Tag: SFWA

The barbaric nature of Pink SF

I will soon have to write a post delineating the many differences between Blue SF, which is classic SF of the sort written by Asimov, Clarke, Heinlein, Herbert and the other SF greats of the past, and Pink SF, which is the modern offense against literature committed by gamma males and snarky shambling shoggoths and inevitably features one or more of that quasi-literary abomination known as The Strong Female Character.

In a very long and powerful essay, John C. Wright explains that the Strong Female Character is not only an offense against literature, but an intentional crime against civilization itself:

Anyone reading reviews or discussions of science fiction has no doubt come across the oddity that most discussions of female characters in science fiction center around whether the female character is strong or not.

As far as recollection serves, not a single discussion touches on whether the female character is feminine or not.

These discussions have an ulterior motive. Either by the deliberate intent of the reviewer, or by the deliberate intention of the mentors, trendsetters, gurus, and thought-police to whom the unwitting reviewer has innocently entrusted the formation of his opinions, the reviewer who discusses the strength of female characters is fighting his solitary duel or small sortie in the limited battlefield of science fiction literature in the large and longstanding campaign of the Culture Wars.

He is on the side, by the way, fighting against culture.

Hence, he fights in favor of barbarism, hence against beauty in art and progress in science, and, hence the intersection of these two topics which means against science fiction.

It’s pretty easy to determine how infected an SF writer is by the Pink SF disease. If his work features women in the futuristic Armed Forces serving on an equal basis with men, it’s Pink SF. If her work involves having sex with animals and corpses, it is Pink SF/F.  And if any female character ever physically bests a bigger, stronger, faster male character without supernatural powers or technological enhancements, its Pink SF.

And if it involves soldiers bantering about providing each other with the sort of services that resulted in a man being beaten to death in the Roman legions, it is most definitely Pink SF.

Orson Scott Card on SFWA

The author of Ender’s Game expresses the reasons he disdains the SFWA, but perhaps more importantly, he echoes my previous point about why the post-80s SF authors repeatedly show themselves to be unable to produce fiction that is as compelling or as relevant as their predecessors even when they are expressly trying to mimic it:

What I find interesting is the people who commit and keep their commitment at great personal cost, the grown-up story, the story of parents, the story of people who sacrifice for community but stay in it and have to live in the mess they made. … They don’t take off their mask and go back into society under another name. They have to be who they are, wear their own face in their community.

This has made some critics very uncomfortable right from the start. And as my politics diverged from the political correctness that has captured the left — I mean, (in) 1976 I was a Daniel Patrick Moynihan liberal Democrat — and without changing any of my principles, I’ve now become quite a right-winger in the eyes of the left. And I’m a little baffled by it because I’m a liberal and they’re not. They’re repressive, punishing, intolerant of the slightest variation, absolutely the opposite of what it means to be a liberal. But that’s the way it goes. They still get the label. I am the fact of what it meant to be a liberal. I find the most liberals who feel like I do among people who are labeled as conservatives. It’s a very odd thing.

But that political thing has affected the criticism of my work. And it would just make me crazy to read asinine, irrelevant comments by critics who think they’re saying something intelligent.

You see, what happens is, if you respect a writer, then you talk about the work. If you disdain the writer, then you try to psychoanalyze the writer and figure out why would he write this. And that’s all I get from science fiction literary elite. If they mention my work at all, which they rarely do, it’s to dismiss it and to psychoanalyze me, which they are incapable of doing since they’ve never actually formed the kind of community bonds that my fiction always depends on. They have no idea what I’m talking about. They couldn’t produce that fiction if they tried because they don’t share those values.

This is absolutely true. “They have no idea what I’m talking about.” That’s precisely what one sees wherever the SFWA fascists are discussing something written by Card, me, or some other outlaw of SF. They literally don’t understand it. Look at how many people threw a hissy fit about my comments concerning NK Jemisin and thought that I was saying I was more homo sapiens sapiens than she was. It’s not worth bothering to explain it to them, because the whole point is to take offense in order to justify taking action.

As he observes: “Just writing honestly makes them attack me because they can’t bear a
favorable depiction of someone they disagree with. It’s intolerable to
them. They are arch-fanatical puritans. They can’t bear the thought that
someone somewhere who is intelligent might not hold the same idea as
them. It’s the essence of intolerance, and that’s the way they are.”

It is the way they are. And it drives them absolutely insane that more successful, more intelligent people not only don’t hold the same ideas as them, but hold them in complete contempt. The fact is that they are nothing but parasites. Consider: after openly ripping off Heinlein, John Scalzi has openly declared his hopes that Old Man’s War can catch a ride on the coattails of the Ender’s Game movie… and Scalzi’s mediocre derivatives are literally the award-winning best that the current SFWA community presently has to offer.

The culture of abuse

The Mad Genius and former SFWA member that is Kate Paulk slogs her way through my response to the SFWA Board report and finds it not only worth reading, but apparently not entirely lacking in entertainment value.  She also determines that SFWA is a “culture of abuse”:

Naturally, he has made public his response to the shit-sheet… ahem…
report. I recommend reading it. My knowledge of the SFWA by-laws from
actually reading the wretched things when the last revision of them came
up for a vote is that Mr Beale’s facts are 100% accurate. That’s
something I’ve noticed with him: you can disagree with him on how to
interpret the data, but the data he offers is usually pretty damned
accurate.

Among the many things Mr Beale is totally correct about is
the culture of abuse within TOFKASFWA. Name-calling that could make a
dock worker blush is one of the charming features of the regular
shit-storms, right alongside a truly remarkable lack of originality and
wit in the insults being flung right and left… mostly from left to
right, but but that’s another story. You’d think a collection of
speculative fiction writers could manage better insults than endless
conjugations of the standard four letter words (and no, I don’t mean
‘work’ and ‘food’).

Having read Mr Beale’s “vigorous” responses to some of
these childish inanities, I can say with a degree of authority that he’s
definitely more imaginative, and often more witty. He even manages to
be self-deprecating once or twice.

As for the substance of the alleged offenses he allegedly
committed: it’s pretty clear that every sin Mr Beale committed against
TOFKASFWA was committed in greater quantity by what seems like half the
flipping membership. Possibly half the non-flipping membership, too.
Since they apparently don’t keep accurate membership records (in
violation of their by-laws and the relevant laws for non-profit
organization in the two states they’re incorporated in – because their
MA incorporation is not over and they’ve taken out CA incorporation.
Possibly in violation of Federal laws for their tax status as a
non-profit as well) it’s a little difficult to tell what proportion of
the membership does anything.

Actually, it’s not too hard to tell what the barely published affiliate members who are pushing the pinkshirt agenda do. They clearly spend considerably more time reading obscure feminist sociology papers than they do publishing anything.  I suspect that what will ultimately be seen to have killed SFWA in the end is the removal of the requalifying requirement for Active membership; the techno-democratization of publishing may have eliminated SFWA’s original raison d’etre, but it was the makeup of the membership that prevented it from finding a new one still related to the creation of science fiction.

I have to confess that I am just a little disappointed no one has yet managed to identify the stylized way in which I began my response. I mean, I’m not at all surprised that it went right over the head of the relatively poorly read members of the SFWA Board, but I would have thought that more people here would have caught the reference.  I thought it was rather funny myself, but then, as Spacebunny assures me, I am the only one who truly appreciates my own sense of humor.

Kate Another Mad Genius, Dave Freer, also has some interesting thoughts on publishing and probability that the writers here will probably find worth checking out.

Burying the evidence: the SFWA Report

It appears the SFWA really doesn’t want the public to be able to learn why the SFWA Board “voted for the expulsion” from the organization of an unidentified member.

Kate Baker
Date: August 19, 2013, 3:52:59 PM CDT
Subject: DMCA Take-down Notice – Request

Requester: Kathryn Baker – Operations Manager SFWA
Organization: Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America
On Behalf of Copyright Holder: Matthew Johnson – Regional Director – SFWA

Work infringed – SFWA_report.pdf

Title: Evidence regarding the complaints made against Theodore Beale
Report to the Board of Directors of SFWA
Matthew Johnson
Canadian Region Director

Referring piece: This is an internal and private document written by Matthew Johnson. No one has been given permission to post,copy, edit the report/article in parts or in whole. We ask that you work in accordance with DMCA take-down procedures to remove the copyrighted piece from the link above.

Sincerely,

Kathryn Baker, Operations Manager – SFWA

This is an astonishingly hypocritical move by SFWA, especially in light of how Matthew Johnson both broke the SFWA Forum rules and infringed my own copyright by copying my Forum posts, blog posts, and blog comments, and distributing them in his report without permission. But I suppose they had to decide what makes them look worse, this DMCA Take-down Notice-Request or the Board Report itself.

I’ve already arranged for access to the document titled “SFWA_report.pdf” to be removed from the ISP as I expect it is only a matter of time before the report becomes a matter of public record. I trust the irony of a writer’s organization fighting to prevent information from reaching the public does not escape the average reader here.

In the meantime, one can still get the gist of Mr. Johnson’s report by reading my formal reply to it: Response to SFWA Board Report. One can also read my detailed response to each section of the report below.

Mailvox: the futility of cancer

Nate explains both why left-wing parasites are driven to take over organizations and why their takeovers always end in the eventual demise of the organization:

They never learn. They don’t understand civilization, and they don’t
understand power. That’s why they are never able to successfully build
organizations in the first place. So they have to take over the
organizations others have already built and try to use them for their
own goals. They think that the organization itself… the name… is
what makes it relevant. So they imagine if they can just get control of
it… all that power will be theirs.

So they break the very tools they are planning to use to fix the world.

Then
they stand there with a dumb look on their face… trying to drive a
nail with a broken hammer… and cannot understand why it isn’t working.

This process is as true of the Episcopalian Church and the Boy Scouts of America as it is of the SFWA.  Some believe that destruction was always the aim, but I don’t think that is true of the average parasite who joins an organization. I think in most cases they genuinely wish to “improve” the organization and do not understand that their desired improvements will kill it.

I’ll write more on this in the next day or two, in my response to NK Jemisin’s call for further “reconciliation”. What is interesting is the way in which Nate’s description here perfectly describes her approach to “improving” SF/F.

Their analytical abilities don’t appear to exceed that of the average cancer cell. The current SFWA is rather like a collection of cancer cells congratulating themselves on how much they have improved the body they are inhabiting and celebrating the way in which they have driven most of those disgusting, unprofessional white blood cells out.  And it is not hard to imagine their alarm when suddenly the body that sustains them begins to cease functioning, for no particular reason at all.

This is something that the Society for the Advancement of Speculative Storytelling may wish to keep in mind, lest it one day find itself going the same route as SFWA.  And speaking of SASS, the organization released a statement entitled: “Statement on the expulsion of a member by another writers’ organization“

In response to requests for comments regarding the decision of another writers’ group to formally expel a lifetime member, SASS Secretary and spokesman Lou Antonelli makes the following statement:

“Although the subject in question was exercising his free speech rights under the First Amendment to the US Constitution, that has nothing to do with the standards of conduct and behavior within a private organization

“Like any private club, the organization in question is allowed to police its membership according to its regulations and bylaws. This is an internal discipline issue and not a matter of concern to the Society for the Advancement of Speculative Storytelling.

“The by-laws of the Society for the Advancement of Speculative Storytelling clearly state that members should not discuss religion or politics within its auspices, and its members are expected to treat each other with respect. Those are our bylaws, and each group operates according to its own bylaws and policies.

I note that not only does SFWA have no standard of conduct and behavior, but it previously had one that was, if I recall correctly, junked during the Russell Davis administration.  As the SFWA’s statement demonstrated, the current Board believes it can throw anyone out of the organization at any time for no particular reason at all.  If I hadn’t made it clear to everyone that I was the member to whom the statement referred, no one would outside the SFWA Board and its confidants would even know with certainty who the expelled member was.

Of course, it would certainly be amusing if the Board’s assumptions turned out to be incorrect, would it not?  Because in that case, I would not even be expelled at all. And it occurs to me that someone inclined towards conspiracy theory might even conjecture that the reason the SFWA Board refused to publicly identify the expelled member is because they know very well that the expulsion was not legitimate, that it was a sham expulsion, and they are attempting to avoid being sued for damages once the illegitimacy of their action is established.

The organization formerly known as SFWA

Kate Paulk shares her thoughts on my recent, and historic, distinction:

His crime? I never really figured that out. It had something to do with
the SFWA twitter account, for which there were no official guidelines
until after whatever Mr Beale did, at least, not that I can find. As far as I can see, Mr Beale was doing nothing more horrible than
stating his opinions – not representing his opinions as those of any
other person or organization, not claiming to be anyone but himself, not
doing anything remotely unethical in other words.

Considering that a leading light of the industry can publicly grope a
female author at an awards banquet and not even get a mild, “that was
bad form” from the organization formerly known as SFWA, it’s clear that
the real reason for Mr Beale’s eviction was his outspoken personal
views.

Now I don’t particularly care what anyone’s personal beliefs are. I do
believe that an organization claiming to represent “Science Fiction and
Fantasy Writers” should have some kind of clause up front if they’re
going to limit membership to people with the “correct” beliefs. Now, if
they were the Communist Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America,
they’d have every reason to want Mr Beale out of their ranks, since he
is vehemently anti-communist. They’re not. Or at least, not openly.

SFWA may not be openly communist, but it is eminently clear that the F in SFWA now stands for Feminist. I didn’t see much hostility for capitalists in the organization, but it is readily apparent that if you are not a self-described feminist, of either sex, there is no place for you in the SFWA. The pinkshirts have already implemented various diktats concerning sexual harassment, SF conferences, and diversity, such as this one.


The Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America Statement on Diversity
 
The Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America strongly believes that a diverse membership is the key to a strong community. We define “diversity” as understanding and embracing the fact that our current and future members are composed of a broad range of individuals, who may vary in ethnicity, race, gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, age, physical disabilities, political or religious beliefs.

By including in our membership those of diverse backgrounds and experiences, we hope to provide an inclusive environment for our members, which is the foundation for civil discourse and the free exchange of ideas. Moreover, maximizing the diversity of our organization is important so that we can benefit from the talent and energy of all those who contribute to excellence in science fiction and fantasy writing.
 
Recognizing that historical and present day inequities must be addressed, we understand the need to promote diversity within the Board, staff, members, programs, and written policies of our organization. We must embody the change we advocate for others in the publishing industry. By seeking greater diversity and inclusion, we can serve as a model of the fairness and equality of opportunity we envision for our members.

We value the perspectives and contributions of all of our members. We welcome and support anyone who comes to us in good faith and with the desire to promote the SFWA, science fiction and fantasy writing, and the genre community as a whole.

This Very Important Statement was penned on the organization’s behalf by one Carrie Cuin, a fat little feminist who hasn’t even published enough fiction to qualify as a full member.  Many, if not most, of the outspoken feminists who have appointed themselves the organization’s stormtroopers haven’t published a single novel; the nobodies on the SFWA Board look like respected elders of the field by comparison.

And forget science fiction, the self-appointed experts on Stormfront and its associates have even gotten into the business of determining who is, and who is not, Hispanic. Despite my great-grandfather being a Mexican revolutionary and close associate of Pancho Villa’s, and despite my great-uncle being a well-known Hispanic painter, due to my failure to be publicly “Latino-identified” and my “discriminatory statements against Latinos”, Ms Cuin informed me that she “was afraid that you wouldn’t fall under that category” and therefore could not be included on a list of Hispanic SF writers.

Of course I’m not “Latino-identified”. I’m not Latino. And I don’t think I’ve made any statements about Latinos at all. The inability of a white woman from Ithaca to recognize the difference between Hispanics and Latinos is merely the icing on the irony cake.  No doubt they all look the same to her, and besides, they all speak Spanish anyhow, right?

The SFWA’s position on who is and who is not Hispanic reminded me of a statement by one of my feminist university professors, who once quite seriously declared that Margaret Thatcher “was not of the gender woman”. SFWA is so committed to diversity and inclusiveness that it excluded one of its few genuine writers of color… for no particular reason at all.

¡Viva la Revolución!

On advice of counsel

The SFWA’s official announcement of my expulsion doesn’t happen to mention me or why I was expelled.  The SFWA President didn’t provide a reason in his email to me either.  That was interesting in light of this belated addition to the official announcement:

Amended to add:

We will continue to omit the expelled individual’s name and the details of his behavior on advice of counsel.

They can’t mention the reason, of course, because that would reveal that their action was either a) highly selective, or, b) ideologically driven.

Meanwhile, Jemisin makes it clear, in her uniquely civilized way, that she’s got others on her hit list:

I’m still thinking about how much I’m willing to put up with, and for how much longer.

For the time being, though, I’ll remain a SFWA member. By expelling Mr. Beale,
and making a clear choice to offend at least one bigot this one time,
SFWA has done the bare minimum of what it must to retain relevance to
the bulk of its membership. Much, much more needs to be done, and I
suspect the organization will always be reactive to change
rather than proactive in this area. Frankly I don’t expect better of a
group that took 10 weeks to decide whether a member who spread hate
speech in its name was deserving of the label “professional”. But at
least for now SFWA might manage to stay relevant enough, to enough
people, to last awhile longer. I guess we’ll have to see.

Some time ago, I warned several SFWA members who were on the political left but concerned about the precedent an expulsion would set that my expulsion would not mark the end, but rather the beginning of the ideological cleansing. The mediocre feminist members of the organization, virtually none of whom should ever have been permitted to join in the first place, have nothing better to do than play sex police and ideological enforcer.  They love having an excuse to be outraged and if they can’t find one, they will manufacture one. I may be the first to be expelled by the rampaging rabbits, but it seems very unlikely I will be the last.

The lesson of the SFWA saga is the way in which it demonstrates how good organizations are invaded, conquered, and purged of both its purpose and its members by the progressive Left.  If your church, or your business, or your interest organization is not actively on guard against such individuals, and is not prepared to prevent them from joining, then the chances are very good that the process you have observed here is already underway.

In case you are interested, here is the actual vote.  Note that none of the four individuals named in the response, who were documented as doing the same thing I was accused of in the complaint, recused themselves.  Even the Board Appointed prosecutor voted:

Moved: That, having determined there is good and sufficient cause, a member be expelled from the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America for conduct materially and seriously prejudicial to the purposes and interests of the organization.

Steven Gould, President
Rachel Swirsky, Vice President–Second

Lee Martindale, South/Central Regional Director–Aye
Jim Fiscus, Western Regional Director–Aye
Matthew Johnson, Canadian Director–Aye
Bud Sparhawk, Treasurer–Aye
Tansy Rayner Roberts, Overseas Director–Aye
Eugene Myers, Eastern Regional Director–Aye
Susan Forest, Secretary–Aye

Vote carried: 9-0-0-0

The SFWA Board decides

Well, so long as the consideration of the evidence was careful….

After careful consideration of the evidence gathered by the Board-appointed investigator and your response, and in compliance with the existing Massachusetts By-Laws, the approved operations and procedures, and legal counsel, the SFWA Board has unanimously voted for your expulsion from the organization, effective immediately. This has been a difficult decision, but thorough examination of the evidence and the situation makes it clear that this action is necessary to best serve the interests of the organization and its members.

According to our records, you paid for your Lifetime Membership in October of 2002. As this period of time exceeds 10 years, you are not eligible for any pro-rata refund of your dues.

Sincerely,

Steven Gould
President
Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America

Fascinating. Notice that Steven Gould informs me “the SFWA Board has unanimously voted for your expulsion from the organization”, but he did not inform me that I was actually been expelled, nor did SFWA subsequently announce my expulsion, presumably because Gould knows “the existing Massachusetts By-Laws” state that as per Title XXII, Chapter 180, Section 18: No member of such corporation shall be expelled by vote of
less than a majority of all the members thereof, nor by vote of less
than three quarters of the members present and voting upon such
expulsion.

In any event, if you’d like to see the evidence that was so carefully considered by the SFWA Board yourself, you can download the two relevant documents:

And if you’re looking for my immediate response to what appears to be an elaborate charade on the part of the SFWA Board, all I can really say is this: rabbits gonna rabbit.

UPDATE: I was initially been under the impression that SFWA had expelled me from the organization. But after legal review, it was determined that the Board merely took the first step in the process since they have not yet held the full membership vote to confirm their decision that is required by the existing Massachusetts By-Laws.

    Handism in SF/F/SF

    Standout Author and anti-handist activist Mike Z. Williamson was inspired to action after encountering this troubling discussion of racism:

    Stephen Geigen-Miller
    June 13th, 2013 at 1:41 pm · Reply
    Jim,
    I agree completely and deeply respect what you’re doing in this post
    overall. Because of that, may I please suggest that you rethink your use
    of the phrase “tarred by association”? There are some problematic
    connotations there. Thanks very much.


    Jim C. Hines
    June 13th, 2013 at 1:51 pm · Reply
    Stephen
    – I’m not familiar with the connotations in question, and Google is
    failing me. Can you help fill in this knowledge gap for me?
    Thomas Wilde


    June 13th, 2013 at 1:57 pm · Reply
    I’m assuming he’s referring to tar babies or somesuch.
    Trey
    June 13th, 2013 at 2:06 pm · Reply
    Tarring and feathering. Also associated with lynching.


    Josh Hawks
    June 13th, 2013 at 2:28 pm · Reply
    I’m assuming it’s referring to tarring and feathering (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarring_and_feathering), which does have classist/racist undertones.


    Jim C. Hines
    June 13th, 2013 at 2:15 pm · Reply
    Had a quick and interesting Twitter chat about it, and did a little reading at http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-tar1.htm. I did go ahead and change that phrase, though. I like the new version better anyway
    To which Mr. Williamson responded on the subject of privilege and the discriminatory bias of handism:
    There’s one minority still not given proper respect in language: Left handers. The term “sinister” is still used as an epithet for evil, wrong, unpleasant. Likewise, “gauche” is a reference to rude behavior.  People are considered “dextrous” if they have good manual skills.

    Why are the negative connotations expressed using references to left handedness, and positive connotations reserved for the right?

    Writers, especially in fantasy, usually right-handed, should stop using these prejudicial terms and find terms that are non-handed specific.

    This is a worldwide issue.  Only about 15% of the population are left handed…. I’m sure most people have never thought of this.  They have right-handed privilege, in a world that caters to them.

    I’m sure some will dismiss this as a non-issue.  I challenge them to go into a store and ask for every household good in a left-handed model.  If the store has any, they will have a token one or two of each, not the dozens or hundreds of right handed options.  Buy them.  Go home and use them in your right hand so you’re using them backward. That’s what it’s like for left handed people every day of our lives.

    Politically, I’ve seen conservatives refer to the political right being “correct” and the political left being “wrong.”

    Then crack open a book and find the bad guy is “sinister” and the clueless guy is “gauche.”  Gee, thanks for that.

    “Right” is an acknowledgment of correctness.  One gets “left behind.”
    I expect there are a number of fantasy writers who are major offenders on this.  But if they’re taking steps with racially, culturally, gender and religiously sensitive terms, it would be fair to not use terms derogatory to the left handed minority as well.

    This moving missive has truly opened my eyes to my right-handed privilege.  Was it an accident that the handist and racist Ursula le Guin asserted it was the LEFT hand that was DARK?  Was it a coincidence that the handist and religious bigot Jerry Jenkins related the LEFT to the body part most associated with ordure, the BEHIND?  Truly, the evil is rife within the genre! I can only abase myself and hope Mr. Williamson will accept my humble apologies for my thoughtless handism.  I henceforth pledge to do my level best to excise this shameful scourge of handist privilege from science fiction, fantasy, and speculative fiction.

    Who doesn’t understand what?

    The current SFWA president provides a fascinating retweet from the previous SFWA president.

    John Scalzi ‏@scalzi 20 Jul
    As a general rule, a person too stupid to understand satire shouldn’t try to use it as an affirmative defense.
    Retweeted by Steven Gould

    Now, logic suggests that there are two possibilities here.  The first is that a member of Mensa doesn’t understand satire.  The second is that John Scalzi is a foolish ass who didn’t stop and think before he asserted his belief in a dimwitted reader’s interpretation of one of my posts.

    Whatever could the answer be?  Remember, leftist attacks often involve psychological projection of their own deficiencies.  Consider the similarities between McRapey’s claims that I don’t understand satire and his response to my explanation for the readily observable fact that women write very little hard science fiction more than eight years ago:

    “John, you think it makes more sense to postulate that despite my
    obvious familiarity with the hard SF works of various women, I am
    dedicated to a theory of genetic female inferiority while simultaneously
    being in denial of the existence of books I own, than to admit you
    failed to grasp an obvious rhetorical device.”

    It’s possible, Vox. On the other hand, I have a degree in philosophy
    from the University of Chicago (specializing in the philosophy of
    language), and therefore have ample training in rhetoric, so I doubt
    that rhetorical deficiencies on this end are the issue.

    McRapey can’t be wrong, you see, because credentials.  Credentials and ample training.