tongues in their presence.

      4. In Heaven, the police are British, the cooks are Italian, the mechanics are German, the organizers are Swiss, and the lovers are French.
        In Hell, the police are German, the cooks are British, the mechanics are French, the organizers are Italian, and the lovers are Swiss.

  18. I’ve been asked through the years. “Why do you debate atheists, you won’t change their opinions?” My answer, for the nearly 20 years I’ve been on usenet/Facebook. is always the same. “I’m not trying to change _their_ opinions. I’m trying to reach the readers that might have an open mind.”
    I think that you’re doing ti for the same reasons.

    1. Ha, I’ve been the saying the same thing for years as to why I debate Christians 🙂

      But I think more importantly – by demonstrating that you can have a debate, and not just an argument, you can humanize the other side.

      Nothing better than piercing the veil of us and them. Even if you think they’re wrong, as long as you can believe they’re decent, earnest people, we can at least not be dicks to each other.

  19. Thank you Larry.

    I’m not a wordy kind of guy. This post of yours is brilliant. It applies not only to the issue with RH, but all the other SJW outrages of the day. Race riot tourism, South of the border voter registration drives and Government takeover of healthcare by deceit.

    You wrote exactly how I see and think, yet lack the wordsmithery to express on my own. So really, thanks.

  20. I’d better never hear anyone use the cultural appropriation label with me, because that’s all I do with the stuff I write, and I don’t give a fig. It makes other people I know nervous, but I feel like after all of the study time I’ve put into it and so forth, I feel I’ve earned the right to speak in this arena.

  21. SJWs are in the most unlikely places. A few years I was on a crochet group on yahoo. You know crochet , using yarn or thread to make doilys, sweaters, afgans and the like. Real controversial. A woman posted that she made a child’s afgan using red heart white kids yarn. They attacked. On a crochet discussion ! Their problem was (among many others) that the previous discussion was about Red Hearts new yarn called Kids Yarn. It came in white…..(and in black and other colors). Never let facts get on the way of a good “you are a racist” attack pack. Have to protect the political correctness of crochet. I can’t believe that I just wrote that…… Story suggestion – a cult of racist, homophobic,white, etc crocheters who try to raise a demon made of white yarn.

  22. You say they have “severe self-esteem issues”. I disagree. I believe what they have is severe self-respect issues.

  23. I’ve run across bleats from SJWs that in addition to male, white and straight protagonists, able-bodied protagonists must be eliminated from stories too. Just when you think they’ve reached the limits of human stupidity, they top themselves.

      1. Only CrippledDifferently-Abled Lesbians, Bi-femal, Transwomen, Queerwomen, and whatever today’s other categories are women, OF COLOR only, you anti-Asian, anti-Latino, anti-Native American, anti-lots of other stuff I can’t think of BIGOT!

      1. DC’s Oracle was a great example of a disability leveraged into making a character better. Of course, many of Oracle’s defining stories were written by that evil right-wing misogynist, Chuck Dixon. 😉

      2. One might be able to make the refrigerator argument about how she ended up crippled in the first place. But she’d long since retired as Batgirl, and iirc wasn’t doing much of anything at the time. Plus, Alan Moore wrote the story. And seeing the SJW’s attack him would probably be all sorts of fun to watch – both from fans going nuts over attacking the guy who wrote ‘V for Vendetta’, and for the inevitable response from Moore (who’s very liberal, and likely won’t put up with something like that directed at him).

        And now they’ve healed her, making her boring again. Apparently the excitement in her series (which I don’t read) comes because her roommate is a post-op tranny. Yippee.

        I’ll also note that before bringing her back, they wrecked her replacement (who was a very unique individual), and according to the writer the instructions to wreck the replacement were heavy-handed instructions from the higher-ups. Said replacement has apparently been quietly ignored (meaning she likely no longer exists) ever since DC rebooted a few years ago.

    1. Then when you politely suggest that they write such stories and try to sell them, you get a baffled look in response.

        1. Of course. Because the only reason readers won’t buy their book is because the patriarchy won’t let them.

          Never mind the large number of women writers who have sold quite well.

    2. If mentally crippled counts all the gender fems need to do is Mary Sue themselves into their bi-sexual unheteronormative sagas of bounty hunters and robots who forgot what women and men are and call everyone “Cousin It” while banging everything in sight cuz gender fluidity.

  24. The reason you fight SJWs is found by extending the Pigeon Playing Chess metaphor:

    Slap the shit out of the pigeon and not only will you be able to continue what you were doing, but you won’t have to worry about him shitting on the board again.

  25. I have a question. How do you find the energy to respond to people this stupid/evil? I find it difficult to even grasp the evil ridiculousness filling their heads, much less dignify it with a coherent response other than profanity and a full stop on contact. I can’t imagine not driving myself insane if I gave every SJW I crossed paths with a response. Do you just pick your battles or do you just have boundless anger towards these people?

      1. Good to know, thanks. I just see these sometimes and think “how can he do it?” Not that I’m unhappy he does, of course. They’re great fun.

  26. Hate to say it, but for the first half of my life I never really thought about the reasoning behind the light/dark conflict.

    Then came Spike Lee’s “Malcolm X”. Good enough movie, but there’s a scene where a man shows Malcolm how racist the English language is by all the negative connotations for black, while white has many positive meanings.

    In the movie theater, in the middle of watching the film, my only thought was “Isn’t that because wild dogs and the great cats have better night vision than we do?”

    But that’s probably my whitey white y-chromosome talking.

    1. No, that’s you not being as ignorant as Spike Lee. In Africa, as Larry noted, they use the same white/good vs. black/evil symbolism. As for their skin, that’s good, “people color”, and not black.

  27. Since SJWs embody the Chess-Playing Pigeon, the reason to fight back is found by extending the metaphor:

    Slap the shit out of the pigeon so you can get back to the game and the pigeon can’t shit on the board again.

  28. Hi, this is Synova. I’m just a little bit freaked out to find myself quoted here. Sarah at least warned me. 🙂

    And I was thinking that the people who found it all rather funny had a good point too. It just makes me angry because it seems like all the rhetoric about protecting vulnerable people is noise to obscure the worst sort of harm. If those PTSD suffering new writers had never been required to accept, in order to be accepted into their “accepting” community, that they *must not* be the judge of their own behavior, no one could have hurt them like that.

    It’s disgusting.

    1. I’ve seen your comments at a couple of other blogs and always find them worth reading. Your analogy was spot on (NPI, but damn!) and perfectly describes the tools of manipulators and abusers. The very behaviors SJWs rail against in public.

      Though SJWs preach equality, what they truly want is simply to flip the perceived power dynamic to their favor. Their entire pseudo-philosophy is a smokescreen.

    2. It doesn’t help that they’re being told that they can’t be the judge of their own behavior. They’re essentially stepping into a minefield without the benefit of a fully functional metal detector. They know some places to avoid stepping, but not everywhere. Then, when they make the wrong step, they’re invariably blamed for the ensuing explosion as if they should have automatically known it was the wrong step.

      It’s really not fair to these poor people. Unfortunately, I can only muster so much sympathy right now because they’re the ones who listened.

      1. No one can be the judge in their own case, but this criticism isn’t about BEHAVIOR, it’s about FEELINGS and THOUGHTS. The SJWs won’t bring up behavior much, because discussions of how people ought to act will trip them up and not let them get away with harming people that they hate.

  29. Oh, and by standard linguistic construction, “homophobia” would mean an unreasoning fear of sameness or hominid species…

  30. The idiot who triumphantly Tweeted “Not a single white man won an award tonight. OPPRESSION” and “Curious: how many of you refuse to watch/read something if it’s about Yet Another Straight White Man?” reliably informs us today “GGers really don’t understand satire, do they.” – Sunil Patel

    That’s coming from a man who still hasn’t gotten to the civilizational level of the Magna Carta and who has abandoned two tin cans and some string to culturally appropriate my Twitter.

    After that he forgot how to breathe and had to be rushed to a hospital full of white technology and books written by white men in a car invented by white men.

      1. The level of race obsessiveness and attacks on LMB (who regardless of politics, writes characters amazingly well) are absurd. I noted that she appears to knuckle under, as well.

      2. That thread is depressing. Bujold finds out very quickly how easily it is to paint oneself into a corner by accepting the flawed argument of a manipulator. Once she fell into the trap, all damage from that point was self-inflicted.

      3. I agree. She should’ve said the amount of anti-white racial bigotry on this thread is amazing and left it at that. You can’t argue with a racist. All their arguments lead to the same target, whether one word or 10,000.

        SJWs believe there is nothing in the world that is not only their business, but that they own. I’ve read enough of that Yeloson to know exactly who he is and what he sells. He’s a bud of Jemisin. “Nuff said.

        For me, all those folks on that thread are really arguing is for me to take pains to never interact with them. There’s your inclusion and diversity. You’re out.

      4. I just skimmed that thread and the number of bigots who don’t want to be confused by actually reading the book or anything else is amazing.

      5. Yeah, those comments are depressing. Not a surprise to see Paul Weimar (Prince Jvstin) and Nick Matamas joining the lynch mob, though.

  31. Write what you want. Write about what inspires you. Make up whatever characters you think make for the most interesting story.

    This. A hundred times, this.

    I’m still starting out, but this tends to be why my leading male characters have swagger and strive to be heroic — because that’s the kind of leading male character I like. I don’t particularly want to read about a bashful wuss, and I don’t want to write it, either.

  32. The thing to remember about the SJWs os that they are nothing new. The phenomena is recorded at intervals throughout history (Savonarola, anyone?). Human societies simply seem to throw up these evangelical religious nuts every so often. They seldom accomplish anything worthwhile, and usually do a fair amount of damage. Each generation derided the ones that ran amok during the previous generations, and then falls for the whole mess all over again.

    I point this out because the SJWs believe they invented this crap. Telling them to their faces that they are just one more recycled fad – like Hula Hoops, but less amusing – probably won’t affect their behavior much, but the looks on their faces should requite us, at least in part, for their persistent idiocy.

  33. Well, if no one else is going to, I might as well address the elephant in the room, namely that claiming PTSD from social media as disrespectful as hell to people who actually suffer from it. And not just the obvious demographic, who just had a holiday in their honor, It’s spitting in the face of ACTUAL victims of abuse, physical, sexual, etc. which the SJWs claim to be dedicated to protect. That’s not to detract from the issue of cyber bullying, mind you. But at some point you have to acknowledge that if something hurtful is posted online, you roll your mouse up to the top of the tab, click on the x, and go back to your YouTube video of someone taking their cats BASE jumping. Therapy in real time is a lot more complex and time consuming and to equate the two concepts is insulting to everyone involved.

  34. …and some people don’t understand why I like you (and John, Mjke, Tom, et al.) Thank you for one of the best, reasoned, explanations of the whole SJW groupthink.
    The only thing I can add is that it seems to be an example of “fear of the Other/Unknown” It is strange, it is different, it is NotUs, it must be evil, we must destroy it.
    Some years ago, I realized that if you substitute Love and Hate for Good and Evil, it creates a new and (to me) illuminating perspective of human behavior.
    I love watching you just romp all over the SJW’s. Some of the most entertaining reading on the Web I’ve found. I would love to see their reaction if they were to witness Agent Franks taking down Something from the Outer Dark. Nah. They would probably go catatonic and then what would we do for entertainment

  35. We’ve gone over this topic pretty thoroughly in the last few months. The question remains as to what we’re going to do about it.

    We need to stick to simple principles that benefit all and ignore the silly strike zone of gender feminists where a strike is a ball and a ball a strike but depending on the day of the week, how old you are, whether you’re black, white or a homosexual.

    We need to ignore morons who want to take fun out of SFF and turn it into the Supreme Court based on paranoid conspiracy theories from the self-evident delicate hold on reality many of these people have.

    Keep monitoring and quoting the hate speech of the SJWs. People are watching and they are appalled at what they are seeing. Conversely the SJWs are finding it impossible to find quotes by us that match their own racism. Saying a shirt is women-hatred and mistaken identity or an absence of black authors racism will impress no one but other SJWs.

    The more we quote these folks the more sales they lose. Readers don’t like it when an author hates them for waking up. Eventually these authors will shut up, or hopefully leave the field all together. The self-evident success non-SJWs SFF authors are having in independent and mainstream publishing versus the no-show SJW SFF authors are at Amazon and in movie franchises tells its own story. No one wants what they are selling in terms of their fiction. The simple reason for that is it sucks; the reason for that is they are stupid. It’s one thing to delete a comment and another to be smart. Even less will people want that fiction when they are alerted these arrogant SJWs think most of the people on Earth are sub-human ignorant reactionaries who don’t get their privilege.

    Scalzi may cheer the monster he helped create when his own “Kid called me out on Twitter last night for something she considered sexist.” He may like it when his own kid becomes a stereotype of a commie regime where kids rat out their parents for badthink but I’m not having daffy feminist morons tell me what’s what.

    1. I just don’t see how the “daffy feminist morons” get away with turning one of the greatest scientific achievements of our age into a debate on fashion sense, and blaming all the sexism and stereotyping on the target of their ire.

      And as long as we’re talking about fashion sense, consider that the feminist morons in this case, are the same people wearing tampons as jewelry, dressing up as giant vaginas, and shrieking like meth-crazed harpies whenever anyone dares to leer at one of their “Slutwalks.”


      Oh, and demanding that we pay for their birth control, too.


      1. Out of all the many things intersectionalism intersects with, notice how it’s never brains, achievement, talent and common sense.

        And most revealingly, it’s never a thing they create everyone wants to bum rush. The only thing gender feminists create are ever more innovative ways to complain and insist they need safe-spaces. By an amazing coincidence their segregated safe-spaces is never where the action is. The other amazing coincidence is how often spaces segregated by actually having an interest in a thing is the center of all the action.

        These dames can’t even land a factual argument let alone deal with spacecraft. That’s going to happen when mental case reality says you have to end all heterosexuality and shirt-oppression before happiness begins.

    2. I think treating these SJW fascists like you treat any other tin-foil hat/black helicopter/chem-trails conspiracist is a start. They truly are a minority of the population, and tarring them with the “tin foil hat” label both marginalizes their positions and explodes their self-righteous heads.

      1. Chuck says: “They [SJWs] truly are a minority of the population”

        Absolutely the minority. Which then also means that Fans of WorldCon are not SJWs. They are more mainstream. Which is what Martin/Sclazi already told you. Good you figured it out.

        1. “Absolutely the minority. Which then also means that Fans of WorldCon are not SJWs.”

          You do understand that your first statement doesn’t in any way make your second true, right? No, you probably don’t…

  36. Just a thought. The right to be offensive is just that a right of free speech within the US.

    There exists no matching right to not be offended. And the reason for that is again free speech. Simply put if such a right did exist anyone could shutdown anyone else by simply declaring that they where offended.

    Note: In a polite society a lady or gentleman will endeavor not to give offense. In a society where people freely scream that they are offended to shut others up then any such politeness has no place.

    I’ll point out that the logical conclusion to having the right to not be offended is that any christian anywhere can logically shut up any atheist, pagan, or other by simply stating that they are offended by their speech. [And yes I am well aware that they think the rules they want enforced don’t apply to them.]

    1. Of course, if Conservative Christians were as “evil” as they claim, they’d be dead.

      But then they never think of that or think about what would happen if Conservatives were as evil as they claim.

      1. I’m way late to this discussion, but bingo. The people who were out on the streets in 2004 or so with “Bush = Hitler” signs never, EVER asked themselves what Hitler did to people who opposed his goals (hint: look up “Gestapo”), and also never asked themselves what Bush would do to them for protesting against them, if he really was as evil as they said he was. And the modern-day version of that claim is just as stupid.

        You know that, of course. But it’s worth reminding people about every now and then.

  37. “The whole Requires Hate mess has certainly handed a shitload of ammunition to those who want SF white, straight and male. Those guys have a paranoid theory about Social Justice Warriors, and they’re using RH as evidence’.” – Damien Walter on Twitter

    That guy must eat bullshit for breakfast. What single piece of evidence does this clownish figure have that anyone wants SF white straight and male other than the inside of his empty head? You’d think something so obvious would be easy to document. Some journalist. Walter makes the National Enquirer look conservative and cautious. These morons are convinced they’re cutting edge wits, but if they presented their evidence for racism in SFF in a court room a judge would laugh in their face.

    As for Walter’s “paranoid theory,” it’s no surprise we have hundreds of quotes to back up our views about Social Justice Warriors while SJWs have squat to back up their paranoia. No one is using Requires Hate as “evidence.” She is an inconsequential piece of the deluge of racist shit that comes from the core SFF community, which would not only include quotes from Walter himself, but the very one above.

    1. Keeping it straight white and male? It hasn’t been for a long time. How could we possibly maintain a completely fictitious state of affairs? Indeed, for us to hypothetically do this, we’d have to purge Larry Correia and Sarah A. Hoyt, who are among the very figures most often accused of trying to promote this non-existent movement.

      1. SFF has never been straight white and male in the conspiratorial sense Walter hints at. And as far as an accidental skewed demographic goes, so what if it was? Making it NOT so isn’t going to make the work any more fun or entertaining, despite all the bleating by SJWs like Justin Landon of Tor.com about a recent all-white table of contents “…zero people of color… there’s not going to be anything new here.”

        Unsurprisingly, Landon is supporting the same arguments as the KKK does.

    2. Damian doesn’t seem to realize that the only people talking about trying to push ANYONE out of SFF is his side.

      It’s another example of the left’s Zero Sum way of looking at the world. The only way to get his preferred people into SFF is to push the people he hates (who, oddly enough, look like himself) out of the genre.

      I have never seen anyone on this side of the issue call for blocking the entry of women or minorities or small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri into writing.

      1. They are amazing people. For some reason 10 white men in a room really bugs them in a way 10 Arabs, women or black guys never does. When did all-white default to “bad?” When did racial or sexual diversity default to “good”? After all, we’re talking about what’s basically a frickin’ hobby. What’s the thinking there, the principle, the basic idea, especially if it’s only ever for white men? If diversity’s so great, why not call on everyone to do that instead of stalking any white male demographic? I think the answer is the same answer as with KKK. The idea isn’t the issue – the target is everything.

        Though the SJWs never shut up about global issues, why do they never say this shit about Chinese literature being too Chinese or Arab literature being too male?

        Walter and the rest of them seem to have adopted some Jim Crow Alabama county from 1930 and smeared it onto Burroughs and Heinlein and added women-hatred and homophobia for laughs.

        SJWs are truly demented people. They have these bizarre anxieties and conspiracy theories they can never articulate or document with facts. I’m not surprised so many admit to PTSD over essentially nothing; that’s mental health territory right there.

  38. As I tweeted to Larry (dunno if he saw it):

    If a Bowling shirt is all it takes to repress women, let’s all dress up and end the scourge of #Feminism once and for all.

  39. It’s always gratifying to see the Demented Guardian Whiner keeping everything in perspective:

    “Damien Walter @damiengwalter · 18 hrs18 hours ago The whole Requires Hate mess has certainly handed a shitload of ammunition to those who want SF white, straight and male.”

    You know what the real problem is? They think we’re as obsessed with race and gender as they are.

    1. Meanwhile, didn’t he rag on Sarah’s cover for A Few Good Men, which isn’t “straight”. He won’t read my story Exodus, which isn’t white. He won’t read Michael Z. Williamson’s Freehold, which isn’t male.

      Hmmmmm…..see a pattern developing here?

      1. If he knew that Sarah’s hero in A Few Good Men was Gay, IMO it won’t matter to him as Sarah’s hero has more important things to worry about than his gayness.

    2. Isn’t Damien white, male and straight(although his man-crush on Mr. Correia makes me wonder about the latter)? People who loathe themselves that much should seriously consider seeking help.

    3. “They think we’re as obsessed with race and gender as they are.”

      Whereas all we’re really obsessed with is not being made to be obsessed the same way they are.

      Of course, for anyone sufficiently invested in a cause, anyone who merely has objections to the preferred solution is always assumed to be a wilful part of (or even the source of) the problem. Which is a universal temptation, to be fair; the key is not to shift the goalposts so this is excusable for one’s own advocacies but not for one’s opponents’.

  40. So, I have to write a paper for a really annoying class. Last semester as an engineering student and they’re forcing me to take a dumb liberal arts class. Well, I want to shake things up a bit. Our writing prompt is to discuss the biggest social problem the American Republic is facing. While my classmates are writing all about the religious right and white privilege and oppression I’m going to shake things up and write all about how SJWs are killing the country. So I’m getting together some of their worst offenses of the past year or so.

    If you want to help, please post links to the top two or three SJW overreactions of the few months. Nothing related to Dr Taylor or Gamergate or the Hugo awards. They’re already there.

    1. I’d say any address to the U.N. about women should qualify. They typically consist of whining about being called names, while conveniently ignoring systemic abuse of women in the non-Western world, from rape of girls in Britain to worse in the Middle East.

  41. Just got back tonight. Firearm hunting season opened today, 1-3″ of the first snow of the year and it was hunting paradise out there. I’m having wine baked venison instead of turkey this Thanksgiving!

    Anyway, there is a point to this post about the SJWs and standing up to their “good think”. Redeeming my buck tag on day one of hunting season (done for the year, yay Bambi’s, you are safe from me for another 365 days….now go multiply!) is just something I’m jazzed about. A lot of you write real well, I just hunt and shoot real well.

    So, I’m checking the alternate news sites (cause CNN just blows buck nuts) and some anti-hunting SJWs are all over an awesome female hunter by the name of Eva Shockley. She had posted on her FB her 500+ pound black bear (Yay Eva! Congratulations!). So, some Democratic Human Centipede Segment rips on the photo of Eva with her little dog. Saying she should have killed that instead for the poor bear. Not giving into the whole shame and guilt thing by anonymous internet cowards, she replied; “Apparently hunting a bear, eating/donating all of the meat and putting money towards conservation is a bad thing, but killing my puppy is ok. If this logic isn’t totally insane, I don’t know what is.”

    Stand your ground folks, call them out on their BS and mock them ruthlessly.
    Thanks again for the article Larry.

      1. aw crap……
        Its Eva Shockey, not Shockley. Did I mention my strength isn’t writing? Earlier this year I did a “Josh Wheaton” instead of Joss Whedon mistake that sucked even more.

        1. I knew who you meant. I just made the same mistake is all.

          Jim’s daughter, who hunted all over the world before she was old enough to drive. Somehow, I just don’t see her really giving a damn what the SJW crowd thinks of her.

      1. I’ve always thought people who worship wild animals should have to spend ten minutes alone with one. This would solve SO many problems.

      2. Make sure it’s a legit wild one, though. As in, “just brought in from the wild Canadian northwoods and hungry,” not “from the zoo.”
        Purely for purity of experimental subjects, of course.

      3. The same logic that says if the Taj Mahal is indigenous architecture then the Empire State Building is pre-Columbian native-American architecture. It does kinda look all Aztecky at the top if you squint your eyes but the “Empire” thing kinda wrecks that.

      1. You are working too hard. Just find a feral dog or cat in the neighborhood and toss it into their backyard. Wait for the screams.

  42. “If they can only control criminals, then soon enough they’ll make sure that everything is a crime.”

    Did you borrow that from Atlas Shrugged on purpose, or independently recreate it?

  43. One of the most virulently anti-white voices in SFF, Rochita Loenen-Ruiz writes from their “Safe”-house in the Marianas Trench: “…it’s necessary to nudge white folks on their privilege because they’re born into it and don’t notice when they act on that privilege. Some will accept it and some will resent it.”

    And some will call it out for the racist bullshit and smear that it is and then ostracize any KKK moron who uses it, thereby confirming your own permanent marginalization.

    Achievement unlocked – I’ll never buy a word you write, nor that of anyone in your “safe” bunker, because I don’t patronize overseas chapters of Stormfront.

    I have no interest in what a ditzy moron says who moves to the Netherlands from the Philippines, declares Europe a white supremacy, and then won’t move back to where they can feel “safe,” the noble Philippines.


    And here’s the charming Solace Ames, one of the noble PoC voices whining for “safe” spaces in the Requires Hate affair:

    “I write mixed-orientation multicultural erotic romance. I’m a Japanese-American woman living in the South. I’m pretty easy-going about most things. Just a word of advice to any writers of color thinking about looking at all the stuff going down around the RequiresHate outing and being really confused…

    “Don’t listen to any white writers, on any side, and if in doubt, stay out.

    “That’s what I plan on doing anyway.”

    Oh, gee… really? Whoda thunk? That’s all from StormfrontAsia… for now.

  44. “, because they those same dirty tricks are all they’ve got to cow the opposition into silence.”

    I think “they” needs to be removed there. Sorry, I have a proofreading compulsion.

    Loved the post. The bit with the example about the child hit close to home, which probably explains why I loathe the tactics of this kind of person so much. Thank you for having the courage to express your opinions like this.

  45. So, since Matt Taylor come up up-thread and SJW crusading is relevant; I’m wondering if this is the solution to Fermi’s Pardox.

    A species gets to the point socially where it can develop technology sufficient to get into local space, maybe even send one or two probes into close interstellar space on conventional rocket drives. Then it develops a SJW contingent which divides society into continually smaller, hostile, competing factions, using perpetually more resources until the unity and resource pool needed for continuing development of space exploration and migration is nonexistent. Therefore, that species never escapes its home planet, eventually dying in either an all-out war of mutual extermination (a-la the alien resource war in Hoshi o Tsugu) or entropy-induced societal and evolutionary regression back to lower beings.

  46. Someone mentioned Yuri Bezmenov and his lecture on cultural subversion in another thread.
    Here’s a link to his lecture.

    It’s an hour long but if you haven’t watched it, you should. It explains much of what we’ve had to put up with for a long while now.

    There is also this, which I’ve posted before but is worth repeating.

    “Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”
    – Theodore Dalrymple

    Political Correction and it’s tactics were brought to the US in the ’30s by various members of the Frankfurt School of Marxism and was taken in as a go to mechanism for confronting enemies of communism by the various “socialist” movements that grew among us like infectious fungus. And, along with the methods and tactics put forward by Antonio Gramsci, embedded itself deeply in the ivory tower intelekshuls of the ivy league colleges and universities prior to WW2.

    It festered there for awhile, growing in that nutritious medium of professors divorced from any real world cause and effect before it began to find wide spread expression in the ’60s and ’70s.

    There is no part of the PC dogma that is rational, honest, or integrity driven. Not. One. Part.

    It is all, without exception, destructionism.

  47. I do not know how they can complain, there is no organised physical threat against them.

    I was twenty before the shoot on sight order against me and mine was lifted in Missouri.

    The social media culture has created an environment where there are little or no consequences for poor impolite behavior. Often comments are made that would never have been said face to face.

    I don’t know what to do about it, save never posting something I wouldn’t say to a persons face.

    1. Before the internet virtually all public utterances in America were vetted by at least some second or third party. Something like the National Enquirer was considered an inflammatory scandal rag, and yet that seems tame compared to the non-stop lunatic group defamation and logic-failure that comes from the core SFF community.

      I am routinely stunned at the stupid, immoral and ignorant comments by SJWs who at the same time are enormously convinced they possess great insights and morality.

      Somehow the great coincidence where all logic always mysteriously returns to straight white men as the final flaw in America escapes them. That’s proof SJWs either are purposely or unwittingly adopting hate-speech concocted into formulas for the last 50 years by psychotic gender feminists like Andrea Dworkin. They can’t figure out they are using the exact same targeted hate speech as the KKK and neo-Nazis.

      If you point out they share an intellectual space you get the “LOL’s” and “Godwin’s Law.” You can’t win an argument with an idiot. All you can do is quote them and hope there are enough sane people to reject them. I’m still amazed how they’ve gutted the Nebulas and Hugos in less than 5 years, which is when the new generation showed up.

      By another amazing coincidence, 2008/9 is when the internet really took off for the mainstream public. SFF was invaded by lunatics with an internet connection and no discernible talents other than a remarkable ability to concoct narratives to explain how their depression, psychotic and obsessive breaks with reality, and self-pity is actually my fault.

  48. Apparently the SJWs created a racially segregated set of forums called ‘Safe’. So there is one forum for Whites and one forum for anyone who isn’t white. No comment on whether they will have separate drinking fountains at conventions.

    Bad RH Immitation:

    Note that the White only elitist forum is placed above the forum of for POCs which is clearly racist.

    Seriously… racially segregated forums. Damn. what is the 1954 all over again? I work in IT, I am the only white person on my team. If we had racially segregated forums, I would talking to myself.

    White People Can Post here:


    Anyone who isn’t white can post here:


      1. I don’t know but “insanity” is a good word for it. They’re giving awards to people who spew KKK jargon about “white cis dudes” punching out non-whites out of one side of their mouths and conformist shit SF novels based on Andre Dworkin and Judith Butler genderspeak out of the other.

        They pretend they’re Emmett Till being dragged behind a pick-up truck while making stupid noises they’re better than Heinlein and Asimov by the simple expedient of writing more shit SF but which is actually very good cuz lesbians and “feminism.”

        If only Heinlein had had more lesbians and Asimov more women talking, the USA wouldn’t be in such a mess. I’m surprised they don’t call the Golden Age of SF “The Golden Gulag,” cuz that’s exactly the way they talk about it.

        Then when they’re relaxing, our science darlings do to a comet-landing what they do to SF: make it irrelevant in favor of intersectional doubletalk about dehumanizing women vis-a-vis the power of the shirt.

        And leading the nuthouse at that site is some idiot from the Philippines who moved to the Netherlands and can see America is an oppressive white supremacy using the power of the internet. And look who’s there cooing at them “There, there you sweet little darlings. The bads whites mans won’t touch you here.”

        The same morons who sang Te Deums no white men won a Nebula and write about the “unconscious bias on the part of men/whites.” There’s your “equality” – a stinking morass of intersectional racism and supremacy.

  49. Larry, I love your books, agree with most of your commentary, and can rarely be bothered spending the time trudging through your overly long winded tirades agains SJWs and the like even though I agree with them. You need either an editor for your posts (not to soften them mode you) or to learn to edit yourself. There is no benefit to making your point in 1,000 words when 200 will do except to yourself. People wander off and any of those “undecideds” out there lose focus and move on.

    If the posts are purely cathartic and for your own benefit then pound away as you see fit. On the other hand if your are trying to win converts take the editor’s scalpel, or perhaps machete, to your posts.

    1. A woodpecker doesn’t need an editor, they just need to make holes. When one is making a case, one can’t deliver strawmen but must back a case up. Driving nails in a coffin is tedious but it closes the lid all the same, no matter if each nail is the same. The more the better.

      1. Yeah, especially since these guys seem to function like a proverbial zombie horde. Don’t want them to break out of their metaphorical coffins too easily…

        *has a sudden image of a rotting scarecrow.*

        Never mind. They burst into flames just fine with just one verbal flamethrower.

    2. As others have pointed out, you come across like a concern troll. Stop it. We don’t like those around these parts and treat them like chew toys. Why? Because it’s fun.

      Second, you’re wrong. As long as it’s entertaining, people will read to the end. As a professional, Larry knows how to make it entertaining. People who don’t even agree with Larry read his posts to pick up new insults. If that isn’t engagement, I don’t know what is.

      That out of the way,

      1. Ken, you should have been here for his blog comparing himself to Stephen King and why he should get a hugo. It was golden. Anyway – pearls before swine and all that.

        1. Here you go, dipshit. https://monsterhunternation.com/2013/01/30/how-to-get-correia-nominated-for-a-hugo-part-4-ten-ways-im-different-than-stephen-king-and-thus-deserve-a-hugo-nomination/

          Yep. It is obviously super serious, since it was written in response to King’s incredibly ignorant gun control post. 🙂

          And now you’re commenting on my even older blog posts. Seriously, do you have a life? I only see this because comments appear in chronological order in the moderation window. I spent 3 days at one of the world’s biggest cons, selling cases of books, and shaking hundreds of hands, and I get to come back to pages of your dumb ass nonsense. They’re so repetitive and boring I just skim them now.

    3. That’s great advice, Ken. How about you write short 200-400 word articles, and I’ll keep doing my thing my way with 2000-3000 word blog posts, and then we can compare which one of us is more successful? 🙂

      The single most successful thing I’ve ever written on this blog was a whopping 10,000 words long (if I’d know millions of people were going to read it, I would’ve spent more than 4 hours writing it). There are plenty of places where you can get short, pithy, commentary and soundbytes. That isn’t my style. I like detail and depth. Hell, my comments are longer than 200 words. Apparently there are lots of readers like me, sick of the short snappy articles that have very little actual information or philosophy to them. So if you are so horribly bored, feel free to skip my long winded tirades. 8 of my last 10 posts fit your criteria.

      Yet, strangely, when I check my stats, my long winded tirades are BY FAR the most highly trafficked things I do. As I flip back through the dates I discover that your opinion is in the minority, because my long winded tirades always get picked up and shared far more, to a much wider audience, sometimes an order of magnitude more. Because there are people annoyed by shallow analysis, who want deconstruction in depth. It is almost like I know more about my audience than you do. Crazy, right?

      Prior generations debaters got like John Adams, H.L. Mencken, and G.K. Chesterton. Ours gets Kayne West on Twitter.

      Fuck that noise. I’m a big picture guy.

      1. I agree. Boredom doesn’t always enter into it. Some people want facts and arguments and you have to have a certain amount of scope to do that. Boring or repetitious a thing may be, but in presenting a case a tidal wave is better than a few examples.

        One of my favorite reactions from SJWs is when they obviously hate what I’ve written and will say something like “Whoa, that’s insanely long, LOL. What a batshit stalker screed unibomber” or something along those lines. They’ll even cite the word count as if it’s a crime in and of itself or sign of insanity.

        Keeping in mind that’s always from writers who’ll write 150,000 words about bi-sexual bounty hunters and capering elves and then add two more volumes, I’m not sure what their argument is. The truth is they don’t like it and can’t refute it.

        So what they won’t do is actually critique it though they’ll say it’s a target-rich environment. Since we know these are people who will swarm the most obscure posts that insult them and write multiple blogs posts in response, when they won’t directly address a post you know you’ve touched a chord.

        It’s hard for SJWs to fisk their own quotes and they hate being quoted, which is why some of them have really cut down on the quotable hate-speech. You can delete comments but you can’t delete the internet, which is why this argument has shifted to other ground.

      2. I think it says a lot more for the attention spans of people these days. Fast, digestible soundbytes? Feh. That’s potato chips. Larry, you give us meat. For us to metaphorically rip off the bone and chew over.

        SJWs don’t have the teeth to chew what you have to say. They knocked them out.

        (Y’know, that was the most horrific part of the World War Z movie to me.)

      3. As someone who also likes to write long posts, I agree with your rationale. I get frustrated with too many online articles that are only a few paragraphs long and hardly get into their subjects, and I find your long posts quite interesting personally. I want something I can sink my teeth into.

        I saw that comment that came up earlier that you need an editor and that you write stuff that is too long, so I felt I should say something. I’m taking notes, by the way, on how you deal with this stuff since I have been speaking at small conferences and stepping into the SF arena publishing my own work, too. Good to have these ideas and to see what is going on.

    4. I’d go so far as to say that the intense focus on twitter-sized soundbytes is the main thing wrong with political discourse today. (There are plenty of other things wrong with it, mind you, but I feel that’s the root cause of the worst of the problems.) I’d rather Larry was part of the solution, rather than part of the problem.

      1. He is good at taking them apart with directness, humor and facts. It’s worth comparing that to people like Scalzi, Hines or Walter, who seem to have not the slightest ability to invoke truth or satire. Rather, they tend to make stuff up out of their head, racially and sexually insult millions of people with straw men and without a hint of of incisive humor.

        I guess that explains why these rednecks repeat “(blank) is about ethics in gaming journalism” about a million times and think it’s Oscar Wilde. That kind of repetition is a sign of a blunt intellect, not wit.

    5. Really?
      You came on HIS site and critiqued HIS writing.
      Writing with a proven track record, both professionally AND on his site in comments.


      That’s just…….wow.

  50. One of the most annoying trends I have observed among SJWs is their belief that their particular opinions are representative of this or that demographic group, irrespective of their own membership in that group or diversity within the group. They always seem to think that whatever they say is the end-all and be-all consensus of how the entire group feels on a given issue.

    I am an amateur artist who comes from your standard Straight White Male background, but the human characters I draw are more often than not non-European, most of all African women. The majority of the feedback I’ve received from African and Afro-Diasporan people has been positive, but I’ve also received flack from SJWs of various backgrounds who claim I’m “fetishizing” my subjects. One of them even said she didn’t like the mere idea of white men drawing black women at all.

    I should probably take comfort in the fact that the SJW reaction isn’t what I usually get from black people, but the thing is that SJWs always portray themselves as the authoritative spokespeople for “people of color”. And they habitually dismiss any “people of color” who dissent from their party line as having internalized white supremacist biases.

  51. “Damien Walter @damiengwalter · 12 hrs12 hours ago Worth noting how similar recent Ku Klux Klan and #gamergate rhetoric and tactics are.”

    Owww. My head. The stupid . . .

    1. And someone Tweets “You want PoC in European literature. But where are the white characters in African or Asian or Middle Eastern literature?” at Saladin Ahmed.

      He replies “Creating a twitter account solely to remind a fantasy author of color that he’s unwelcome. Priceles.”

      That’s not long after Ahmed Tweeted “Man, white people MAD up in your mentions on this one ‘BUT…BUT…THE AY-RABS!’ GTFO,” about someone who took a tiny amount of heat for linking to a Africa-without-European-colonialism map which ignored Arab colonialism but used Arab placenames.

      In other words someone asks Ahmed the same thing he’s always going on about, but without Ahmed’s usual racial insults, and the victim hanky comes out. It simply never occurs to Ahmed it’s not him that’s unwelcome but his continually racially insulting rhetoric.

      Sometimes I think there’s some autism going on here, cuz these people seem to have no awareness of their own racially divisive language. Walter’s own rhetoric is KKK-like enough for him to join the KKK, not pretend he’s against it.

  52. Mr. LC, given the amount of sheer hate-speech directed towards straights, whites and males, and given the huge push SJWs put on for harassment policies at conventions where one’s race and gender cannot be put upon, I’d like you to have a satirical post where you create a definition of hate-speech and a harassment policy for the entire SFF community to embrace, just to watch the SJWs ignore what they say is the single 2 biggest issues in SFF.

    SJWs will ignore it because they are by far the biggest source of hate-speech and racial and gender harassment in SFF.

    The truth is if we did in reverse at a convention what the SJWs do routinely, we’d be banned for life. There’s gotta be some comedy gold that’ll come out of that.

    1. “huge push SJWs put on for harassment policies at conventions where one’s race and gender cannot be put upon”

      And one of the things we need to start doing is to bring complaints under the various Civil Rights Acts against both the convention and each and every member of the con-com for racial, religious, etc. discrimination because under those acts, they are not private organizations but public accomodations. We may not win many, but putting them through “process as punishment” may cut down on the nonsense. One of the biggest parts of the problem is that there are no costs to giving in to SJWs and their demands. That needs to change.

      1. Read this amazing Twitter thread that starts out “What would happen if @scalzi and all the other white male authors now said ‘I’m not doing panels anymore that are all white men.'”


        This is the same cult with non-whites-only “safe” web pages, SFF convention “safer” rooms, dinners, writing workshops, car fare to SFF conventions, SFF awards, SFF writing grants. This includes multiple instances of all-white SFF convention panels apologizing for being all-white. These amazingly creepy people have made themselves and SF at once a laughing stock and a cult that deserves to be monitored for hate speech for the same reasons the Southern Poverty Law Center, GLAAD and Jewish Anti-Defamation League do.

        This is the same cult that uses the word “harassment” and has no understanding of the word. This is the same cult that relentlessly Tweets wisdom about people who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it. They don’t understand that either.

  53. Mike Rowe did a sort of fisking of a comment troll on Amazon. It’s on his facebook page. Totally different style than ILOH’s but a really amusing read. I’m both fascinated and scared of the thought of Larry Correia and Mike Rowe in the same room or collaborating…

  54. Reblogged this on The Worlds of Tarien Cole and commented:
    And reason #100 why I refuse to be silent. There is nothing right about letting good people be slandered, abused, and yes BULLIED, by the SJWs. I don’t care what background someone is, what they identify as, they deserve every chance to stand on their own. To accomplish as much as they dare, as long as it brings harm to no one else. To dream of a better world, and share that dream as widely as they wish.

    I believe that is far more optimistic than any “Goodthink” the SJWs can conjure. And infinitely more diverse, in the truest sense of the word, as well. But hey, I can’t check the right boxes, so I should check my privilege and shut up, right?

  55. For those of you who care, you’re making a difference. The amount of casual hate speech in SFF is down quite a bit. That doesn’t mean SJWs are changing their minds, far from it, they just don’t like being quoted. Being quoted equals lost sales. If you match SJWs quote for quote, they lose that one at an astonishing rate. Some of them aren’t stopping at all, but they’re mostly loud bloggers and amateur writers, and even some of their own are starting to distance themselves. But keep in mind they didn’t learn one single thing from the Requires Hate incident. The worst thing RH did is the one thing SJWs won’t even discuss.

    It doesn’t help sales when the entire SJW ideology which puts SF on the back-burner is symbolized by reducing one of space science’s greatest achievements, putting a lander on a mountain traveling faster than a rifled bullet, to feminist hysteria about a shirt. That’s the SFF community in the last 5 years in a nutshell.

    In my opinion SJWs will never change, partly because many of them are simply ignorant, stupid and naive people. The rest of them are folks who simply don’t like whites or men or have fairly serious sociopathic mental health issues. Some of them are too far out on a limb to back out now.

    By quoting them, especially on big neutral sites, and by continuing to use reason and satire, this is a fight the SJWs can’t win. They can’t win because our argument boils down to nothing more complex than equal protection. I’m not having my rights whittled away by morons because of some idiotic notions about “privilege” or “rape culture,” or the sad psychotic fantasies of lesbian radical ideology propagated by academic gender studies professors.

    When I do insist on such rights, SJWs will generally go on about “white tears”or “can someone think about the white people.” Then… we quote them.

    These folks can, have and will get away with their fabricated excuses for bigotry at the Nebulas and Hugos because most anyone with a brain is long gone from those venues.

    But SJWs can’t survive outside their bubble. As I write this, SJWs are once again 0% of the Top 100 in Amazon’s SFF. That’s ZERO PERCENT. Considering all the awards they give each other, that’s stunning. No. 1 is Heinlein. Bradbury, Tolkien and Orwell are on there.

    No one wants what they’re selling for the simple reason it’s hate and conformist and shit story-telling. And how can you sell art to people you openly despise?

  56. The entirety of Requires Hate’s blog has been scrubbed from the Wayback Machine, which suits RH and the guilty parties who left sympathetic comments on RH’s site and then pretended to turn against her.

    The truth is they did that because at the time they didn’t realize their comments hadn’t already been scrubbed. I know that because they constantly refer to the site vanishing when it was still available at Wayback. Eggs on faces. It’s an admission of guilt. My links are empty now but there are enough quotes and names to damn these folks who openly commiserated with the most racist blog in SFF history.

  57. I’ve been having an internal crisis about writing fan fiction. Now, back in September, I included a scene in a fan fic where a girl tells her mother she was sexually assaulted, but the mother blames the girl for it, and other characters call her out, knowing how horrible she is for doing such a thing. I don’t need to tell anyone that rape and victim shaming are horrible. I don’t condone it, and I make sure to portray it as horrible, because that’s what it is. But some people were yelling at me for even putting it in, claiming that I triggered someone. I tried to stand up for myself, but someone I admired, the author of a fan fic I love, wrote a LOOOOONG rant about how I’m a terrible person who doesn’t care about anyone but myself and that I go around hurting people and calling me a victim blamer because I didn’t put any trigger warnings…even though I knew nothing about trigger warnings at the time. They put words in my mouth, persecuted me as a person, and made false judgments about me just because of something I wrote. I apologized to the person I’ve triggered, and we’ve made our peace with each other, but I can’t forgive this. They’ve made me not enjoy writing anymore! I can’t even call them out on all of their bullcrap because they’re gonna interpret it as victim blaming (I have no idea how they interpreted my standing up for myself as victim blaming) and twist all my words around and never acknowledge their own errors.

    1. Don’t let them steal the joy from you, because every person who loses the joy in creation is one less person who could make the world a little bit brighter. Reading over your description, I think you handled it (the scene and character reactions) well. The fact is, regardless of your intentions, there will always be people who will misinterpret how you wrote a scene (sometimes, wilfully) and use it to rant at you for something that is probably completely unrelated. This is ridiculously common these days.

      Remember that there are people out there who will take offense no matter what you do, or how careful you are. For every person who gets upset, there may be a person further along who might relate to the scene in a positive manner, or appreciates that you made a point of trying to portray what is a sensitive scene well, despite how difficult it is to write.

      Keep writing. Keep telling stories. Don’t give up what’s important to you, and don’t let someone else define who or what you are. If you lose this thing that makes you happy, that gives you joy, what else will they be able to take away, till there’s nothing left? And sometimes, having that little something you can hold on to makes all the difference in the world.

    2. Never submit your own judgement to others. You thoughtfully considered what they said. You rationally considered what you’d done. Writing is often writing about bad things. I wish there was some way to resolve the issue, particularly with people you’d thought your friends, but I don’t know that there’s a way. If you leave your fan fiction community it will be someone else next time, but it will be someone else because there will be a next time. There will be a next time because the same need to make a public show of virtue and self-worth (see, how vigorously I defend the weak?) will still be there.

      I don’t know if it helps to hear me say that or not.

      I won’t even say that they are good intentioned because I just can’t see it. Public postures and conspicuous displays of virtue are all about “me me me”.

      So, eff em. And write.

    3. Remember as well that you did not intend to give offense, they took offense. It is on their heads and not your fault. Never feel bad about your feelings or thoughts, reexamine but don’t let others ruin your own happiness if you can help it.

    4. People choose to be “triggered.” The very phrase “trigger” is a lie; it implies that they are non-sapient mechanisms. If someone doesn’t want to read about rape, or murder, or hamburgers, they can always choose to stop reading. They are not passive literary consumption machines.

      1. It can be pretty bad when you’ve had something traumatic happen and stumble across a reminder… say you’ve had a child die, you’re not going to want to read fiction about a child that dies… and so on.

        Expecting the world to stop for you is something else.

      2. Everyone has experienced some “trauma” they can dredge up and put on view. Most people don’t. That’s why we call people who do professional victims. They compete for worst “trauma.” I consider my own life fairly uneventful by my own standards because I have thick skin based on the reality the world can be surprisingly cruel – for everybody at some point – some more than others of course. But by the standards of SJWs I should be living in a cave and demanding all literature just stop. It’s the luck of the draw. There’s no reason to ask for the earth to stop turning and all to share in the luck of the worst.

      3. @ Julie &@James May – I have traumas, and yes, reading about similar events can remind me of them. That’s not the author’s fault, and how I react to it is not in any way the fault of the author or their responsibility. I don’t expect writers or people outside my family or close friends to know what wounds I’ve had, and I don’t expect anyone outside of my family to be aware of what not to poke too hard. To have the irrational expectation of the world to accommodate your every hurt and pain is insane.

        This is just an impression I get, but the whole ‘waving around one’s pain for other people to ‘know’ about it’ has almost … a sense of… and I’m probably phrasing this badly… an almost pornographic voyeurism or exhibitionism to it.

    5. Adding to the wise words already posted on this topic, it’s painful to discover that someone you respected and admired has feet of clay. Bitching from total strangers or even casual acquaintances is one thing, but coming from someone whose opinion you value, it can be devastating. It really sucks, but unfortunately it’s a part of life. Just remember a couple of things:

      You mentioned really admiring a fanfic this person wrote, but good writing (or any other talent, artistic or not) doesn’t necessarily make for a good person. Chinatown was a great movie, for example, while Roman Polanski is a miserable excuse for a human being who raped a 13-year-old girl. Respect (and emulate) the talent, treat the rest with whatever disregard, scorn, or contempt that it deserves.

      Also, good (or talented) doesn’t necessarily equal smart and/or not clueless. And vice-versa. There are plenty of basically good (or talented) people who are so detached from reality that they might as well be living on another planet. Sometimes they just don’t have the brainpower to know any better, sometimes they’ve never been taught any better, and some are just astoundingly credulous (my brother falls into the latter category – wonderful guy with a high IQ, but a hot-earther who bobbleheads away at anything his leftista girlfriend says).

      Life is about learning, in ways big and small. Choose teachers who know their subjects well, and don’t take instruction from assholes in how to live your life.

    6. As someone who has suffered PTSD for years, I myself don’t get the whole trigger warning thing or why anyone coming from a traumatic background finds this necessary unless they are in denial about what happened to them. I once joked to a friend that, contrary to expectations, I am more likely to read something that reminds me of what I went through. I read similar experiences of other people because I get validation and a support group sensibility from it. I don’t care about “triggers” in my own fiction writing that I publish, and I only give a general graphic content warning on my blog when I cover extreme sex or violence in books by others that I cover there. Beyond that, what you describe is just baloney. This sounds more like control issues rather than actual sensitivity.

  58. And this is why I like Larry Correia. I only read the first 3 monster hunters and the first 2 Grimnoir I leave at an end of the world (Not the end of the world but one of them) Correa, Maine. Not a lot of books stores out here to remind me what I’m missing.

  59. I may not agree with what everybody believes here, but I respect your right to say them. Besides, it’s your book, good on you for not having hangups over whomever it is that you may or may not offend. If I don’t like it, I don’t buy it, read it, or even watch it.

  60. Thank you sir once again for your refreshing and brave response to the SJW bullshit and the assholes behind it. A friend pinged me on this posting because it comes at a time when I announced on my on social network that I would be pulling back my creative efforts and withdrawing my social media networking for fear of SJW reprisals in my professional world. I am a author, film maker and presenter at various geek cons, but as the level of vicious, self-righteous unreasonalbe SJW activity increases in the geek community I’m getting more and more concerned that my corporate professional employers would simply cave under the barrage of bullshit accusations and slander that the SJW seems so ready to sling.

    It is therefore refreshing and uplifting to read about a professional who stares back at them and says…no.

  61. I’m still waiting for the SJW community to address the burning issue of ethnocentrism, exemplified by the arrogant Americans and Europeans ‘westplaining’ to the Muslim world what does and does not qualify as “real” Islam. Will no one stand up for poor ISIS?

  62. Yeah, I hear you on this. To preface, I am a liberal, an ally, and have worked on various social justice projects and my own focus, poverty-alleviation. I’ve also studied formally many of the issues within SJ.

    However, I have become disgusted with what the SJ world has become. I want to be clear. It’s not just so-called Social Justice Warriors on Tumblr or online. If one actually works on real issues that the umbrella of social justice addresses, from poverty to inequality to racism, then they will be naturally be around a lot of people that are in the social justice movement in one way or another. Many are very rationale, kind, and moderate people. But I also have more than encountered my share of in-person SJWs who fit all of these negative stereotypes. Some are even friends or coworkers.

    The biggest problem is double standards.

    1) Supposedly stereotyping, judging someone based on race/gender, dismissing based on race/gender, etc, is wrong…… unless of course SJW’s are talking about white males. Then there will be an astounding silence on the part of all of the SJWs. In fact, many will put affirmative posts about it or laugh and applaud in person.

    If a white male or simply white person, even an ally, explains how it is offensive and wrong, they may be attacked or it may be implied that they only think that because they are blinded by white privilege, are racist, or ignorant.

    2) If a white person uses or does anything from another culture, it’s horrific cultural appropriation. But an SJW will NEVER (in my experience) talk about Yo Yo Ma playing cello, or rock bands in India, or a pizza place being opened by an Egyptian in Cairo. Instead, if some person such as those does something super successfully, they will be applauded beyond belief (and they should be).

    3) Racism according to them only goes one way, even though all kinds of historical and anthropological evidence, not to mention person experience, would suggest otherwise.

    The double standards have really begun to anger me, and I truly believe based on my person experience and seeing some of these blogs are pushing away a lot of people who without these excesses, would be powerful allies.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *