Fauxtrage

So, in this post, I said this:

I don’t mean I wish a different set of books/stories had won.  That is only to the extent that the DELIBERATE and PARTISAN slighting of such unexceptionable luminaries as Kevin J. Anderson and Jim Butcher (Yes, yes Three Body Problem.  Well, I didn’t find it worth it, but I bet you half the people who voted for it voted either under the illusion they were favoring Chicoms OR as a slam against the puppies.But quite beyond that the block voting for the clumsy Ancillary “but pronouns” would have won first place if it weren’t Australian Rules) is a blot on the face of our genre and makes me sigh and roll my eyes.

Fully expecting the MASSIVE and AMAZING brains on the other side would come back and tell me Ancillary Pronoun is a great novel, a work of genius, a… blah, blah, blah, to which I would answer with the respect I reserve for leftist lectures, which are the same things they ALWAYS say:

I’ll spring awake at the first original thought, I swear.

For the record, I was wrong.  They DID surprise me.  They went past boring lecture and way past stupid and to full potato.

Mary Three Names, whom I don’t mean to impugn, because it’s becoming clear to me that she has an impairment that prevents her from understanding written language but has nonetheless managed to win three Hugos,

Well done, Mary. That must have taken effort.

leapt to a conclusion probably caused by her impairment and decided “Chicom” was a racial insult.

11933473_10153681687662994_3838355761728418713_nNow, I understand some of the younger people and those who didn’t grow up in Europe during the cold war might NOT know that Chicom is a contraction of Chinese and Communist.  Not a racial slur under any way or form, but a way of specifying these were CHINESE communists, you know, not Russian Communists or Feminist Communists (you know, Mary, Femcoms, you might know some) or any other form of the repulsive ideology.

Now, faced with this cogent accusation, this was my reaction:

And this was my fans’ reaction:

And being the restrained and sweet people they are, a lot of my fans hit twitter and did this at Mary.

Look at the funny woman who thinks Chicom is racist!

At which point — I swear I’m not making this up, Mary said she’d looked Chicom up in “Dictionary.com.”

Are you kidding me?

This is the point at which I started to suspect some intellectual/developmental impairment might be present, even though one would never suspect it from her status in the field.

And then I went to dictionary.com and looked up Chicom.

Chicom
[chahy-kom]

noun
1.
Slang: Disparaging. a contemptuous term used to refer to a Communist Chinese.
2.
a grenade or other weapon manufactured in Communist China.
adjective
3.
of or relating to the People’s Republic of China.
Usage note
Though the term was originally an official military abbreviation, the derogatory slang use originated during the Vietnam War.

“derogatory” apparently to Mary means “racist.”

Wow. You don’t have a very large vocabulary, do you?

I will assume this is lack of comprehension of the reading word is due to some sort of language-processing issue, and NOT to the fact that she assumed that NO one could use a derogatory term for this nice, jolly chap:

But you know, one can’t help thinking — just a little — that before launching a crazy accusation based on her possible misreading of “Chicom” as a slur, she would have wanted to — oh, I don’t know — look it up in other locations.

You know,the free dictionary or  wikipedia, or Merriam Webster or Abbreviations.com or the cross-word dictionary or even, GASP Democratic Underground. WHO FAIL TO LIST CHICOM AS “DEROGATORY” (NO I DON’T KNOW WHERE DICTIONARY.COM GOT THAT EITHER.)

No, Mary was so absolutely SURE I couldn’t possibly have referred to these nice, jolly fellows in what dictionary.com (and only them) defines as a derogatory way,

Now that I know of her impairment, I’ll spell it out again.  Chicom does NOT refer to these people:

Chinese people!

It refers to people who approve of this:

A lot of the people who approve of the regime who did THIS are Western intellectuals, most of them white and exquisitely “educated.”

Now that we have that clear, let’s move on.  You’d think faced with the fact she jumped to conclusions, Mary would have said “Oh, sorry, my bad, I assumed.”  I didn’t even require an apology from her because on her side an apology is viewed as a sign of weakness and a reason to pounce, so of course, she’d never do it.  And also, of course, since I disagree with her and don’t like communists I’m Satan.  So, no, I didn’t expect an apology.  What I didn’t expect was that she would go past potato to full turnip.

A recent photo of Mary Three Names.

But yeah, she decided to double down on stupid.  AND to call in her FOLLOWERS.  Starting with Arthur Chu who started AT full potato.

A recent picture of Arthur Chu, best known for winning some game show which apparently gives him recognition enough to write for Salon and the Daily Beast. Apparently they thought that a good memory equals intelligence.

He jumped into the fray with the mental acumen we’ve come to expect from him:

You’re right, Arthur Chu. We can’t make you up. If you didn’t exist we’d have to invent you. No, wait, no one would believe that load of dumbassery if you didn’t exist.

Let’s take it from the beginning — no I didn’t make it up — go look in any dictionary.  And second, no, it’s not a slur according to most places, you know:

You know,the free dictionary or  wikipedia, or Merriam Webster or Abbreviations.com or the cross-word dictionary or even, GASP Democratic Underground.

I guess dictionary.com thinks it’s “derogatory” to speak disapprovingly of people who DO this:

And I guess Arthur Chu thinks it’s mean to call murderers… Chicoms?
That’s all I’m going to say. That’s cold people. You mean you don’t disapprove of the Cultural Revolution, the Great Leap Forward, the Tienanmen massacre and everything else the Chicoms have done? You want me to be RESPECTFUL and not DEROGATORY of them? Whoa.

BUT beyond that, let’s look at what the revered and intellectual Chu had to say:

To smear WHO? Did I say Cixin Liu was a Chicom? Please read my paragraph again. Feel free to move your lips and follow along with your finger.

What I said was:

but I bet you half the people who voted for it voted either under the illusion they were favoring Chicoms OR as a slam against the puppies.

That is I said — let me repeat it SLOWLY — that you idiots in voting for the three body problem thought you were voting for Chicoms.  The use of “illusion” should tell you I don’t think so.  Tell me what part of this smears Cixin Liu?  Was he perhaps your primary education teacher and responsible for your reading comprehension?

No.  As the Author of the Three Body Problem, he knows damn well that he had to battle official disapproval in a country that’s far from free, just to be allowed to dream.

Since the book is set during the Cultural Revolution and portrays the problems of doing science under a dictatorial and murderous regime, it’s not exactly kind to Chicoms.  You know, these guys:

YOU THINK THE BOOK APPROVES OF CHICOMS? DID YOU READ THE BOOK?

In fact, at this point I must confess part of what turned me off from the book is that I’ve read a lot about that time period — and the French Terror, and the Stalinist Terror, and — and there is a certain dread of reading more about it.  It HURTS to read about that much death and destruction and pure evil. (Beyond the fact that I am not crazy for hard sci fi unless I’m in the mood.) Lots of my friends loved The Three Body Problem. ( As did Vox, but I guess we won’t hold that against the book.)

But you?  If you think Chicom is a derogatory term or applies IN ANY WAY to Cixin Liu (beyond the necessary to survive in his homeland?), DID YOU READ HIS BOOK?  Or, you know, were you just being asshats?  Or didn’t you vote for it?  Or, given the mull you made of what I said, are you in fact illiterate?

If you have reading difficulties, you shouldn’t jump to conclusions. And you shouldn’t make fools of yourselves all over twitter.

Because,you know, then you lead your followers who are, if possible even dumber (or perhaps more trusting) than the fabled brain consortium of Arthur Chu and Mary Three Names to say crazy sh*t like this:

“Alyssa Wong @crashwong · 2h2 hours ago
Dear Sarah Hoyt,
Don’t call anyone a Chicom. It’s not clever, funny, or cute.
Any admiration I had for you has burnt.”

Dear Alyssa Wong, FUNNY?  CUTE? what in HELL do you think I’d find funny or cute about this?

The Cultural Revolution in full glory.

I wasn’t making FUN of Chicom.  I was pointing out that people like Chu and Kowal and their camp followers just might be stupid enough to think Chicoms are cool and quite capable of voting for a book VOX DAY RECOMMENDED because they thought it was a paean to Chicoms.

And yes, I know, now they’re going to say I shouldn’t make fun of Alyssa Wong.  That’s nice.  You shouldn’t lie to ignorant babies like her who are STUPID ENOUGH TO BELIEVE YOU.  I bet she never read my original post, either.

But since writing is hard too, I have a really hard time convincing myself that someone literate enough to write books, like Mary Three Names CAN be so dumb as to misinterpret THIS:

but I bet you half the people who voted for it voted either under the illusion they were favoring Chicoms OR as a slam against the puppies.

(BTW, Miss Wong, for the reading impaired, the only people that paragraph calls Chicoms?  Are the Chicoms.  You know, Mao and company.  Seriously.  Parse it.  I didn’t even call the idiots who thought it was Chicom and voted for it because of that Chicoms.  I wouldn’t call even idiots something that bad.)

I also don’t believe a MERELY stupid person would go all over twitter proclaiming that someone is racist without checking more than one source. Or accidentally pick, first time out, the only source that calls this word “derogatory.”  That’s a hell of a draw, Mary Three Names.  Hell of a draw.  You should buy the lottery.

I believe in fact that you were attempting to do battle space preparation for the coming Hugo award contest.

11889448_1145875835429433_3787911293098758337_nDear Mary Three Names — Arthur Chu MIGHT be dumb enough to not have understood what I wrote, but you’re not — this meant you’re willing to slander someone’s reputation over this:

And power.

You’re willing to connive, lie to the ignorant and pretend to be a total idiot, FOR THE CHANCE AT A PLASTIC ROCKET. And for a chance to continue controlling who gets the plastic rocket. Because striving for it in the normal, meritocratic way is beneath you, Mary.
Congratulations, Mary. This man would have been proud of you. He too thought he was more equal than others:

Granted your evil is tiny compared to his, but the general attitudes are the same.

As for me, and the other people you have slandered, attacked and smeared in your quest for power, over the last few years, I have one thing to tell you.

Every time you think of a clever slander, every time you’re ready to twist someone’s words, every time you’re ready to attack, because your shriveled little soul needs power to make you think you’re relevant? JUST SHUT UP.

Write your books, enjoy the admiration of your followers and leave me and mine alone.

Because if you don’t, you might make me pay enough attention to you to find a way to retaliate and trust me when I say this: if I have to give up my writing time to deal with your idiocy, I’ll get really creative about it, Mary.

Metaphorically, of course. But trust me, you really, really, really will not enjoy it.

And now, having dealt with the sort of mind that slanders all Chinese with the title of Chicom  by claiming it’s their race I’m insulting? The type of mind who would try to destroy someone because the someone talks back to her?

Because, Mary, using a reference to a regime that massacred millions of humans to slander someone with “racism” — that’s not funny or cute, and you’ve totally lost any admiration I might have had for you.

Also, any claim to the benefit of the doubt. You might think you’re cute and endearing, but at your age it won’t wash.  It’s time to grow up now.

Right now my annoyance at you is outweighed by my wish to write. I’ve only half-engaged you.  Notice I’m not on twitter, because I have books to write and the cat fights of the sorority BORE me. I only hear of your shenanigans through my fans.

But you could get my full attention if you continue with the Fauxtrage.  You could get my FULL attention to your pathologically manipulative utterances.  You could get me to become your biggest un-fan.  Sure, it will burn my career because I won’t have time to write, but when I’m done, you’ll be the laughing stock of the world.

Because, Mary, darling, in your social media presence? you’re not clever nor cute.  Most of the time you’re at best pedestrian.

And before you scream “stalk” or “dox” — Mary, Mary, you’re not that stupid, are you? — No, I just mean take your tweets and SHOW them to people.  People outside your circle.  You know, like what you do to me and others.  Only in your case I won’t have to twist their meaning.  Because, Mary, you’re amazing.  And not in a good way.

Like, remember when you called legends of Science Fiction and wished they would die?  Yeah, Mary.  The internet never forgets.

Be told!

UPDATE: Mary Three Names (Good Lord woman, don’t you know that’s a cartoon villain?) is protesting in an unapproved comment that I didn’t let her “apology” yesterday out of moderation.  I didn’t because it starts with a lie “I didn’t call you racist.”  This means either in Three Name Land “ethnic slur” has a different meaning from in everyone else’s or she’s a disingenuous serpent.  (Any bets, guys?)  OR she thinks she can get away with semantic games here.  “I didn’t call you ‘racist-racist'”  I don’t approve posts that START with this kind of sh*t anymore than I approve the ones that start with obscenities.  However since she INSISTS I’m tempted.  What say you guys?

UPDATE TO THE UPDATE: I’ve approved it.  Lord what tripe.  She absolves me for not knowing it was racist.  I challenge her to show a post not by her followers implying it was in any way racist.  Dictionary.com says it’s derogatory because they’d like us to be respectful of commies, of course.

And Mary Curds and Whey, way to whitesplain to this tan immigrant.  Well done.  Patronizing returned to sender.

1,132 thoughts on “Fauxtrage

    1. As usual, I’m late to the party, and everyone has probably moved on, but I have some thoughts on using, or banning the word Chicom.

      My screen name is derived from my last name, which happens to be Chu. I personally do not find the term Chicom offensive. Chicoms did some very bad things to my family in China. When I see or hear the term Chicom, I associate it with actual Chinese Communists. Chicom is just easier to say. I might feel offended if anyone actually called me a Chicom to my face, but that has never happened in almost 60 years.

      I believe that Chicom might be considered a slur if used to refer to all Chinese people, but Sarah plainly did not intend this. She clearly did not call MRK or Arthur Chu Chicoms. So who was harmed by Sarah using the word Chicom?

      There are conflicts going on here at multiple levels. One which I think we need to keep in mind is the struggle to control the terms of debate. The Left is very, very good at this. The Left determines which terms are acceptable or unacceptable, and the actual debate becomes a mere formality.

      For example, in a few short years we have gone from “illegal aliens” to “DREAMers”. Now the pressure is ratcheting up to ban the term “anchor babies”.

      If anyone has read to this point, you may not approve of some or all of the terms I have used. The point is that free people do not need your approval to say things. If too many words and terms are disallowed, some ideas can no longer be expressed – and that is the goal.

        1. I was a technogrunt (engineer) at the end of the Cold War. I used the word Soviet, but it was common even for people who understood the distinction to just say Russian. And of course the Beatles did a silly but catchy tune about the USSR.

          I would like to graciously accept your compliment, and thank you for your efforts that make this blog an interesting place.

      1. The point is that free people do not need your approval to say things.

        Well put, and demonstrates a clear conceptualization of what the term “fauxtrage” was conceived to convey.

        If only you hadn’t implanted an image of a viking dragon ship landing, with the captain commanding, “Drop the anchor babies!” in my head … (Not your fault — it’s this head; I’ve had it for years and its always been a trifle warped.)

  1. I USED to be a fan of MRK. Mostly because of Howard Tayler and Brandon Sanderson, through the Writing Excuses podcast. Then one day I was on one of my extremely rare Twitter reading sprees, and saw her posting absurd things about Ferguson. Calling teargas “chemical warfare” for instance, and I put on my best moderate hat and tried to talk her down from using the word in that way because it devalued the term for when it came to real chemical warfare. She accused me of supporting teargasing the crowd, which is something I argued against and said was terrible.

    She just jumps to conclusions and reads things that simply aren’t there whenever she’s arguing with someone who she thinks is her enemy. I mostly agreed with her on many issues related to police brutality, but not on this one issue, and thus I was the enemy to be destroyed. After several back and forth discussions about related issues she blocked me. I don’t mind people muting someone on twitter that is taking too much of their time to respond to, but blocking is essentially saying that you’re not allowed to be their fan. Thus, I no longer consume any content she’s involved in. I’m sure it’s no big loss to either of us.

    1. I’m surprised she doesn’t live in Seattle. She’d fit in beautifully with my sister’s crowd. Disagree on even one issue and be blocked and denigrated to the world. And the disagreement is often caused by an inability or refusal to read what was actually said, or if it was read, an inability or refusal to interpret the words the way normal people would.

        1. Probably. 😀

          My sister’s “nice” friends read “I don’t personally believe in abortion except for the life of the mother” and interpreted it to mean that I wanted women with ectopic pregnancies to DIE!!1!!1 and called my sister up in crying hysterics asking how she could let this insane person comment on her FB wall.

          I think it was one of the Rotties who asked “What is their emotional age, 10?” I’d say that was a pretty good description of the average SJW.

          1. ” I’d say that was a pretty good description of the average SJW.”

            I wouldn’t say that. It gives them too much credit and insults actual ten year olds. 😛

            1. You have a point.

              Perhaps it is simply that their emotional age stopped when they got to 10, and since they were most likely raised as SJWs by SJWs they were already behind the maturity curve even then.

          2. It is commonplace for such types to leap from “you don’t like my solution” to “you must like the problem.”

            The possibility their solution won’t work and carries a high risk of exacerbating the problem seems beyond their comprehension. This is indeed an iteration of the “you don’t love me because you won’t let me have my way” creed found in many ill-raised brats.

            1. “THE reformer is always right about what is wrong. He is generally wrong about what is right.” G.K. Chesterton

      1. Her wiki states she’s from Raleigh, known to Tarheels as “Berkeley South” (along with Chapel Hill & Durham. In some ways such people are worse than Seattlites because here they have to live with the gross embarrassment of being associated with the rest of this state.

        There were more than a few ’round here who voted for Jesse Helms as much to piss off such as MiRK as for agreement with his politics.

        1. I lived in Durham for five years, and still have nightmares about it. It wasn’t even the politics so much as the general Durhamosity of the place. To quote my husband: “You tell ’em you live in Cary, they say ‘oh!’. Tell ’em Morrisville, they say ‘mm-hmm’. Durham, they just say ‘…ah.'”

          1. Cary is no longer so much the corral area for relocated Yankees as it once was. We now, attracted by the research triangle, have a burgeoning population of expatriates from the Indian sub-continent. We have gained some great restaurants and groceries. Sadly, attempts to keep an Indian cinema open have been less than successful.

    2. In all fairness to MRK we did get tear gases as boots for CBR training.

      Then again, maybe we should let her know that so she can spread the news that the US used chemical warfare against their own troops.

      1. And then again in work up to deployment and periodically through out service. These people don’t seem to get the difference between ‘this sucks’ and ‘this will materially harm me.’

        1. Back when I worked for a living, I performed an extended aging of CBR masks used by the Marine Corps. I have no doubt that tear gas is a good training exercise, as the soldier’s duty is to maintain an air-proof barrier between himself and the gas. That said, CBW agents are much more *aggressive* in their ability to penetrate the materials. This is one difference between chemical warfare and tear gas; however, it is a concept way too detailed for a typical SJW to understand.

              1. Sarah – remember you can (sometimes)fix ignorant or stupid, but when the adjective “deliberately” is put in front of either, you are in a no-win situation. And I ‘spect that Mary K suffers from that word an awfully lot.

                1. Nah. She’s a mean girl. I dealt with them since elementary school. You know, the prim and proper rich girl in bows and ribbons who kicks you under the table and then screams you attacked her for no reason. She should remember I have EXPERIENCE with her kind. See my update at the end of the post.

                  1. I’m of two minds on this:

                    There is no personal issue that can’t be solved with the judicious application of high explosives.

                    but

                    When committing violence if you can choose sword over a gun and your fist over a sword. The greatest pleasure comes from it being closest to hand.

                    That said, a spanking with the paddle made out of stainless non-skid would probably be very educational for some people or the pointed waffle cut one.

          1. Did you do the firefighter school at Goodfellow AFB? That is near my old stomping grounds in West Texas. Mom lives in San Angelo now.

            1. No, the one at Submarine Base, Groton. It has fire rooms designed to mimic the interior of a submarine. Other Navy fire fighting school mimic other vessels.

              There is not thrill quite like walking into an metal enclosed space that is on fire. I completely understand how some combat vets from WW2 got addicted to the adrenaline rush and formed the first biker gangs after the war.

              1. My dad had a good friend who was a crop duster. He had flown close ground support missions in a B-25 in the Europe in WW2, flying the model that had 16 .50 cal MG’s and a 75mm cannon. He told Dad that crop dusting was the only civilian aviation form that came close to the thrills he got flying 200 ft off the deck.

                1. Wow, that sent me to Wiki to read up on the gunship version of the B-25.

                  That does sound like fun. Then again, across nations the most dangerous branch was air so there you go.

                  Nation specific most dangerous branch was U-Boat crew between the inherent danger of submarines, Enigma being broken, and Dönitz being so damned chatty while coordinating the wolfpacks.

                  1. For American large units, highest casualties by proportion were 8th Air Force and Pacific Submarines. For smaller units but still a reasonable number of people the 442nd ranks high being effectively replaced two and a half times.

                    Rumor says submarine damage control in Connecticut and Hawaii share with the fun house at Gunsite and other such the experience of working exercises in open topped chambers with folks in the rafters (so to speak) making it fun combined with fireworks and loud noises. Would such places fit better in Disneyland or Dismal Land?

                2. Had a ROTC instructor tell us he flew one of those; they found a cow in a field and rolled it up and over a hill with those .50s. He also started telling us about Japanese burial sites, started to draw one, and stopped. We got the impression it might look like women parts. Which we hadn’t seen, being too young.

        2. Friend of mine had to attend a reenlistment ceremony in the CS chamber, with a full riot’s worth of CS clouding throughout the shack.

          Good times, he told me.

          1. I had a couple of Sergeants who could stand in the stuff at that strength and not even want their masks. NOT my thing (I was an MI geek), but sort of proves the not-going-to-kill-them thing. 😉

            1. When I went through it in basic there was one guy who was immune to it. The drill was: get gassed, everyone take off masks, everyone inhale, everyone put masks back on and clear. The guy who wouldn’t take his off was asking to die. Then there was the one guy who wouldn’t put his back on because it didn’t bother him in the least. The rest of us just wanted to get out of there so we could blow the snot out of our faces, but we couldn’t until he put his mask back on. Then there was the tree five feet in front of the exit from the gas chamber. The drills sat there and watched us walk into it as we came out.

              IIRC, the reason the US doesn’t use CS in combat is that it may be mistaken for NBC, not that it is NBC. Why do I remember this being some kind of hoo-haw about a decade ago?

            2. Yeah, I watched on Old Salt step into the gas chamber in his service uniform (not BDUs), calmly remove the mask, put a Pall Mall unfiltered to his lips and light up.

              There was a look of contempt on his face for those who lost their military bearing. The snot and tears wasn’t the problem–he knew we had no control over htat, but the coughing and utter loss of control, that he could not abide.

              Years later during an Air Force exercise in same I pulled my mask off and stared the instructor right in the eye as I counted one to ten, then walked out of the chamber (The instructions were to keep your eyes closed. Wimps).

              1. When I was in the USMC, I got to the point where I enjoyed the trips to the gas chamber as my sinuses were always clearest after those trips. Breath-right strips and menthol have got nothing on a good trip to NBC training.

              2. In the first book of his I ever read, HOLIDAYS IN HELL, P.J. O’Rourke wrote of the student riots in South Korea, where he was wearing a gas maks, and COMPLETELY panicked and weeping, and the Koran kids were wearing gauze “Doctor Dan” masks and smearings of toothpaste. And fighting like motherf*ckers.

                It’s quite an account.

            3. Y’all’re lucky CS is all you had to go through. When Dad went through NBC school during his first trip to Germany (late ’50’s), they dipped a straight pin in mustard gas and touched it to an unprotected spot on his forearm. Raised a blister the size of a quarter and left a scar that is still there today. And they’re still finding stockpiles of that crap in Europe – not to mention all stuff we’ve found in Iraq.

      2. Sounds a lot to me like a middle-schooler whingeing that a richly-deserved spanking is child abuse.

        M

      3. Yep, I remember that. Ft. McClellan, Alabama. Basic Training – one of the last all-women classes in 1976. Had to walk into that building full of tear gas and remove my gas mask and give the Drill Sergeant my name, rank and serial number.

        Good times.

        1. Did it myself, at Lackland AFB, but I managed to get through it without tears and vomiting. Our TI s didn’t know that I spent a lot of time swimming, and could hold my breath for quite some time. (Used to have breath-holding contests with my brothers.) Hyperventilated while standing in line, took one last deep breath at the door, and went through the whole rigamarole without breathing in until I put on my mask.

          OTO, the best gas-training story came from my best friend at my first assignment; she was Army, from New York … and Jewish. She had, in fact, a huge repertoire of Jewish-American Princess jokes. She said that as she went into the chamber, she turned around at the door and yelled, “Six million and one!” She claimed that her DI about split a gut laughing.

          1. Ah, you’ve discovered our secret: Jews train for this kind of thing. Every Sedar we demonstrate our lung capacity singing (in one breath) working our way up to the last verse of Echad Mi Yodea:

            Who knows thirteen?
            I know thirteen.
            Thirteen are God’s principles;
            Twelve are the tribes of Israel;
            Eleven are the stars of Joseph’s dream;
            Ten are the Commandments;
            Nine are the months of childbirth;
            Eight are the days before circumcision;
            Seven are the days of the week;
            Six are the sections of the Mishnah;
            Five are the books of the Torah;
            Four are the Matriarchs;
            Three are the Patriarchs;
            Two are the tablets of the covenant;
            One is our God, in heaven and on earth.

            This is often followed by a song expressing the wished for desire of every Jewish child’s heart, “An Only Kid.”

        2. I made the mistake of joking that it reminded me of home (Los Angeles) once I got out and finished heaving.

          The Drill Sergeant outside decided to send me through again so I wouldn’t be homesick. What a nice guy.

          1. Yikes. I actually had a pretty nice Drill Sergeant. Probably because my bunkmate tried to kill me on the rifle range. He caught her aiming at me and saved my life.

          1. If it is anything like the Mexican election riots in Juarez when I was in HS it won’t be that bad (I didn’t get gassed we just watched).

      4. But then it CAN’T be chemical warfare, just as waterboarding can’t be torture because “we do it to our own men”. (Uh, to train them to RESIST TORTURE.)

    3. I quit listening to writing excuses once they brought MRK on board. Nothing to do with her politics – I had no idea what they were until SP3 – but the podcast just… didn’t seem as fun anymore after she joined. Everybody got all serious, no more kidding around. Now I know why, since SJWs and CHORFs seem compelled to suck the fun and joy out of everything.

      1. This is where someone claims they were a long time fan of Writing Excuses, but were too disgusted by the way Howard Taylor recruited a developmentally disabled person in to be an object of mockery.

          1. Kowal is either dishonest, or mentally impaired and never grew up. The latter might be considered a developmental disability.

            Next look at reports of how Writing Excuses changed when she joined. The kindest explanations we will consider are that she is a humorless joykiller, or that she is too stupid to get the jokes. The meaner one is that she was brought on board to be the joke.

            If the dishonest model is correct, then she may be acting that way to make fun of the mentally ill, like a blackface minstrel show.

            In either case, Howard Taylor has the background to be aware of mental health issues, so his behavior comes off as appallingly insensitive.

            Take these assumptions, and plug them into the form on page 78 of your Fundamentals of Social Justice Warfare workbook.

            That form produces the standard denouncement I described. It would be dishonest of me to say it, because I wasn’t that much of a fan, and because I have more apathy than disgust towards Writing Excuses.

    4. Curiously synchronistic, I just read an explanation for this behaviour, calling it the “stray voltage” theory, deliberately saying something over-the-top provocative to shift the conversation:

      Major Garrett, the CBS White House correspondent, has talked with White House aides who confirm that the administration is working from the theory of “stray voltage,” as developed by former White House senior adviser David Plouffe.

      “The theory goes like this,” Garrett wrote. “Controversy sparks attention, attention provokes conversation, and conversation embeds previously unknown or marginalized ideas in the public consciousness,” Deliberately misstating information about key issues in order to keep certain issues before the public is often a premeditated strategy.

      “The tactic represents one more step in the embrace of cynicism that has characterized President Obama’s journey in office,” John Dickerson wrote at Slate. “Facts, schmacts. As long as people are talking about an issue where my party has an advantage with voters, it’s good.”

          1. Unfortunately, if they keep pushing it, it will. And while I’m not currently a fan of the idea of ACW2, I can be persuaded to start lining up ideologues against walls and letting physics play out when chemical reactions start involving tubes and soft metals.

    1. dictionary.com is owned by ask.com (the people you are always removing their malware toolbars from your kids and parents pcs); they are owned by IAC a Berkely CA company. Surprisingly, one owner seems normal, the other one ran against Arnold in the 2003 recall as a democrat.
      SJWs always despise dictionaries because they twist so many words, and question the authority of the SJW. Good to know they have their own socially sensitive one. Since SJWs don’t understand logic or sentence structure, Sarah’s best response so far is calling her Mary-3-names.
      The complete response should be:
      Mary-Three-Names, WRONG #FAIL.
      After that, ignore her.

      1. Correction: SJWs despise dictionaries that don’t support them. Ask one about what feminism is, and at some point in the discussion they’ll likely point to the dictionary definition of the term instead of admitting that in current practice it’s pretty much Professional Misandry.

  2. I keep hearing the Hugo referred to as a “Plastic Rocket”. Is it really plastic? I was hoping for pot metal and chrome, like regular trophies. If it’s really plastic then I’m less interested in getting one (once it’s been rehabilitated, naturally.)

    1. Depends on the plastic; I wouldn’t mind the polymers Glock uses, because it would be tough enough to insert forcibly, fins first. Even Arthur Chu couldn’t enjoy that.

      See, this is where I part company with Sarah. She’s still engaging, still giving them the benefit of the doubt, still excusing them because they’re ignorant or stupid.

      I’m not. I’m calling it for what it is: straight up intentional lying and malevolence. From all of them. I know an enemy when I see one.

      1. If it is impairment, it seems to be at a level where letting them interact with the public is cruel and exploitative.

      2. Glock calls it “polymer”, but it’s plain old plastic – Nylon 6,6 with colorant.

        Glock claims their Nylon they use has magic doody dust to make it special, but apparently it’s so magic it doesn’t show up under chemical analysis.

    2. For last Christmas a friend gave me a model rocket. The body is two 20mm shell casings joined at the butt ends and the boosters are 7.62×39 cases treated in a similar fashion. All soldered together and painted gold. It’s actually quite attractive. I expect it would make SJW heads explode once they realized what it was made of.

    3. But the ones awarded the SJWs are specially designed to hold two “D” cell batteries, guaranteed to provide them hours of amusement.

    4. Baen’s writing awards are lovely crystal trophies that look beautiful in a cabinet (my goal is to win their SF contest so as to have a matched set). Some of the Hugos I’ve seen are nice, some are… tacky. There was a cool display of historical Hugos at Worldcon when I went a couple years back, that was nice.

  3. If you visit China, you will not be shown the site where that lone man faced down a tank . . .because officially it did not happen. But I have stood there. Chicom. And you haven’t lived till you stood near a mass grave in Cambodia. Khmer Rouge. Holidays can be educational that way.

    1. There was an interesting incident in China a few years ago. An unknown woman walked into her local newspaper and purchased an ad that said, “For the heroes of .” I don’t remember the exact date off the top of my head, except that it was in 1989. The newspaper assumed that it was commemorating some local disaster, and went ahead and ran it.

      Eventually, someone a little more knowledgeable realized that the date was a reference to Tiananmen Square. The local censor at the newspaper hadn’t realized that because the Chinese government has done such a good job of suppressing knowledge of the uprising that even the government watchdogs don’t know about it.

      1. This phenomena where something is so suppressed that the censors don’t know about to censor is called “Totalitarian Alzheimer’s”.

    2. Let us keep in mind that for at least two decades now the Chicoms have been executing prisoners and harvesting their organs for reuse. Mostly they harvest Falun Gong, but if there is a demand for a specific organ match they have been willing to find and convict an suitable donor.

      Not that MiRK, Chu or any of their ilk would condemn that. Likely they’d praise the Chinese Communists for recycling.

  4. C4C – query are the time stamps local time to the posters or to perhaps local to a hosting server or?

    I’ve got to stay up all night waiting for posting to taper off then being to too tired to think straight but too energized to sleep and doubly useless even for waxing cats and taking out the garbage.

            1. I had to double-check to ensure that wasnt a video I helped make for a 48-hour film festival, even though ours had a puppet, not a marionette.

                    1. I just hope that the people making these jokes don’t end up looking back on this as one of their salad days.

                    1. “Don’t Bend Over In the Garden, Granny, You Know Them Taters Got Eyes!” — Lewis Grizzard.

                1. Eh. My family nickname in the village is “the Potato Sellers” or lit. “The potatoers.” Great great (great?) grandma owned a potato resale business. AND the only thing I miss now I’m low carb? Potatoes.

                  1. *chuckle* Great grandson of one of the biggest moonshiners in the tri-state area, and things like the topic of this post make me *really* miss alcohol… Usually made with corn and honey, not potatoes, though.

                  2. You know about the killer cauliflower gratin, yes? Mix one head boiled, mashed cauliflower, one block of cream cheese, sharp cheddar and bacon to taste, and shove it all in the oven for 30 minutes at 350. Saved my sanity when I was low-carbing.

                    (I Cannot Be Trusted when the topic turns to food. “I have a recipe for that!!” is my weakness.*)

                    *but my weakness’ weakness is that most of my recipes start with “some” of whatever the ingredient is.

                    1. That’s what you’re supposed to do to thicken your soup, stew, or gumbo, but it shouldn’t generally be enough to notice.

                    2. Put “indian cooking okra” into your search engine for loads of delicious recipes. Bhindi Masala is terrific, and they have numerous other uses for this vegetable:

                      Check the sidebar for more delicious recipes!

                    3. I can’t get any of my family to try fried okra. All of it left for me…

                      You should try bhuna bhindi; indian curried okra. Yum.

                    4. We’ve got a new Indian restaurant here in town, so I might have to see if they have it.

                      I can cook, and cook pretty well. But I don’t like trying to fix something I have never had. I hate not knowing if the problem was me, or just that it’s not something I enjoy, ya know?

                  1. I agree, but I’m *considering* trying a truce with it after roasting some with olive oil and paprika. Smelled good, but I’d only bought enough for my father, for whom I was cooking it on Father’s Day.

                  2. Okra are the worst vegetable

                    I’m going to second/third/whatever the recommendation for fried okra.

                    Worst vegetable? Brussels sprouts.

                    1. I have found success with Brussels Sprouts by selecting them small and cutting them in half, which allows them to cook more evenly. With an appropriate glaze, such as balsamic vinaigrette, they are tasty roasted. Or you can stir-fry them, taking advantage of the exposed interior to absorb tasty sauce such as a garlic & ginger sesame brown sauce.

                    2. I love Brussels sprouts and this interests me. Do you cut them in half or leave them whole? Use a rack or just scattered in a shallow baking pan?

                    3. cut them in half. And put them face down on a shallow baking pan. I used to hate brussel sprouts. Now the whole family loves them. BTW, I realize I’m giving you time/temperature for high altitude. They should be crispy on top and mushy on the inside.

                    4. Thank You! This will be tried. Maybe I can even get the dear wife to like sprouts.

                    5. Cut the Brussels sprouts in half, toss them with some sliced red onion, and a bit of sliced-up kielbasa sausage in a little olive oil, spread them out in a single layer in a shallow baking pan, and oven-roast them. They’re wonderful cooked that way.

                    6. I don’t know. My father developed a taste for brussel sprouts during his time in Scotland, where his landlady cooked dinner every night. The sprouts were the only part of the meals that weren’t dripping in fat. (He maintains that there is some mutton still stuck to the top of his mouth somewhere.)
                      As for me, I’ve gotten to using them in corned beef as a replacement for cabbage. I just tried it one day and liked it.

              1. I think it may be a local neologism, building on this meme:

                We’re dealing with folks so far beyond “full retard” they’ve landed at turnip. Or potato.

      1. Interessting: I decided to click on the box at the end to play the whole list, 3-4 songs in, I got a message: This video contains content from Artisan News Service, who has blocked it from display on this website.” Followed by a link to watch it on YouTube.

  5. Ouch.

    Reminder set to never aggravate, irritate or annoy the esteemed hostess.

            1. Then the Lesser Magellanic Cloud is probably ideally situated for out of the danger zone but affording a good view.

        1. I’m not sure there *is* a reasonable safe distance. Her rage can take out a good chunk of the galaxy.

  6. When I was growing up in the U.S., “Chicom” was used to designate mainland China (or more particularly the Communist government of mainland China). “China” was sometimes used to designate Taiwan. If something was stamped “Made in China” in the 1970s, it was probably manufactured in Taiwan. The ethnic slur was “chink”.

    It was confusing to elementary school students during the Cold War. I would have thought educated adults would know the difference.

    Hi, I usually lurk but I heard about SJWs at the Hugos and I dislike SJWs having had a few squabbles with them. I took a leave of absence after “MammothFail” when the SJWs jumped on Patricia Wrede’s “Thirteenth Child”.

    1. Aw, sheesh, I missed that one. If even Patricia Wrede’s not safe from the humorless… well, no wonder she’s staying over in the children’s section, making money hand over fist.

      1. But, comrade, she depicted a universe in which there were no human inhabitants of the Americas before the whites arrived, merely because it was inhabited by ferocious magical beasts. If you can’t see the racism in that. . . you must be some kind of kulak or wrecker.

          1. Me too. I hoard something awful. You should see my tightly-packed pantry cupboard. And the equally tightly packed deep-freeze out in the garage. Enemy of the people and a counter-revolutionary – that’s me.

            1. You should probably stop hoarding Something Awful. I mean, what if Something Awful spilled out of the closet when company was visiting? Something Awful might scare them away forever, and then there would be talk about it all around town. 🙂

              (Running away now)

              1. I had to reread that to make sure you weren’t talking about the website. If so, it’s still an appropriate comment.

              2. Oh, I don’t know. If Celia is hoarding Something Awful, doesn’t that mean there is less to go around? Personally, I have more of an affinity for Something Beautiful, but usually find out it was really Something Awful wearing a disguise…

          2. I’m a rambler, I’m a gambler, I’m a long way from home,
            And if ya don’t like me, then leave me alone…

      2. I hope she’s making money hand over fist. If someone deserves to, she does. I’ve actually hesitated mentioning her because, you know what happens next, right?

      3. Ultimately, no one is safe from SJWism, using “safe” in the sense that they’ll never encounter it.

        Not even other SJWs. They’ll turn on one another at the drop of a digital hat the second someone voices even the slightest concern that maybe, just maybe, someone might have possibly gone perhaps a little too far.

        1. If you know your history of Chicoms, you will recall that turning on your comrade revolutionaries and denouncing them for not being revolutionary enough is standard operating procedure. And the best way to protect yourself from being denounced.

          1. Yep, and not only them but just about every totalitarian society since just about the history of forever. The Marxists and their spiritual descendants just took it up to 11… which the social Marxists in SJW circles then took up to 12. 😛

    2. It may have been confusing, but it was the world I grew up in.

      The Chicoms were the ones who ruled the mainland and required everyone to dress alike (male and female), to live by a little red book, work hard (at assigned task) for little and be subject to people to disappearance to be reeducated (by harder labor) if they objected.

      Taiwan was a place that allowed you some choices. If you worked hard, even at making ‘cheep’ products, you could make a good life for yourself and prepare your children to be able take advantage of even better opportunities.

      And that last was a word my Momma did not approve of…

  7. Self evidently true when I can’t even type I’ve got to stop

    I am gratified to see that it’s blessed by the dictionary to use chicom to refer to a manufactured article. Though I’m tired of saying it’s not an AK-47 it’s a Type 56.

    In coming days I expect chicom and Chiraq to be confounded in folk etymology. Maybe not while the origin is remembered – some criticism of Chicago and its residents, past present and future, is racist and some isn’t depending I gather on external factors not in evidence.

  8. Only a comsymp would be offended by ChiCom.

    But then again, what do you expect from a pack of cultural Marxists?

    1. . . . And isn’t it sort of funny that Christopher Nuttall’s post on “Pointless Discrimination?” had to be followed up with a post about somebody else’s pointless anti-discrimination?

  9. You do realize she and Chu are just going to double down again. That’s what they do. Their entire self-image is built on their version of “us” vs. “them” with folk like you and me as the “them.” They cannot admit to error. They cannot back down. It’s psychologically impossible.

    They might know a moment of fear, to which they will, however never admit, but they will soon talk themselves instead into outrage, or rather more fauxtrage and be off again.

    It’s what they do.

    1. “Arthur Chu ‏@arthur_affect · 7h7 hours ago
      FWIW I’ve been aware of Sarah Hoyt since her epic rage abt Obama’s reelection in 2012. The only one in her clique worse than her is Vox Day”

        1. The only one in her clique worse than her is Vox Day”

          And already with the equivalencies. Of the long list of applicable adjectives, this one takes lazy.

          The demonization of VD having garnered such success, we’ll just spuriously link our enemies to him!

          I can’t wait for when they find out how you founded GamerGate!

          😐

                  1. Hum. Mine, too.

                    Tried it a few times, myself. Afraid I get all “Hulk SMASH!” after a half-dozen failed games… Then I just HAVE to go kill some Strogg to feel better.

        2. Dear Lady, I stand in awe and respect of your post, and would like to make two points: 1) I totally agree with what you say, and 2); anyone who puts themselves down range from your truth cannon deserves what they get…

      1. As that quote comes from a man willing to monologue about raping small children on stage for “humor,” his disapproval should be a badge of honor to Sarah and the rest of us.

      2. There was an author
        by the name of Arthur.
        His last name was Chu,
        and was dumb as a shoe.

        Thought Chicom an ethnic slur,
        because he was an ignorant cur.
        For his vicious lies,
        He should be raped til he cries.

        1. Other Sean – That last line goes beyond entertaining discourse, and it is extremely lazy both as poetry and insult. We don’t have to sink to their level or be boring.

          1. At this point, I no longer care about maintaining the moral high ground. If it wasn’t illegal (immoral I’m not sure about) I’d say the correct solution to the SJW problem is “kill them all and let God sort them out.” They’ve oozed into all aspects of our cultural institutions. Just about every type of event I go to I find a bunch of their ilk in positions of power, and upon a soapbox ranting about “privilege” and such. I just want them gone gone gone.

            1. Well, I can certainly understand that, and sympathize. But there’s also no point feeding the trolls by actually saying egregious stuff, rather than making them make stuff up for us. 🙂

              1. Does it really matter what we say? Whatever we say, they’ll deliberately misinterpret it, take it out of context, or just make up shit. But you’re right, the only thing trolls should be fed is poison.

                1. This fight isn’t for them, they are beyond reason. It’s for those fence-sitters who really don’t understand the issues. If both sides are screaming “racist” and “rape” at one another, third parties are more likely to ignore everyone.

                2. One thing to try is to comment on the Administrative bloat in colleges and Human Resources departments. That is their preferred hangout. Fuss whenever possible of being a ‘resource’, kind of like a lump of coal. Hopefully, their might be one or two thinkers in upper management that will consider the point valid.

                3. It does matter. Let them grasp at straws. This is exactly what they want to hear from us. Normally they have to lie and distort to make us look bad. This time they won’t have to.

          2. I share the objection. That last line doesn’t scan properly. Try this instead:

            For his vicious lies,
            Bugger his eyes.

          1. It’s not going to be WWIII. We are just going to have a nuclear war in the Middle East which will stay regional. China and Russia will stay out of it.

            Seriously, I only have as much confidence in that forecast as I do in ‘Amazon, Baen, and Castalia will be the only current publishers stil around in seven years’.

              1. If Obama did it, it must be good. Forward to the realization that the dangers of nuclear war were massively overhyped.

              2. It isn’t as if the region produces anything of value to the rest of the world.

                Maybe if we get Tom Friedman to open a McDonalds’ franchise in Tehran, Riyadh, Tel Aviv, Baghdad and each of the other countries in the region we will see complete peace.

                1. Hey! For the sucker one-two punch, get Paullie “The Beard” Krugman to give them economic advice!

                2. Ahem. There IS a McDonald’s franchise in Bahrain. It delivers.

                  There’s also a Chili’s, a BK, a DQ, and a Johnny Rockett’s along American Alley, which, despite its name, seems to always be full of locals and TCNs. Especially Saudis, Kuwaiti and Emirati on weekends.

            1. Iran will activate the cells they have world-wide. Sympathizers around the world will riot. Dearborn Michigan and Berkeley will burn.

                  1. There are normal people in CA. San Diego isn’t a bad little town. What about the people on all of the military bases in CA? Pendleton, Edwards, Twentynine Palms, The Presidio, All the Navy in Diego. North Island.

              1. Thinking…thinking…thinking…

                Is there a downside here?

                Could we get them to create a PK cell and save Vox Day the energy on next year’s Hugos?

            2. Bob, I disagree, Iran would love to ‘strike a blow against the Great Satan’ and pop a nuke in one of the targets conveniently suggested by the declassified RAND Corporation study from a few years back.

                1. Maybe if Cruz, Walker or Perry are elected Pres., we’ll bypass the need for a Buckman.Things are epically fubared but it shouldn’t take more than 50 years to get our allies to trust us again.

                  1. Things were bad under Carter and Reagan turned them around. With God’s help and the right people in office and winning the culture war we will be able to turn things around. Dec 1940 looked pretty bad for the Brits.

            3. Bob, if you ever read the Horseclans books, that was Adams’ prediction of how his WWIII would start, except he fingered Qaddafi for the trigger-man..

              1. I think those were before my time.

                As places for first-nuke-use-that-triggers-a-WW go, it is more plausible than an Australian civil war, or a sub-Saharan African tribal conflict.

                I’ve been trying to write a comic treatment of “there’s bound to be a nuclear war sometime”.

            4. As noted by Power Line:
              SATLOFF’S 10 QUESTIONS
              Jeffrey Goldberg is a trusted interlocutor of President Obama and a hand-wringing supporter of the Iran deal. Robert Satloff is executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and a scholarly critic of the deal. Goldberg has posted Satloff’s 10 questions for President Obama on the deal. Satloff has also posted the questions here at WINE’s site. These are his questions:

              1. You have argued that the Iran deal enhances Israel’s security and those of our Arab Gulf allies. At the same time, your administration has offered the Gulf states a huge security package by way of compensation and you have expressed frustration that the government of Israel has not yet entered into discussions with you to discuss ways to bolster its security. But isn’t this a paradox? If the Iran deal bolsters their security, shouldn’t their security needs be going down, not up?

              2. It is surely legitimate for you to argue that the Iran deal enhances U.S. security but it certainly seems odd for you to claim to understand Israel’s security needs more than its democratically elected leaders. Are there other democracies whose leaders you believe don’t recognize their own best security interests or is Israel unique in this regard?

              [SNIP]

              7. You have argued that the global sanctions regime falls apart if Congress rejects the Iran deal. But the key variable here is not Europe, China or some other foreign country—it’s the United States. Specifically, the sanctions regime only collapses if the U.S. stops enforcing the sanctions with the same vigor it has enforced them [with] in recent years, and instead goes back to the policy of the Clinton and Bush administrations, which refused to enforce ILSA [Iran and Libya Sanctions Act] despite overwhelming votes for that law in Congress. In the event of a “no” vote, can you promise that your administration will expend the same effort and resources to enforce U.S. sanctions laws against Iran as has been the case the last few years? And if that’s the case, what’s your explanation for how or why sanctions will collapse?

              [SNIP]

              9. In your American University speech, you said the Iran agreement produced a “permanent” solution to the threat of the Iranian nuclear bomb. But just a few months ago, you told an NPR interviewer that Iran’s breakout time toward a bomb “would have shrunk almost down to zero” when restrictions on centrifuges and enrichment expire in after 10-15 years. Can both statements really be true?

              Words are malleable in Obama’s hands, evanescent things which mutate and evaporate.

              It will be interesting to watch the MSM spin his “legacy.”

              Just as it will be interesting to observe the reportage accompanying Jimmuh Carter’s passing, and the encomiums that will be emit from Obama, Biden and the Clintons.

            1. Nyah — it’s the fish. Haven’t the slightest idea where they come from, it’s like they just fall outta the sky some days.

          1. Doesn’t that depend on whose grave it is?

            I imagine the graves of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton, Jackson and others are rather unsettled.

  10. To MRK, Chu, et al. ad nauseam:

    ✨🌟Achievements Unlocked:🌟✨
    ☑ 1. Skim until Offended
    ☑ 4. Disregard Inconvenient facts
    ☑ 5. Make S——t Up (Mostly Chu)
    ☑ 7. Concern Trolling
    ☑ 8. When all else fails, Racism!
    ❇️Efficiency bonus!❇️
    (Just 3 more for a complete checklist! You can do it!)

              1. Yep. I think she’s using what is left over from being ill on some art commissions, too. (Oh, if I could only afford anything extra these days.)

                Hasn’t even put anything new up on cutelildrow (her DeviantArt page).

                Spring is on its way down there, though. Hope she perks up with more sunlight. And finally writes the rest of her dad’s biography – that is one on my “MUST BUY” list if it ever shows up.

        1. Okay, I’ve read most of Larry’s checklist, but I don’t think I’ve come across the moon ferrets before. What’s the deal with them?

            1. Of course, there’s also the problem that people accuse you of diverting the topic when you bring up a counterexample.

            1. Forrest was posting his charts and statistics, and demanding answers; and when Larry got involved he said this:

              You’re like that crazy hobo on the subway demanding everyone justify the moon ferrets. But moon ferrets aren’t real, so why waste a bunch of time explaining that to a stinky hobo. But I’ll try, because I’m a retired accountant, and when people like you try to use stats it is like watching a monkey humping a football. So amusing, but kind of sad.

              1. Moon ferrets? Someone’s been reading too much crossover fanfic between Sailor Moon and either Negima or Nanoha. 🙂

                Moon rabbits would need some sort of predator.

                1. In Chinese Myth (yeah, I hate them so much it’s one of my fun ‘go to’ places — THIS IS SARCASM FOR ANY SJW TWAT READING THIS) Moon Rabits are LEWD. So without a natural predator they’d overtake us!

                  1. Maybe they’re food limited, and their restrictive gives a hard cap on their population? Do we know if they’re k or r type?

                2. Nanoha… hmmm… Lord knows SFF could use some “befriending…” (Death Star supelaser, orbital bombardment, Nanoha’s befriending of her foes; it all looks the same in the end)

                    1. If that is the scene with Four, I don’t think she ever makes friends with her in canon. On the other hand, Vivid seems to indicate Nanoha is on good terms with Vivio.

                    2. No, Four pretty much ends up in prison until the heat death of the Universe. Vivio she adopted, IIRC.

                      I was remembering a fansub of the Strikers series. Had an amusing caption at the beginning of each episode after the opening credits. Episode 24’s caption:
                      Let the Befriending Begin!

                      (Great, I’ve revealed a dark secret: There’s one magical girl series I like. *goes to watch some Gundam/Macross clips to compensate*)

                3. I wonder if they are related to the moon mink, on the moon around Norstrilia. If they are it would explain why I’ve never seen a moon rabbit.

              2. So if I understand this correctly, in order to get the “Moon Ferrets” bonus in this particular argument, I would need to demand that Sarah retract her support for the My Lai massacre or something like that?

                1. No. You’d need to demand she withdraw her support for George Bush’s decision to nuke Sri Lanka. Not just claim she supports something, but claim she supports something you made up. Otherwise it only reaches “make shit up” level, not “moon ferret” level.

  11. Good Post Sarah.

    Unfortunately, due to my blood pressure, I think I need to take a vacation from hearing about those “people”. [Very Very Very Annoyed]

      1. “It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him.”

        ― J.R.R. Tolkien

    1. If you must, you must. Note that I only stopped arguing with those “people” over at Baen. Reading just keeps it at a healthy level for me.

      (Besides taking too much of my time. Knocked out “The Muse” yesterday, since it wouldn’t get out of my head otherwise – now I might just make something out of it. Assuming alpha reader doesn’t shoot me down…)

  12. Sarah,

    I appreciate your attempt to engage these dishonest mental midgets, but it’s like playing chess with a pigeon. All they’ll do is strut around the board, knocking over pieces while crapping on it and then declaring themselves the victor.

      1. Apparently that alleged statement was a paraphrase of a Russian quip. Russian humor of the more “earthy” type is very preoccupied with both anthropomorphisms and people’s mother’s 😉

    1. It is an argument before the jury. No point trying to change your opponent’s mind, they have a vested interest in their stated opinions.

      Argue to sway the jury.

      1. Some folks are laughing and clapping for the cute pigeon. They ignore that pigeons befoul whatever they light upon. The mess is immaterial to them. Such folks may be loud, and that may draw your attention, but these are not the target audience.

        That would be the young woman with her two daughters, pausing, curious as to why someone would play chess with a pigeon. The old man with his nose in a book, blinking as he looks up to see what the fuss is all about. The cabbie who just reads the local sensationalist rag (or lowbrow, pure enjoyment sci-fi), waiting for his fare. Figuratively speaking, that is.

        The *real* audience isn’t your supporters, or your opponents: it’s the *vastly* larger group that barely know either of you, if at all. This is where you make your first impression to them. That’s why it’s important to know when to be blunt, when to be civil, when to stand firm, when to admit fault, when to have *passion,* and when to swallow your fears.

        The performance is real, even virtual as the internet is. Listen to Eamon. And Larry Correia. Chu and MRK won’t be swayed. Others will be.

  13. Posting to Twitter w/TLDR version for the progs. (“Sarah was insulting you, not the author of 3BP. Happy now? No? Good. HAND.”)

  14. I’d say the trolling has already started to disrupt SP4. Its almost like they’re afraid of something.

        1. Yeah. That’s why I think its so funny. The trolls are running loose on Mad Genius right now too.

          I suppose they could be “sore winners”.

            1. Someone needs to make a new Hitler video when the time is right. “Why didn’t we stop when all we had to worry about was Strawman Larry?”

            2. From that new book by the SJWs’ absolutely favoritest blogger:

              “#3: SJWs Always Project.”

              😉

  15. OK, so I missed the earlier tempest in a tea cup from 2013… Who are the people she’s calling 12 rabid weasels? Oh and let me say WOW, if that’s 1/4 speed I don’t want to see all all ahead flank

    1. They were well-regarding SFF authors who objected to the SFWA magazine fiasco (see also: lady editors) and/or the aftermath. Harlan Ellison and Mercedes Lackey were, I think, two of them.

      1. Ok, when Ellison, Lackey, *and* Pournelle agree that you’ve stepped in something, it’s time to check your shoe.

      1. OK, just seeing the names Ellison, Lackey, and Pournelle says enough… My wife’s dealings with Ellison all indicate he’s (was?) a dick, but he’s a giant in the field, not just in his ego. Lackey I’ve never met, nor know anyone accept Mike W who’s ever met her but all reports say she’s a sweetheart, even if left of center also a giant in the field. Pournelle inherited the crown for king of the right of center when RAH died, and while there are several princes in the wings who will end up splitting the kingdom when Pournelle dies, he’s the Old king of the Right in my opinion… when all of them are against you and united, check yourself, because you’re fucked up.

        1. The “left of center” comment is kinda important in this case. If it’s the incident I’m thinking of, then it ended with the SFWA accusing all of the old guard authors involved of being “right wing”.

          1. In a universe where Mercedes Lackey was right wing Lenin would be an Ayn Rand fan.

            Also, M3N and other recent Hugo winners might learn something from an author who writes pretty much 3 stories but writes them very, very entertainingly and thus gets people to buy them every time. I’m buying them about 1 out of 3 although she abandoned the series I liked the most for the most valid of reasons: it wasn’t paying the bills. That said I kind of thought with urban fantasy being the thing Diane Trigard would be back by now.

            1. Well, I understand she did join the Oklahoma Democratic Party back in the 1980s, but in fairness she was from somewhere else and probably did not understand the implications of that.

              My understanding is that the Guardians were also dropped, and will stay dropped, because she had some disturbed fans who were a bit too into those books.

              1. Yup. Which is too bad, but apparently when the Guardians resonated with certain people, they really, really resonated, all the way onto a frequency far outside the normal spectrum.

                1. I read that as well which bugged me.

                  I mean, I really, really liked the books (I had a PC in Tales from the Floating Vagabond that was Diane crossed with movie Buffy) but people, get. a. life.

                  They were recently republished. I had hoped that meant she relented and was going to write more. No such luck I guess.

            2. I wish – those were good stories. Apparently they attracted too many crazies who didn’t get the “fantasy” part of urban fantasy.

        1. Maybe we could try a cheerful: ‘Hey people!’

          Of course that would still create trouble with those who identify as animals, birds, plants or whatever…

                  1. Please stand back while I attempt to juggle five live carp and a model rocket. I must ask you to keep your hands and noodly appendages off the launch remote for the remainder of the performance, and please keep a firm grip on your cats and shoulder dragons.

                1. In all fairness there are social circles I move in where is it is a commit in very specific situations even if prefaced with word “evil”.

              1. Y’know, just the other week, after Mass, I stood up in the apse and called out, asking “Any c**ts need a ride?” and got the rudest looks! Just proof that bible-thumpers aren’t as enlightened as university presidents, I guess. From now on I will only extend such generous offers in college bars at closing time, where I can be sure folks will appreciate my efforts to reduce drunks driving.

            1. Greetings armor and crunchies, swabbies and snipes, airdales and bubbleheads, jarheads and grunts, wingwipers and coasties, redlegs and 117s, fobbits and REMFs, …

              OK, I ran out.

        2. “Hey, ya’ll.”

          Just another example of Southern English being superior to any other form of English. We have multiple forms of “you” that clarify the subject.

          E.g. “You suck.” Could mean one person, could mean millions of people.

          Southern English:
          “You suck.” Means you – individually – suck.
          “Y’all suck.” You and those around you suck.
          “All y’all suck.” Everyone present sucks.
          “All y’all and them just suck.” Includes everyone present and those not present.

          When everyone’s armed, specificity in who you’re insulting is of paramount importance.

        3. I can think of one term for them, but I doubt it appropriate to use here; rhymes with “slewsch rags.”

          1. I believe the host only said don’t begin with obscenities…

            Yes, I would have made a fantastic guardhouse lawyer. So?

          1. Never!

            (I do wish I could find a clip of William Daniels’ delivery of that word from when he played John Adams, it would be handy. One of his reading of the word ‘disgusting’ would come in useful as well.)

    2. She’s never identified them (to my knowledge) nor acknowledged, even with a wink, anyone else’s attempt at identification.

      The way she tells it these 12 SFWA members were heckling her for no reason, though the reading comprehension she’s just displayed makes me wonder whether she had any idea what they were actually saying.

    3. I’m a little bit confused…I went to the page Sarah linked, but I don’t see any wishes that anyone would *die* (as opposed to quit).

      And was it really all over some authors using the term “ladies”?

      Thank you!

      1. Really? — then it might have been sanitized. Or I might be confusing it with one of her posts on twitter at the time telling them to “hurry up and die.”
        Sort of. As usual it’s half truth, half lies. They called women “lady-editors and lady-writers” in an historical retrospective. This set off the craziest feminists, who then went hunting for something to disapprove. Then there was “they were drooling over women in bikinis.” This actually referred to their describing a past female editor as so incredibly beautiful (particularly in a bikini at pool parties) that male writers’ wives were highly suspicious of her till they got to know her better. That’s it. In an historical retrospective. (And I’ve seen pictures of the editor and I believe it.)

        1. I looked up pictures of her at the time. My response was something along the lines of, “Damn. I can see why.”

          And, really, IIRC, didn’t they point out how her looks made it harder for her to be taken seriously?

        2. Thanks for explaining things. If you can show that tweet or wherever else MRK did ask people to die that would be nice.

          FWIW, I read MRK’s page some time back — before this SP/RP flap — and I don’t recall having seen any death wishes (first-, second- or third-person) then either.

  16. In my own never ending search for reassurance that if not the lurkers support me then at least the facts do I find The Chicom Series by Granville Rideout, 1971, 245 Pages Hard Cover to be a book about firearms.

    To my eye ignorance of the past, politics and firearms is a point of pride with the SJW crowd. If not the first to say don’t confuse me with the facts such people do say it long enough and loud enough to justify Duranty’s Pulitzer as having at least some if negative correlation to the facts.

  17. As for the “Reading Is Hard” brigade: whenever I see the puerile response “tl;dr” my response is typically “TS;DD” (Too Stupid; Don’t Debate). And yes, it’s all caps to denote my extreme irritation.

    Sometimes the foundation for a cogent argument just won’t fit into a bumper-sticker aphorism. I understand that this might be annoying for the members of the International ADD Set. but that’s life for you.

    1. Reading is hard; Thinking is harder. Most people would rather not do either, I’m very much afraid, but there is a certain segment of the population who wish to project the image that they are very good at both, without actually putting in the effort at either.

      1. There is a whole bunch of signaling whereas having correct thoughts and statements are intelligence and quality. Especially when the unperson label can be wrapped around opponents

      2. As Don Marquis said, “If you make people think they’re thinking, they’ll love you; but if you really make them think, they’ll hate you.”

                1. Quotes, books I want to read, things I don’t want to forget, music, and sketches, mostly. I have a separate one for story bits so they get out of my head for a while.

                  Thanks, I really had no idea this was a thing. It was originally something my mom suggested I do, because I have the world’s worst memory as it is.

    2. “Sometimes the foundation for a cogent argument just won’t fit into a bumper-sticker aphorism.”

      Or an image macro.

      To use it to illustrate other text (like say how our hostess some times does things) is, depending on the specifics, alright, but when some [censored]wit uses it as the entirety of their argument you (generic “you”) are 99% likely to be okay by just ignoring anything further from them.

    3. Hear, hear!

      In fact, quite recently I posted a fair to longish comment on an SJW blog. They were talking about people who had misunderstood others’ words, so I thought I’d set the example and explain my position in detail.

      I was accused of “mansplaining,” and specifically told that the very fact I’d discussed my arguments at length discredited them.

      Some people don’t want to communicate so much as they want to (1) have their minds read and (2) show how superior they are to the telepathically-challenged.

    1. One of my favorite opening quotes from Andromeda was this one:

      “Those who fail to learn history
      are doomed to repeat it;
      those who fail to learn history correctly–
      why they are simply doomed.”

      1. I preferred:

        “Requested:
        One Mark V ECM unit, 1000 km of
        Fullerene cable, one low-yield nuclear warhead. Purpose:
        Surprise party for foreign dignitary.”
        Argosy Special Operations
        requisition form,
        CY 9512

  18. During much of the Cold War the US considered Taiwan to be the “real” Chinese government, Beijing an illegitimate one. “Chicom” was a political distinction. It may have been a slur, but an ideological one, not racial one.
    Educated people should know this stuff, but your critics are not educated.

    1. It’s still a good way to differentiate between the mainland Chinese government, Taiwan, and the couple hundred million “overseas Chinese” spread around the Pacific Basin. So that way I can say, “F’ ing Chicoms!” without slandering millions of decent, hardworking, capitalist ethnic Chinese. Now, mind you, the Chicoms don’t care for the differentiation, as they’d prefer everyone to believe that they speak for every ethnic Chinese on the planet.

      1. You know…

        It occurs to me that if you were to attempt to pronoune PRC, instead of spelling it out as is typically done, it would be rendered as “prick”. Think the SJWs would let us use that one instead?

        1. This is a country that calls it’s own fleet the “People’s Liberation Army Navy”. Coming up with stupid names to hang on them is going to take some work.

          1. I was under the impression that the PRC just considers them the naval branch of the PLA, in a joint command structure not unlike what Canada (f’rex) uses, and “PLAN” is just what western sources use to specify the branch in question.

            1. That they consider their navy just a part of the army goes a long way to explaining why the Europeans chopped them up into little pieces rather than the other way around. One experiment with Zheng He’s fleets and back into their hole they went, never to explore the world again. Meanwhile, relatively tiny European nations were sending ships all over the world. China’s always been very introspective, more concerned with their own internal stability than anything else. Navies just aren’t any good at controlling the peasants.

              1. Which is why the Founders put fewer restrictions on the Navy than the Army, like limiting Army appropriations to two years out in the Constitution.

    2. Nope, but they are highly credentialed which carries much more social value in most of the US these days (and the West in general).

      1. Let’s keep in mind that credentials are generally awarded for mastery of the conventional wisdom, recognized by those heavily invested in that conventional wisdom.

        1. I was observing not lauding.

          Having worked with PhDs at Pfizer who thought up stuff before breakfast I won’t understand before doomsday while being unable to install browser plugins I know the value of credentials. Outside of your area of expertise they generally are inverse to useful knowledge.

          When your area of expertise is feminist Marxist theory and you have an advanced degree I hope you can afford to pay someone to tie your shoes otherwise you’re going to trip on the laces.

    3. Yeah, that’s how I knew it too. Political distinction usage. Also, these days as “Chinese Company” – Company in mainland China, but that might be more of a jargon. Also, to distinguish between the millions of Chinese who weren’t from PRC versus the billions who WERE from the PRC. (And to this day, Hong Kong still doesn’t seem to count.)

      I’m not sure that the SJBullies/CHORFs aren’t using it the way they WANT it to be. Ideology seems to trump reality in their mind, but disagreeing with someone ideologically doesn’t have the same impact as well, racism or ‘bigotry.’ And you can’t accuse someone of bigotry if you simply disagree on ideological basis.

      Thus they scream ‘racist, bigot, misogynist homophobe’ at their ideological opponents, because those terms HAVE a reaction, even if the accusation isn’t true.

      And their method of scream and leap at “Vox Day” makes so much sense now.

    1. Yep. I read some of the things that these delightful people say in various venues, and I feel the urgent desire to slam my head repeatedly against my desk until the stupid stops. And I just got a new desk.

  19. Sarah – re: the picture of the burning armored personnel carrier, it was set on fire by the Tiananmen Square protestors. The people climbing around were identified by the caption as “residents” who were basically rubbernecking and checking it out. I don’t think they’re supposed to be Party members.

            1. When the Chicoms have tanks that are independently smart, worry.

              Actually, worry when they have tanks that are independently dumb, too.

                1. Luckily, communism isn’t big on that “independent” thing anyways

                  Oh, I don’t know about that: One of the few governments I can see thinking “autonomous armored fighting vehicle” is good idea is the PRC – no soldier reliability issues to worry about*, just drop it into an area with an on switch when it lands, and a finite load of ammo and fuel.

                  * Open source word is that back when the PRC politburo panicked and wanted to send in tanks to break up the Tiananmen protests, they actually sent orders to several armored units to head in to Beijing (none being based close in as a coup preventative measure), but the first such units did not comply – they had mechanical problems, or were unable to copy the order properly, or were worried about regional unrest, or were waylaid by troublesome insects. The result was that those initially contacted units basically sat in place, didn’t move out and drive on up to kill those kids.

                  As you can imagine this freaked out the leadership even more, but eventually their frantic dialing found a unit that would answer the phone, and that was the one that rolled in and did the bloody work on unarmed college kids.

                  Obviously afterward the didn’t-answer-the-phone generals and their staffs all had mysterious rapid disassembly events for basically passively siding with the kids in the square, but also not none of them moved to block any other units from making it to Beijing.

                  1. Not 100% sure where I read it – probably Ledeen writing about Iran – but the observation was that protest revolutions succeed when the general’s kids are in the crowd.

  20. M3N: If “Chicom is a slur, and Chicom means “Chinese Communist”, then clearly Either:

    1. “Chinese” is a slur, or,

    2. “Communist” is a slur, or,

    3. You are an idiot.

    Choose, please.

    1. put in the effort over a dildo on a plaque.

      At a certain point it stops being about the trophy and starts being more about simply beating the socialist would-be tyrant “SJW’s”.

      1. And there is Breitbart’s ‘politics is downstream of culture’. Change the culture of entertainment and it will have an effect on politics on the long run when it starts to change the way the voters think of issues. This is the long game, a very small side fight perhaps but still a part of it.

        1. Or as Mark Steyn puts it:

          “If you lose all this stuff, if you lose the TV shows, you lose the pop songs, you lose the movies, you lose the churches, you lose the universities, and even lose the locker room, then electing a guy with “R” after his name isn’t going to be much use.”

      2. I’m all for that. Hey, have you heard this one?

        What do you call a million dead socialists?
        A good start.

      3. The points to remember are first GamerGate. It was a major unexpected loss for the SJWs. It puts fear into them, they might loose their job like Reddit CEO Ellen Pao. Sad Puppies had a victory on the voting slate. Lamentations of the Women Scalzi didn’t get a Hugo for crap like Redshirts this time. No Award shows moderates and undecideds that the SJW clique gladly adopt scorched earth as a policy.
        They fear SP4 badly. SP3 proved that the nominations could be wrested from them, and only their scorched earth ‘saved’ the awards (if you want to call it that). Their fear is SP4 can control the nominations and the awards. Recognition of how small they are, and the ease in which Chick-Fil-A and the pizza place in Illinois had a ground swell of financial support, indicates that they may not be able to ‘buy’ the No Award support against a growing and dedicated SP4 campaign next year.

        1. Anent:

          No Award: The Hugo Awards and the Nihilism of the Cultural Left
          By Robert Tracinski
          A few months ago, I wrote about a notable victory in the culture wars: a group of science fiction writers had pushed back against the politicization of the Hugo awards, the most prominent literary awards in the sci-fi genre. The “Sad Puppies” campaign and its more radical offshoot, the “Rabid Puppies,” promoted their own slates of candidates for this year’s award nominations and achieved a spectacular success. So it was assumed that, having swept the nominations, the Sad Puppies would stack up a large number of wins in the voting for the final awards.

          The response from the cultural left, such as Marxist Philip Sandifer, was to propose a slate of negation: to vote en bloc for the “no award” option rather than let any of the Sad Puppies or Rabid Puppies nominees win. This has been called the “Puppy Kickers” campaign. And it succeeded. In the final awards ceremony held on Saturday, there were five categories in which the final result was “no award.” For context, there have been a total of five “no award” results in the entire 60-year history of the awards.

          In other words, the left would rather have no awards than let them go to the wrong people. This approach has been summed up as “Burn the Hugo to Save It.”

          Yet there is something appropriate, almost poetic, in this result. It represents the modus operandi and end goal of the cultural left. Their “counterculture” is not about creating a new culture. It’s about destroying the culture of their opponents.

          [SNIP]

          I recently argued that if we’re going to have a “culture war,” it should be more of a culture competition: you put out your best, most appealing visions of your ideal, we’ll put out ours, and we’ll see who wins more converts. That, in essence, is the challenge the Sad Puppies posed to the cultural left, and now we see how they responded. The only way they can win a cultural competition is by suppressing the alternatives.

          Or to be more accurate, the only way they can win is to make everyone else lose. It’s the culture of “no award.”

            1. Don’t the proglodytes have to HAVE some culture

              Does a culture positive for neisseria gonorrhoeae count?

        2. And they should be fearful. All that it would take is an Instalaunch of the nominations and votes.

            1. Isn’t there an old saying to the effect that you shouldn’t get into an argument with someone who buys bits by the Large-Hadron-Collider-full?

              1. See, they’re not taking this in account. In the future, should you guys tell me of a particularly pungent post/tweet of Mary’s, she can be famous beyond her wildest dreams 😉

                    1. Oh. I was on Twitter. Also before that, asleep.Also, in Star Trek Online, before that. NEED TO FINISH MY DELTA QUADRANT MISSIONS BEFORE UPDATE TT_TT

                      Also, a proper ritual summoning of moi requires Hershey’s chocolate, mint chocolate and arabica coffee as part of the sacrificial items. ^.~

                      (To the idiots who are unable to comprehend humor: the above is teasing between friends.)

                    2. I am unable to comprehend some people’s liking for mint and chocolate together. They are both great flavors, but to me, putting them together is just a recipe for “ew”.

                    3. Dark chocolate and mint are some of my favorite combos. My love for the flavors started with my parents introducing me to a box of After Eights as a child in Berlin… and now my kids love the stuff too, based on the logic of ‘Mummy likes that. Mummy likes to eat only yummy things. Therefore, that is yummy. I want to try it, Mummy.’

                    4. “Also, a proper ritual summoning of moi requires Hershey’s chocolate, mint chocolate and arabica coffee as part of the sacrificial items. ^.~”
                      Oh that’s eeeezzyyyyyy for me to manage…if you were here in my neck fo the woods. lol [3 groceries and a walmart with in 2 miles in any direction]

              1. Well, it means if she makes me destroy her, it should be easy enough. Just a late night comedy feature “Deep Thoughts of a Modern Feminist” 😉
                I’ll still have time to write, and all. Happy?

                    1. I think this should be a weekly (or whatever) feature for the next year … and not just for this individual under discussion …

            2. You have to do it early, so InstaReaders can get signed up to participate in time to do some (a LOT of) good.

  21. What staggers me is how utterly unconcerned the WorldCon apologists are about the opinions of people outside of “Fandom”. I tried to explain that they are coming across as being willing to repell outsiders at all costs and that image leaves something to be desired as a recruitment tool. They don’t care. In October I will be attending my first sci fi con as an adult and right now I am dreading it–I’d cancel my membership except that people are counting on me to man a table in the dealer’s room.

    WorldCon is going to be held a few hours drive from my house next year. You couldn’t pay me enough to attend.

    1. Can’t we pay you to go and vote against whatever proposals the SJW’s propose at the business meeting?

            1. I am not against hugs. I have many close friends who hug. I believe that people have the right to hug or to be hugged, as they choose. I simply prefer not be hugged myself.

    2. May be the point. If only their people attend they have control. Who knows, may also be why Helsinki won the bid for 2017, they have been trying long and hard and will presumably feel obliged to please the people who helped to bring it there, and the mere fans (as just readers, not involved in Fandom politics) here mostly know nothing about this whole debate except the puppy kickers’ side if they know anything. And most of the puppies have a life which means they are unlikely to travel there. So, more control.

      I think Vox Day has fans here though. Castalia House is here, for starters.

          1. I guess I should. Depends a bit on things like whether I can get that weekend off. And if there will be others. Not much I do alone except have blood pressure problems.

            And what happens next year, and if VD gets forward – and how far forward – with his aim of burning the whole thing down.

              1. Little secret. In any crowd there are likely people who agree with you. The hard part is convincing them to stand with you. Often they don’t realize how numerous they are so stay silent out of fear.

                1. I’ve seen (or so I think) a lot of new handles showing up on the blogs, people that finally hit their maximum level of disgust. (I hit mine only after the nominations, but before the vote.)

                  It may not be a good indicator – but the Puppies have certainly influenced a few out there to cease taking counsel of their fears.

            1. Unfortunately, VD’s goals are easier to accomplish. If anything, Rabid Puppies are this year’s winner, because he actually got his enemies to do his bidding. In his new book, “SJWs Always Lie”, he actually says nice things about Sad Puppies, except he considers ‘saving the Hugos’ to be an impossible goal. Unfortunately, he is a master of gaming the rules, so his opinion does count.

      1. Hmm…perhaps Castilia should have a presence.

        But I do remember campaigning for Helsinki on the no puppy side

          1. And what little I know about few things I am interested in personally. Guns, knives and where you can carry them are among the things I have done some checking on from time to time (results: “oh s**t when did that happen!” moments. Things were a bit, er, looser when I was young, if not exactly free back then either).

          2. Thank you.

            That clarifies things. Haven’t exactly found what I am after.

            I’m curious whether the Act on Extradition On The Basis of an Offence Between Finland and Other Member States of the European Union (2003) chapter 2, section 3, paragraph 2 numbers 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 17, and 20 are crimes in Finland, how they are defined in Finnish law, standards of evidence, whether the police will make arrests, and whether the courts will convict.

            If I think someone is traveling to Finland to commit a crime, am I also a criminal if I suspect, but do not tell the Finnish police until that person is in Finland and in a position to carry out the crime? What level of proof would I need to not just be wasting police time?

            Just getting the answers might be more effort than I am willing to put in. The answers are for a plan that would likely be beyond my ability, even if I didn’t have better things to do.

            My apologies.

      2. The Elite Truefen will undoubtedly fly to Helsinki on Tor’s dime… it’s a legitimate business expense, after all.

    3. Plenty of people at conventions are perfectly nice, or neutral. A lot of vendors would give people the shirt off their backs plus good advice galore, and that’s who you’ll be spending the most time with (if you’re running the table in the huckster room). There are also plenty of people who like to help new attendees feel at home.

      Very few of the real jerks have the chutzpah to say anything or do anything to anyone’s face; they are usually whiners behind people’s backs (or on Twitter, now), or they confine their backstabbing to depriving people of party invitations and trying to take over convention committees for their own glorification. This has been an unusual season for outright jerkism, but it doesn’t seem to be happening anywhere except isolated places where the jerks feel safe. (Which unfortunately included the Hugo ceremonies, in a spectacular failure of good convention management.)

      It shames me that anyone should have reason to feel afraid or worried about attending a convention, and I wish I could be there to help you out. But what I hope and expect is that you will be happily surprised by how friendly things are.

      (Alternately, the convention may be a little empty and lonely, as many conventions have gone down in attendance a lot in recent years, what with bad economy and no new blood. In which case you may have plenty of time to chat with your fellow dealers.)

    4. I am sorry this has left such a bad taste in your mouth. I’ve been a con goer for decades and I literally wear my opinions on my sleeve. (If you’ve seen me at Boston area cons, you know what I mean). I am known as a conservative and have not received garbage from it beyond the usual debate flak*. And I am a panelist at the conventions and not just an anonymous guest.

      So, I urge you to go, and more importantly be a visible wrongfan. Show the flag. If there is a political panel and they have a Q&A, politely view your disagreement. Let them know you’re out there.

      Most importantly, have a good time. Yes, the cons are a blast. And if you like them, volunteer. Get involved. Man registration desks. Suggest ideas for panels. (I once managed to get a panel on conservatives in Sci-Fi at Arisia. And it was well received.) Because the CHORFS and the SJW fellow travelers want us to feel unwelcome and to concede the field to them. And, as appalling as these last few days have been, that is what we can not do. Even if the SPs never win a Hugo for their nominations we need to make sure they will be dealing with us permanently.

      (*A 8 year old kid once hit me in the stomach for wearing a button that said ‘Pokemon, the other white meat!’ As she did so she yelled, “Don’t eat Pikachu!”

      1. Now, that last one you may have deserved.

        It does reflect extremely poor child-raising by the parental units, though. Mine, you would have been well-advised to stay away from anything with more than two or three stair-steps… :>

      2. Actually, I am going to be on a panel–that’s the other reason I can’t back out. I don’t anticipate having fun, I’m not there to have fun, I’m there to work. For fun I sit in an unfurnished room in the gathering darkness and brood about the meaningless of existence.

        But the point that I was trying to make is that the Pro-Puppies and the Anti-Puppies (for lack of a better characterization) seem to have very different responses to the question of how the Spokane Hugos make Science Fiction fandom look in the eyes of people who are not yet part of the fan culture.

        Folks on the Pro-Puppies side respond like you all have done here–cons really are fun, you can avoid the drama, it’s not all like that, and so on.

        The Anti-Puppies don’t seem to care. I get the impression that they have no interest in sharing science fiction outside of their own little clique. I think they want to scare off the filthy casuals.

        1. “I get the impression that they have no interest in sharing science fiction outside of their own little clique. I think they want to scare off the filthy casuals.”

          Appears that way to me, too. And that is a sad thing, because more readers, more fans grows the genre, feeds the authors money (a larger pool of people who are aware of your stuff is usually a good thing), and tends to blunt the effect of the cliques.

          Hope the work is beneficial, if you don’t anticipate fun. I’m not much for crowds and people I don’t know, myself, but I enjoyed the panels at Libertycon this year. It might surprise you.

            1. Ironic, isn’t it? You can consider yourself the class of the world, if only the world ends at your door. Open that door and step out in the world, well…

              ‘It’s a dangerous business, Frodo, stepping out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don’t keep your feet, there’s no knowing where you might be swept off to.’

              The world is not your friend. It’s not your enemy, either. It’s worse. The world, by and large, doesn’t know you, and worst of all, doesn’t care. And that last bit is most frightening to those who’ve been coddled all their lives. Far easier, it is, to keep that door shut and never face the challenges, the wonders, the risks and dangers, the unexpected joy and excitement that the wider world brings.

              Ironic, indeed, that the ones calling for Diversity! in all things require everyone to all sing with one voice, while the rest of the world jams to a trillion different tunes.

        2. My advice? Have a video recording of the proceedings. Upload to Youtube if the ASPs have a go at you, and upload to youtube the nice times too.

          I honestly wish someone had done this with John C Wright and Jagi. I think we should start doing this.

        3. Well, I am a filthy casual they scared away. I paid the bucks to nominate, vote, and attend (and read the works); but when another trivial engagement came up, I changed plans, reservations, and avoided Spokane.

          From what I have heard (anyone have any youtubes?) I was right to avoid the arrogant preening of the Neros as they burned down the awards rather than give one to the wrong people.

          I, also, don’t think the Anti-Puppies care. They like the clique small so they can control it. They will, in a very under-handed and cowardly way, discourage others from becoming involved.

          I would have attended had I known anyone else attending to bolster my courage at having to perhaps argue or defend solo against for what all I know could have been hoards.

          Maybe for SP4 more of the organizers should let it be known they are attending. I know JCW never let it be known he was attending.

    5. I would have expressed disinterest in walking across the street to attend … now I fell like going just to tick them off.

    6. My fantasy if I have enough $$$ for next year to attend. Wear an insensitive pin-up girl Hawaiian shirt over a Skynyrd Confederate Flag t-shirt over my Privileged Microaggressor t-shirt over a henna’d tatoo of the cover to Spinrad’s The Iron Dream. If anyone complains I will be happy to comply…

  22. I agree with the original use of “chicom”. I agree that Mary T.N. is clueless to not be familiar with the appropriate usage of the term.

    But I also think this response is just a tad over the top.

    1. Oh, good. Guys, we have the “How rude” response.
      IS IT OVER THE TOP TO OBJECT TO PEOPLE DOUBLING DOWN ON SMEARING YOU? HOW? GIVE ME A DETAILED EXPLANATION. Show your work.

      1. Well now this is interesting. I agree about the use of “chicom”. I agree about her cluelessness.

        At no point did I suggest “how rude”.

        However, it does seem to be a bit over the top to suggest abandoning a successful career in writing in order to pursue M3N.

        Sure, it will burn my career because I won’t have time to write, but when I’m done, you’ll be the laughing stock of the world.

        1. After sitting quietly and courteously while the culture was dismantled around us — over the top is about all we have left.

          1. No. I get it. I get why you are angry. I get how awfully they behave.

            I even get how socialism is a bad thing. The only way for someone to be more anti-socialist than me is to have actually survived one of those messes.

            I just don’t get the effort into the elaborate threat. If you believe that this is worth “burning” your career, then do it. Secret societies generally stink and can’t survive the light of day. If you mean it, then just do it. There’s no need for the warm up, just throw the danged ball.

            If not, then what’s the point in tossing off a thousand menacing words (give or take)? How does that solve anything? It surely won’t change her behavior.

            My interest is in “us”. I use “us” because you and your expressed experiences are one example that I generally list when I try to engage folks that are neutral or inclined in the other direction.

            How do these thousand words…crap…it’s actually approaching 2500….no offense intended….make us look better to the folks that aren’t on a side yet?

            FWIW, her apology indicated in the “update” sounds like crap to me. Perhaps she should read Whatever a bit more and learn something about how to offer an apology.

            http://whatever.scalzi.com/2013/04/15/apologies-what-when-and-how/

            And yes….I get the irony here.

          1. Guys, look at his reply to the initial response. He specified that he doesn’t want Sarah burning her career over this (as she said she might in the post).

        2. Ah! The next tactic from the Alinsky manual! The pettifoggery. The sea lawyering and obfuscation. The deliberate misunderstanding of implications.

          M

      2. Has he commented before? Could maybe be an innocent newcomer who hasn’t seen anything but this one post. One thing Mary three names and others are probably doing is to try and get outsiders to go and look at those things that will look ‘over the top’ when you see just that one thing and don’t know of anything else, like how constant this type of attacks have been.

        Or somebody planting a comment he can then link to those actual innocent newcomers and which might make him look like an innocent getting piled on.

        Okay, am I getting paranoid here? I have to admit I do have some tendency towards overanalyzing things.

        1. Not new. Don’t comment a bunch. Usually read via the copies in my email inbox.

          I actually spend more time watching their (SJB*) over the top reactions. I’ve been banned from a couple of twitter feeds already for attempting to politely engage.

          I know they play games, so I don’t mind the over-analysis. It’s just misplaced this time around.

          *SJB – because they aren’t warriors. They are bullies.

          1. Consider the Social Immune System is a bit hyper-active this week, and prone to react strongly to suspected infections.

            One cost of the actions of the SJBs is diminution of trust and patience and the increased wearing of chips on shoulders.

              1. At some point in my experiments with WP I apparently toggled an automatic subscription option which not only avoided the requirement of any C4C type posts but sent me emails of my own posts, facilitating keeping track of where in the scrum my own contributions hit.

                Somewhere along the line WP, in one of its periodic “Do I know you?” snits dropped me out of that mode and I’ve never found it again.

                1. I can get the blog posts in my email, but I’ve never found a way to get the comments to show up in email without otherwise commenting. Of course, because of similar post to this, where you get 1K+ comments, I wouldn’t want that in my email anyway.

        1. I may regret getting into the middle of this, but nobody ever claims I’m all that smart…

          @Sarah – as I see it (and your view may not be this, and that of course counts for more), the goal of SP4 should be to get even more of that majority of “fleshfans” (newly coined) outraged enough over the invasion of our entertainment to come to the party. We’re already starting at a disadvantage – it is far harder to convince with the truth than with lies.

          @dann(something) – unfortunately, in any movement there have to be those who will sacrifice almost anything to win. “Our lives, our fortunes, our sacred honor.” These people are almost always those who we respect the most – not some minor supporter of the cause. I, for example, don’t have a career to burn. Maybe someday – but right now, by any rational assessment, I am one of those who (hmm… rather scatological phrase concerning Marines and houses of ill repute. Skipped).

    2. ✨🌟Achievement(s) Unlocked:🌟✨
      ☑ 7. Concern Trolling
      (Just 7 more for a complete checklist!)

      Note 1: When Larry talks about “How rude” being a subspecies of #2 (Disqualify/Dismiss!) it’s in the context of a give-and-take:

      SJW: ‹attack
      Sane person: ‹defend
      SJW (Disqualifying the defense): “How rude.”

      Note 2: Yes, I have a template for this, sparkles and all.

    3. If you are genuinely worried, I suspect you have only dealt with the very mild flavor of Communism that we have here in the United States (Which is getting progressively less mild. Pun intended.) I also suspect you have not been around through the last 3 years of libel. I also suspect you are unfamiliar with the crowd of which Mary 3 names is a part who would deliberately ruin a career. It is not over the top. It is a very clear ‘back me into a corner and you’ll find I’m a wolverine not a 2 week old kitten.’

      There are several posts on this site about her experiences with this. Put “He Beats Me But He’s Still My Publisher” into the site search engine and read the resultant article. It’s a good starting point. Tip: It’s unwise to come in and start commenting if you don’t know what you’re talking about.

    4. Since I don’t recognize the name, I’m going to assume this is an example of what could be known as “misunderstanding other people’s children”: That’s the reaction when you’re in the supermarket, and someone’s child does something and the parent’s reaction seems out of proportion.

      Perhaps the munchkin picked up a bag of chocolate chips and is looking at it. You may be watching and thinking that it’s no big deal, but then the mother snatches the bag out of the child’s hand, slaps the hand, practically throws the bag back on the shelf, and tells him that she is REALLY TIRED of him not listening to her when she tells him NOT TO PICK THINGS UP TO LOOK AT THEM.

      You might be tempted to tell the mother that that reaction was over the top, and that what the child was doing wasn’t all that bad, and she didn’t need to be so mean. What you’re not considering is the fact that that conversation has happened a hundred times, and the little brat never seems to learn, and it REALLY is getting to be annoying, especially when a couple of days ago, the mother had to pay for something that the little rat dropped and broke.

      So it’s not unlikely that the mother in this analogy would react rather rudely to the statement.

      1. Well, fark. Didn’t see your comment about getting the outrage until this comment refreshed the thread. As for being worth the word count, remember that for Sarah, reducing the word count takes time.

  23. These are the opening salvos of the 2016 Hugo War from the SJW’s. Every slur about females will be hurled at Sarah, Kate, and Amanda. M3N and her SJW brothers and sisters are deep-down, hate-filled fascists. What they call us (SP) is what they are. They are professional projectionists.

  24. For Alyssa, if Chicom is a racist slur, why isn’t your picture on Twitter of you holding up a coffee cup labelled “White Tears” a racist slur?

    1. Aren’t all tears white? Or at least clear? I mean, unless you’re a vampire from certain mythologies?

      1. Colorless, Chrismouse, colorless. Clear can be any color. My mother the chemistry teacher would complain that you tell the kids to stir the solution until it turns clear and they let the fact it’s bright blue distract them from the fact that’s completely clear — they can see straight through it.

        1. I will grant you that. Transparent does not mean without color. Perhaps she has a medical problem that has turned tears white? She should go to the doctor to find out what is Wong with herself.

  25. Use the term “Nork” and really blow her little mind.

    You may want to block off three or four hours to explaining the difference between a RoK and a Nork afterwards.

    1. “We have the force of history on our side!”
      “We have a Hoyt!”
      (I think I used that some months ago, deploying it again…)

      1. You have at least three Hoyts. Was never so proud when younger son went on a rant against a Bernie supporter on his web page. WAS magnificent rant. Brought tears to my eyes. Had no idea what his politics were up to then! And husband will have post for this blog maybe next week about the craziness of all this and the crazyness of winding up a Sarah.

      2. Or you could pull from The Avengers:

        “We have an army.”
        “We have a Hoyt”

        (I figure since Sarah compares herself to the Hulk every once in a while, I can get away with that one.)

  26. Re: Chicom — Three Names’s beloved Dictionary.com says that the word origin is from cold war American English dating to 1962. According to Arthur Chu you certainly would have been a precocious Portuguese tot with very far reaching influence.

    My, my, my, I am impressed…

  27. It HURTS to read about that much death and destruction and pure evil.

    Agreed.

    It leaves a morbid sour taste in one’s mind.

    This is a reason I balance any reading of that sort that I do with something more encouraging, like the history of the Founding period. They may not have been perfect, who is? They may not have created perfection; who has done better?

    1. Yes. This is why I’ve actively avoided researching certain periods of history . . . until my characters pushed me to it. I’m learning far too much about the origins and applications of fascism (1920-36) than I really wanted to.

      1. I met Arthur Chu at Worldcon – twice. He seems a very lonely and troubled young man. I’m actually praying for him. And any of you who believe in “love your enemy” should do the same.

        That being said, when you turn the other cheek, remember you only have two (four if you count the ones in the back.) When people say WWJD they forget about Him overturning tables and chasing people out of the temple with a whip of cords.

        What I THINK has happened is something akin to Sam Gamgee’s observations about Gollum underestimating Mr. Frodo. Frodo was nice, Frodo was kind, and Gollum assumed that kindness equaled blindness. Um, not hardly. I for one am not blind. I’ve been the victim of a deranged internet mob before. You fight lies with truth and you fight everything you can with lawyers (especially VD hijacking us next year). Not threats of force, not even in jest. This year we need to do trademark protection, and jump on things in a way they will understand. DOCUMENT EVERYTHING and be careful nothing you say can be used against you. I see Sarah and others qualifying their posts to make sure they are not taken the wrong way. I know I will be doing that.

        I always play to the “jury”–those who are not our enemies–and am kind until they prove to be enemies. Then I am the most polite and devastating enemy imaginable. And as Tolkien said, it only takes one foe to cause war. We just wanted to feel welcome, equal. Last Saturday night told me we are not welcome, and not equal in their eyes. Okay. Message received. They don’t like slates, fine here is my recommendation. We talk about books we like and for our picks to get on the radar we VOTE IN THIS YEAR’S LOCUS READERS POLL. It’s free and very few people vote in that either. It’s hugely influential.

        With their own weapons they will be worsted.

        1. Worsted? Those clowns, their words? Polyestered. Dacroned. Wet spandexed.

          Hmmm … definition:
          Firmly twisted yarn or thread spun from combed, stapled wool fibers of the same length, for weaving, knitting, etc.

          Firmly twisted, well groomed … I can get behind worsting them.

  28. I do have to disagree with you on one point. I doubt Mao would be proud of Mary Three Names for her petty and stupid tyranny. He’d laugh at her pathetic attempt to mock her opponents, rather than shooting them in the head like every good Communist should do. Then he’d call her a useless bourgeois parasite and send her to the rice paddies so she could work herself to death.

    It’s not very Christian of me, but there are times when I wish the SJWs could get the revolution they claim to want so badly.

    1. Ditto. While it would suck having to literally fight for our lives every second of every day, the looks on the SJWs faces when they realize that they weren’t actually part of the ruling class would be worth it.

    1. Side note: Auto insurance does not cover intentional acts. Yeah, I even raised that scene with my insurance agent, and he confirmed that it wouldn’t have been covered. And no, it wasn’t my actions that had brought the conversation up, it was the idiot that rammed me and told the deputies he did it intentionally.

  29. And the Cabaret singer in Guinan’s Lounge who sang a anti-puppy song as loud as she could and tried to get a sing-along started for it didn’t happen? I was there for the Larry Niven bearfest. And PNH blowing his top when Lamplighter tried to make peace didn’t happen at the con either.

  30. Considering the level of the people you’re speaking about here, and the fact that one of the gifs you used referenced a character’s rape (the 300 gif) I wonder how long it’ll be before one of them claims you threatened to rape Mary3N?

    I want to say I’m making a joke here, but I’m not entirely certain I am.

      1. Remember Whoopee Goldberg’s comment on the revelation in 2013 of the 13 year old Roman Polanski raped in 1977:
        “Well, there is rape, and there is rape-rape”
        Translation: The right people are never wrong.

        1. And all that Whoopi did in this case was reveal her ignorance. Because what Polanski did was “rape rape”. Not only was the victim underage, but she also said no.

    1. That particular photo actually references her revenge. She turned his words back on him — as he died.

    2. Speaking of Hugos, how is it your memoirs (or your wife’s) didn’t get noms back in the day? The first two, especially, are very re-readable even now (as in I reread them this year).

  31. You know they did not misunderstand. This was a classic instance of “sentence first, trial second.” On this occasion they ruled you a racist then searched for evidence to support their verdict.

    The fact that the evidence they found is so nonsupportive of their charge and must be flogged beyond equine pudding is confirmation that, as the phrase goes: They got nuttin.

  32. However since she INSISTS I’m tempted. What say you guys?

    Why doesn’t she respond with a post on her own blog?

    1. because it’s an “apology” designed to justify “how rude” ALSO I haven’t approved it because it would require me to read it in full. Since it already started with the lie, I imagine what comes after. And I’m having trouble enough not berserking out. I’m working in a rented office that really doesn’t need holes in the walls.

      1. Granting the justified threat to the walls — I still say let her through. This isn’t the first time she’s dropped by somebody’s blog to apologize for her deceit. I think a record would be useful.

        And I’d like to know when her apology is going out on Twitter.

        1. An apology that starts: I’m sorry you are such a moron that you fail to understand the emotional impact of your use of that word in a greater social context…
          it isn’t really an apology is it?

        2. She still believes it’s a racial slur, but is generously apologizing for thinking Sarah meant it deliberately:

          Sarah, publish her comments; we might as well have a version she can’t toss down the memory hole.

            1. The Twitter conversation has taken an interesting turn. Were there Western volunteers helping the Chicoms (similar to American communists joining the fight against Franco)? Perhaps the exported Maoists came back to slave volunteer in the Cultural Revolution?

              Maoist racism makes me think that’s unlikely, but does anyone here know for sure?

              1. I know for a fact there were PORTUGUESE Maoists. (MRPP) They tried to shoot me once. Fortunately they couldn’t shoot any better than they could think. We called them Chicoms, too.

                  1. My brain keeps trying to work out a pun for that on ‘porcos’, but it’s just not coming together. 😦

              2. That Mao bio Sarah was talking about? The Soviets were funding the Chinese communists. That is the whole reason a) the communists took over b) the Chinese communists didn’t get rid of Mao for his failure to stick to the party line.

                1. It was not the first time that a sponsored political entity chose to cut their strings and stand up on their own. The Soviets were none too happy to have China refuse their ‘proper place’ as their puppet in the hierarchy of the International Communists.

              3. Yes there were. In fact much of the controversy around Macarthy involved people in State and media aiding the ChiComs and stabbing the Nationalists in the back. Frankly I’m firmly convinced that much of the getting the US involved in WW2 was about the Soviets maneuvering to get the Japanese off their back and aid the Chicoms.

                1. Chung and Halliday’s Mao: The Unknown Story is explicit about it. The soviets had a sleeper in the KMT. They were worried the Japs might go north against Russia. So they had their sleeper attack that Japs, in violation of KMT orders, to suck the Japs into heavy fighting with the Chinese. If that hadn’t happened, no Nanking, no Pearl Harbor, and the US might’ve stayed out of WWII.

                  1. So THAT explains Marco Polo Bridge. Add to that, Sorge egging the IJA high command on and the infiltrators in the Roosevelt Admin urging FDR to take a hard line and there you go.

                2. MacArthur had seen the Nationalists were corrupt and incompetent. What he hadn’t seen was that corrupt and incompetent are not the worst things a government can be.

                  Same applies to Batista, of course.

                  1. Well, the other day I realized a bit after the fact that I had one lined up all ready to be used, but she had convinced me first that I needed to drop the subject for my own sake.

          1. And still no explanation of the “full context” or how it is in any way a “deliberate racial slur.”

            What, precisely, is it slurring? I would really like her to answer this question, in the clear, without allusion.

          2. I like #3:
            I assumed Sarah… translation: I didn’t know Sarah was an illiterate. Yep, that is an apology all right. Sarah uses the word as probably 95% of the world understands it. Of course, “opportunity” is now considered racists as well as “best qualified” so none of us should be surprised by the redefinition of ChiCom.

            1. That’s okay. I assumed anyone sheltered enough to have never heard the word ChiCom might not become an expert in the meaning of the word in less than 10 hours, too.

            2. I couldn’t help but think of the old saw about the meaning of assumed … only our esteemed hostess is not now nor ever has been a beast of burden.

          3. Agreed.

            Now, I disagree about it being a slur. And I’d like to think that she wouldn’t memory hole the apology. My personal dealings with her have been OK, but limited and several months back. However, having it in multiple places could be a good thing for all involved.

          4. It’s sad that a person who has won awards for writing doesn’t know what “context” means.

          5. The question that I have for Ms. Kowal is, Has she even READ Three Body Problem and does she have any idea what the Red Guard were? Cixin Liu does not depict the ChiComs’ Cultural Revolution in a flattering light. He shows ChiCom savagery that eclipses the worst excesses of France’s Jacobins. After I read the forward I thought, this sounds like the SJW mob backed by the deadly force of the state.

            1. Actually it is not the SJWs I fear. For the most part they lack the courage or the stomach to be Red Guards or Brown Shirts.

              What they have is the stupidity to empower and unleash such and while I will enjoy them realizing that empowering does not leave them immune (quite the opposite) I’m not looking forward to it.

            2. There’s a reason I tweeted in a rather smart-assed way about the CHORFs:
              “They did a wonderful cosplay of that scene from Ch1 of 3 Body Problem.”

          6. ROFLMAO, does she not realise she’s being precisely a cliched high school Mean Girl? I mean, I’m a dude, and I recognise that cattiness.

          7. What really blows my mind is that by her logic Allen West and Rand Paul are racially the same. But Allen West and Barack Obama are racially disparate.

  33. Sarah, there’s no profit to be had in taking the least notice of Kowal or her fellow-travelers. All they do is froth at the mouth. Go your own way. Write interesting books; comment on others you’ve found worth your time; and enjoy life.

    Life’s too short to drink cheap booze, read bad books, or trouble yourself over the immature, the stupid, the ignorant, the vicious, or 99% of the political class.

    1. So the trashing of fellow travelers should be left to those of us without literary talent? I think the economic term is “comparative advantage.”

    2. We’ve been polite and ignored the pitiful howling of those beneath our notice for decades. While we’ve been taking the high road, they’ve been busy conquering the culture through entertainment, education, and entitlements.

      The time to fight is now, on this hill – because we have finally looked up, and noticed that there is no next hill between our backs and the sea.

  34. Unfortunately, this is all battlespace preparation for SP4. Sarah has been identified as one of the lead participants, so they are already equating her with VD for moral equivalence and outrage. I think 98% of VD is reasonable, the remaining 2% is loony and bad, but really, is what he says any worse than ‘White Tears’ on your coffee cup?

    1. Depends on where you go. The problem is that VD has actually said some nasty stuff, it’s just that you end up with what happens when wolf gets cried enough times and all that’s there is a husky.

      1. Every time I have checked on the “nasty” stuff the VD has supposedly said, it has turned out to be the opposite of what the SJB’s said it was either throught their lying or because VD was being sarcastic.

        1. No argument on most of it–see, “crying wolf”–but he’s been radicalizing over the years, and it’s worrying me.
          Contrast his initial notorious Taliban post with this–http://alphagameplan.blogspot.ch/2013/10/the-wages-of-female-education.html

          Maybe I misunderstood him, maybe he was being sarcastic.

          1. Ah, that old canard trotted out again.
            “Ironically, in light of the strong correlation between female education and demographic decline, a purely empirical perspective on Malala Yousafzai, the poster girl for global female education, may indicate that the Taliban’s attempt to silence her was perfectly rational and scientifically justifiable.”
            What Vox is doing there is showing the process by which the Taliban decided on their action– in other words, it makes sense TO THEM in order to get the result they wanted.
            He’s not really being sarcastic here, but he is being deliberately provocative–from a PURELY EMPIRICAL sense, the Taliban’s action to reverse the decline is rational. But Vox is not agreeing with the method here (hence the word “ironic.”)

            1. That was the original Taliban post, and it was pretty obvious to anyone who wasn’t skimming until offended.
              That one…not so much. That “ironically” could be taken any one of a dozen different ways, and maybe my opinions were colored by the yard dogs in the comment section, but VD’s not just tap-dancing on the line between admiring what virtues the foul possess and admiring the foul, he’s turning cartwheels over it.

            2. I think some of it is Vox posturing to embrace the opposite side from the SJWs just to prove how stupid they are and to get them jumping and swooning to conclusions.
              For instance, the claim that men and woman are *exactly* alike and interchangable or that there is no possible differences between the various races of man. Both of these are absurd. Whites are lactose tolerant and Blacks prone to sickle cell anemia. The environment of northern Europe required foods like milk to sustain people in winter; sickle cell anemia confers resistance to Malaria when inherited from one parent. Now, neither of these two things matter squat; however, clearly Blacks and Whites have different genetic make-up. Therefore Vox has, shown that the SJW position is absurd. Only when this is twisted and warped by SJWs does it come out white>black. He did not say that, but he has proven the assertion that white=black is false.

              1. That’s some of it, and Vox’s views on race honestly strike me as being no more racist than most of the diversity trainers out there–I’m not sure which one I just condemned with that clause (both?)–and the reason a lot of those people hate him isn’t because of his views on race (not really), but his views on how to deal with the issue.

                1. I’ve never encountered the ‘how to deal with the issue’ from him, but perhaps that is for the best.
                  I always thought, recognize it, rely on each one’s strengths, help in overcoming each one’s weaknesses, rinse and repeat.
                  Unfortunately, we have far too many ‘progressive’ race baiters (who know what you are thinking better than you do) and the whole ‘special snowflake’ approach.

            1. Milo has a forward and an afterword. The afterword is the speech he was going to deliver in an Australian GamerGate meeting that was disrupted by SJWs’ bomb threats.

              1. Hang on, the afterword of Milo’s was supposed to be the speech in Gamergate in Melbourne last night? There was a bomb threat phoned in and everyone present including the bar owner laughed. Or was it a previous one?

                Yeah I read the whole book – I haven’t slept yet and it’s 7 am here where I live. I think everyone in #SadPuppies needs to read it.

                1. I’m two-thirds of so of the way through “SJWs Always Lie.”

                  So far so good, and Vox fortunately wasn’t wearing his “master baiter” hat when he wrote it. That still won’t (and isn’t) going to keep the “Skim Until Offended” crowd from finding stuff to complain about, but I think it will make the book and its lessons more attractive to the neutrals and undecideds.

                  He also gives some good background on the Puppies and GamerGate, for those who aren’t really familiar with the issues, and most importantly gives good advice for those finding themselves on the wrong side of an SJW attack.

                  If I had to come up with a criticism of the book thus far, IIRC he devotes much more time discussing his feud with Scalzi – the disupte over Scalzi’s Web traffic, in particular – than either the feud or Scalzi himself really deserve. Although I at least now know why he calls Scalzi “McRapey.”

                  1. Yeah, I agree with your criticism. The discussions about Scalzi had a lot of background though,and shows how the little web on the Torlocky side is linked. Also proves the double standards the Torlocks have regarding approved disregarding of Author Badthink. It’s VERY revealing once you compare the charges they level at Vox, or John C. Wright, and how they gloss over Chip Delaney’s openNAMBLA support, Requires Hate’s unrepentant and constant haterage, and NK Jemisin’s dehumanising tribalist othering (Which, considering the genocideal tribalist othering practices of Africans show, is not a great way to display supposed ‘ethnic diversity.’)

                    Sexual perversions are ‘okay’ because ‘progressive’ somehow, is the takeaway I get from that.

    2. And speaking of “battlespace prep,” the current knock on Kate Paulk over at Mad Genius Club – from a sudden troll infestation – is that she’s a meanie for comparing SJBs to Nazis, or something.

      Which is really rich, considering what Chu and Feder and Gallo and the rest of the Mean Girls have been shrieking about the Puppies for the past few months . . .

      1. Several keep prattling on about Irene Gallo.

        What they don’t understand is that Gallo called us neo-Nazis while promoting a Tor book, making it look like she was speaking for Tor. Kate is a writer, how speak for themselves.

  35. Interesting correlation between Mary RK and a certain recent newsmaker:

    When Alison Parker was an intern at WDBJ in 2012, [the shooter] — then a reporter for the station — heard her utter what he apparently considered to be racist words.

    Parker made reference to “swinging” by a destination and also referred to heading out into the “field,” according to [the shooter’s] 2013 complaint with the station, the New York Post reported.
    . . .
    “That’s how that guy’s mind worked,” Ryan Fuqua, a WDBJ video editor, told the New York Post of [the shooter’s] racism claims. “Just crazy, left-field assumptions like that.”

    “[Those words are] just common, everyday talk. [But] that was his MO — to start s**t,” Fuqua added. “He was unstable. One time, after one of our live shots failed, he threw all his stuff down and ran into the woods for like 20 minutes.”

    WDBJ cameraman Trevor Fair recalled others using the term “field” around [the shooter]: “We would say stuff like, ‘The reporter’s out in the field.’ And he would look at us and say, ‘What are you saying, ‘cotton fields’? That’s racist,’” he told the Post.

    “We’d be like, ‘What?’” he added. “We all know what that means, but he took it as cotton fields, and therefore we’re all racists.” “This guy was a nightmare,” Fair told the Post. “Management’s worst nightmare.”

    Then there was the time a station manager brought in watermelon for all employees. “Of course, he thought that was racist. He was like, ‘You’re doing that because of me.’ No, the general manager brought in watermelon for the entire news team. He’s like, ‘Nope, this is out for me. You guys are calling me out because I’m black.’”

    7-Eleven’s sale of watermelon-flavored Slurpees didn’t escape [the shooter’s] observations, either.

    “It’s not a coincidence, they’re racist,” Fair recalled [the shooter] saying.

    Half-joking on Twitter, the Free Beacon’s Sonny Bunch reacted to this news by observing that, “instead of going on a killing spree, this guy should’ve gotten a columnist gig at the Guardian.” As with all humor, there is some truth at the root of this barb. Certainly, the shooter was extreme in his willingness to take offense. But, really, he was no more extreme than many of the extremely silly people who write at Salon or sit on diversity boards or who stand up and make a nuisance of themselves on contemporary college campuses. If one believes that the culture causes people to pull triggers — and again, I don’t but many do — then one has to be ecumenical about it. For what reason is this guy exempt? Why do we not need to have a “national conversation” about hypersensitivity?

    Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/423221/hypocrisy-culture-kills-crowd-charles-c-w-cooke

    1. Now you’re tempting me to pull out the Guardians of the Galaxy lineup meme again for this…

      Shot 1, Rhomann Dey: “Did you hear about the ‘ChiCom’ kerfuffle?”
      Shot 2, Rhomann Dey: “SJWs have decided a non-racist word in common use for 5 decades is now racist. Why does that sound familiar?”
      Shot 3: (Picture of shooter with quote)
      Shot 4: “What a bunch of A-holes.” / “I know, right?”

      1. Oh, and I pointed out that her definition of a racial slur could apply to any pejorative for any racially-exclusive group: “Kluxxers”, for example, or “Daȝesh” (religious not racial; but same idea):

        1. Oh. So calling real racists demeaning names like skinheads or klukkers is bad? Mustn’t offend the poor sensitive little dears?

          Well, she does write about the early 18th century when women were reportedly afflicted with the vapors. However, I suspect the real condition is logical contortionism.

      2. My comment on her blog, currently awaiting moderation:

        “But if you did intend it to be insulting… it’s an insult that can only be applied to someone who is Chinese, as opposed to something like “Commie.” The *only* reason to use it there instead of Marxists/Commies/Pinkos is because Three Body Problem was written by a Chinese man. That’s what makes it a racial slur rather than a political one in this context.”

        That is a remarkable stretch. Truly. While it is certainly true that it can only be applied to Chinese communists, that’s rather the point. To differentiate the communism practiced in the nation of China from that practiced in other nations.

        It is a contraction of two words, nothing more. Such contractions are common in certain professional circles. It is no more a racial slur than CASEVAC.

        I’ll stipulate that it may well have negative connotations. But those derive entirely from the reprehensible acts of communists in the nation of China, not from a racial slight. The inclusion of Chinese is, once again, merely to separate those acts from other reprehensible acts carried out by communists in other nations.

        Furthermore, I have been unable to find any support for the contention that this is the current connotation, outside of the one source, dictionary.com. Forgive me if I find this uncompelling.

        I’m am left to wonder if your eagerness to jump upon this perceived iniquity of Mrs. Hoyt’s is indicative less of a desire to address racism and more of a desire to undermine Mrs. Hoyt in the public eye.

        I would be pleased to learn I am wrong regarding your eagerness.

        1. Not to mention that “Chinese” does not denote race, unless one is truly ignorant of the country mentioned. “Han Chinese” is only one of the *56* different ethnicities recognized by the PRC government within the borders of China. And 55 of them are minorities, totaling 8.4% of the population. So that’s *114,868,772* people being completely disregarded in order to make a point and find offense here. Who exactly, then, is the racist?

          1. Does Miss Triple Initials think Chinese is NOT a race perhaps. That China is populated by the same “race” as a Vietnam? Just she think a Vietnamese is the same “race” as a “Hmong” or Rhade, a Burmese as a Karen, a Thai as a Cambodian? And has she suggested that to any member of any of those groups? She would get a loud education.

  36. Funny thing, Sarah, my Chinese brother in law never heard Chicom used as a racial slur.

    Of course, his family had to FLEE the Chicoms, so he might be biased.

    And my adopted Chinese nephew never heard the term either…but then he couldn’t really hear anything since that was just one of the life-saving surgeries the state orphanage was denying him. He can hear fine now, not to mention he’s alive. Chicoms had nothing to do with that.

    1. *gigglefit*
      Oh man. I remember my utter bafflement when someone chided me on using that as ‘the term is racist.’
      I am not ESL, though people often treat me as if I were, simply because I’m Filipino. But apparently, my comprehension of English is better than most people’s these days. ~_~;;;;

      1. Clearly, and SJW who acts in such a way is guilty of a microaggression and must prostrate themselves on the altar of tolerance and abase themselves for all eternity.

      2. Yes, a word from Old Norse, used long before the ethnic slur for black people existed. For some of us, that strive for a precise meaning, it is a wonderful adjective. Unfortunately, I haven’t been able to use it since the 80’s.

  37. All apologies should be honestly considered. Note that I didn’t say accepted. But will she take responsibility for her part in stoking fires or for the reactions of those who consider her a trustworthy person?

      1. Remember the old joke:
        Comedian: “Lady, you’re fat.”
        Bystander: “That’s a terrible thing to say. Apologize at once.”
        Comedian: “Lady, I’m sorry you’re fat.”

        Intent as well as words are necessary to make an actual apology.

    1. I tried that. She chose not to apologize even though she knew she was wrong.

      *shrug*

      We are what we do.

  38. From Twitter:

    “ItanyaBlade ‏@ItanyaBlade · 2h2 hours ago
    Why the hell did I even go read that blog post by Sarah Hoyt? I guess I didn’t expect a lot of.. I don’t even know what that was.”

  39. BTW… The new York times article should be read carefully. It contains a gem right in the middle.