Tag: SJW

A misstep on the long march

David Futrelle’s jumping on my failure to properly articulate my statement on what I believe #GamerGate to be is a good example of why the written word is reliably more powerful in the medium- and long-term than the visual medium:

Yesterday, I wrote about Vox Day’s extravagantly evasive — yet highly revealing — interview with David Pakman. But the interview also featured a few striking moments of candor. One of these came when Day — a sometime gave developer as well as the biggest asshole in Sci Fi — offered his answer to the question: “What is Gamergate really about?”

Suggesting that the issue of “corruption in game journalism” was little more than “the spark that set the whole thing off,” Day declared that

    what Gamergate is fundamentally about is the right of people to design, develop and play games that they want to design, develop and play without being criticized for it.

Which is an. er, interesting perspective, as there is in fact no “right” to be immune from criticism.

If you write a book, if you make a movie, if you post a comment on the internet — you should be ready for it to be criticized. Because that’s how free speech works. That’s how art works. And that’s how ideas work.

It’s too bad David Pakman didn’t jump on that or I would have corrected myself. But Futrelle is absolutely right for once. I shouldn’t have phrased it that way. It was a mistake. What I should have said, and what I believe, was this:

What GamerGate is fundamentally about is the right of people to design,
develop and play games that they want to design, develop and play.

Period. Although I will add that it would certainly be nice if we could simply design, develop, and play games without being harassed in the process. Now, as is normal for the average SJW, Futrelle hasn’t really thought this through beyond the chance to momentarily try to portray me as being anti-free speech. (DISQUALIFY!) It’s not a cheap shot, given the quote I handed him, but it is a silly one, because I have twelve years of evidence demonstrating that I am fairly extreme on the pro-free speech side, whereas Futrelle is considerably less staunch in that regard.

Of course, they will keep saying “you said it” and “no takebacks”, or as PopeHat rather absurdly tried to insist, “you can retcon all you like”. But that would only convince people if I had no previous statements on free speech, not to mention one of the more lightest moderating policies of any popular blog.

And it’s very easy for us to turn this particular line of attack around on them. In response, I asked Futrelle the following question:

A question for you re your two articles. Do you support the right of gamers to tell women they should not develop games?


It should be interesting to see what his response is. And if he fails to respond, well, that will be even more telling. The important thing to keep in mind is that no one exchange is final. There will always be tactical mistakes, missteps, and dead ends. They will happen, so don’t try to hide them, just admit them, clarify, and move on.

At the root, of course, this is just more SJW word games. When game journalists attack gamers and game developers, they call it criticism. When #GamerGate responds in kind, they call it harassment.

UPDATE: Futrelle responds, knowing perfectly well how one could hammer him for the statement.

David Futrelle ‏@DavidFutrelle
@voxday They have the right to say it, though not to threaten or harass; others have the right to call them out for their misogyny.

Now, if I were an SJW, this would be my cue to point and shriek that “MISOGYNIST DAVID FUTRELLE SAYS WOMEN SHOULDN’T DEVELOP GAMES!” But I’m not and I won’t bother, because it doesn’t matter.

Yeah, so, about that….

What’s the lesson? No, not the one about women, the one about SJWs:

John Scalzi ‏@scalzi 
I’m not the Anti-Beale. I’m merely the person who Beale so very desperately wishes he had the career of.

Deirdre Saoirse Moen ‏@deirdresm
Which is why his Alexa rank is < 1000 milliScalzis.

Notorious E.G.G. ‏@silvermink
Though, I have to say, his Alexa rank is much closer to that number than my faith in humanity can handle sometimes.

John Scalzi ‏@scalzi
Trust me, if his Alexa score ever gets above mine, he’ll trumpet it to the heavens.

Deirdre Saoirse Moen ‏@deirdresm
It wasn’t until I looked at the puppy Alexa rankings that I understood why RP was more successful than SP. Sigh.

Notorious E.G.G. ‏@silvermink
People actually listen to Mr. Beale, mindboggling as I find that.

John Scalzi ‏@scalzi
Yeah, but they’re assholes.

Notorious E.G.G. ‏@silvermink
A bit of a saving grace, it’s true.

Jonathan Bergeron
now that’s a burn

John Scalzi ‏@scalzi
It’s not the Alexa award. It’s that the RPs appealed more to people happy to shit all over other people.

Deirdre Saoirse Moen ‏@deirdresm
 I figured as much (and said so in response to a comment).

Marty ‏@hugbug94
VDBEALE doesn’t have the writing chops to be in your league.

John Scalzi ‏@scalzi
Thanks, although I would not that for commercial success, writing chops are not always required.

Current Alexa Ranks

Scalzi Global: 84,147
Scalzi USA: 18,628

VP Global: 84,187
VP USA: 17,599

Now, Alexa is a ridiculous measure, as it is based on links rather than the more straightforward metric of traffic. At present, VP alone has about 3x Scalzi’s Google pageview traffic, and VP+AG has about 4x the traffic. If history is any guide, we should see the first 2 million-pageview month in August; this month is on course for 1.9 million+ combined.

But, as is our wont, let us count the lies:

  1. I very desperately wish I had John Scalzi’s career. I’m a lead game designer, a lead editor, and a minor author. He’s a very successful midlist author who is making some headway in television and failed as a game writer. My blogs surpass his by a factor of four and are nearly double his all-time peak. My Twitter Impression/follower ratio is considerably higher (355 to 125), and despite having only one-fifth the Impressions and one-seventeenth the followers, I expect my Impressions will pass up his within 18 months.
  2. I will trumpet to the heavens if my Alexa score ever passes his. It did, months ago. I didn’t. That’s VP alone, by the way, VP+AG is far beyond his, as AG alone is around 105k Global.
  3. People who read here are assholes. Actually, according to the demographics, you’re much wealthier and better-educated than the norm. And considering how lightly I moderate, I think it’s self-evident that most people here are more civil than average as well. You’re certainly less vulgar than Scalzi’s commenters, for the most part. I like you, anyhow. Obviously, he doesn’t.
  4. RPs appealed more to people happy to shit all over other people. Considering how the SJWs have treated the 2015 nominees, this is certainly false when compared to them. But compared to Sad Puppies, that’s probably true. It’s an unfair and misleading exaggeration, but not a lie.
  5. VDBEALE doesn’t have the writing chops to be in Scalzi’s league. Actually, I’d put us both right in the same league. We’re both mediocre, albeit for very different reasons. My Style has no melody, no flare. It is plodding and pedestrian whereas Scalzi’s Style is light and breezy. Scalzi can’t do characters and they all speak in one snarky voice: his own. My characters are diverse and distinct, albeit limited to the upper half of the male spectrum. I think Story comes out fairly equal, although he directly rips off the greats whereas I merely borrow here and there, Concept is also fairly even, his clever stunts versus my worldbuilding.

Help the Honey Badgers

The Honey Badgers were kicked out of Calgary Expo, apparently for the thoughtcrime of supporting GamerGate by selling GG t-shirts. Here is another chance to strike back at the SJWs:

The Honey Badger Brigade is now seeking legal advice to hold the Calgary Expo staff accountable for their acts of abuse and discrimination against us. We have made attempts in the past week to diffuse the situation by attempting to contact Mr. Kelly Dowd, owner of the Calgary Expo. We have received no response.

On April 17th 2015, the Honey Badger Brigade was forcibly evicted and our booth ordered removed, despite our operating well within the rules of the Expo and it’s policies of conduct. We were not given a chance to dispute the alleged complaints. The organization violated its own stated policy in the process and has released conflicting claims regarding its reasons for our removal.

Those claims indicate that we were removed due to our Men’s Rights Activism and unpopular view of modern feminism. Therefore it is our belief that the actions taken by the Calgary Expo staff were of a political nature and contravene the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, in particular freedom of conscience, freedom of thought and freedom of association.

If so, this eviction was based in discrimination, an act that has defamed and abused us. While we would prefer to settle this outside of a courtroom, we are prepared to take every legal action needed to ensure that ourselves and other future exhibitors will be treated equally, and without such a denial of their fundamental human rights.

All funds submitted to this fundraiser will be used for legal costs and costs directly related to our ejection from the Calgary Comics and Entertainment Expo. We will be keeping track of expenses and providing expense reports as we’re able.

If you’re a member of the Dread Ilk, Rabid Puppies, or #GamerGate, I’d encourage you to start a little coffee fund. Nothing much, maybe save your change or devote $5 per month to support the little causes such as these that are going to continue to arise. If we all do that, and judiciously apply this financial ammunition, the force multiplication of doing it at the same time at critical junctures can have a disproportionate impact.

I’m not going to bring up every little thing, but if one seems particularly useful or hits in a critical area, I will bring it to your attention. The Honey Badgers are significant because they are being attacked primarily to prevent the GamerGate virus from spreading into other potentially anti-SJW women’s groups.

Remember, the SJWs always focus their ire and their fire at the weak links and the inroads. That’s why they put pressure on the likes of Annie Bellet, not Steve Rzasa or Tom Kratman, to withdraw from the Hugo shortlist. If we can continue to knock them back at those points of resistance, they’ll crumble much more rapidly than they will from steady, constant pressure.

Literary journalism

I think this must represent a new low where the coverage of books is involved. Lana Jordan busts Jane Carnall of the Guardian, who openly admits that she hasn’t read the very books that she “reviewed” and gave one-star ratings on Amazon.

Tom Knighton goes into more detail on this: “When we talk about why we despise CHORFs so much, it’s because of
crap like this.  Carnall isn’t trying to just keep Sad Puppies nominees
from getting awards — which has its own brand of pathetic — instead,
she’s actively working to destroy people’s livelihoods.  Keeping a Hugo
out of their hands isn’t enough for her.  No, she wants to destroy their
careers.  Why?  *GASP* Because they disagree with her!!! We now see the face of evil, and believe it or not, it’s not Vox Day.  Shocking, I know.”

This is what we are dealing with. No compromise, no retreat, no apologies, no mercy. They started this cultural war. We will finish it.

Diversity is Equality

Anyone who has been paying attention has been aware of this for a while, but now it’s being openly admitted by the SJWs:

A students’ union has been accused of racism and sexism after banning white people and men from an event to promote equality. Those studying at Goldsmiths, University of London, were invited to the students’ union meeting to discuss ‘diversifying the curriculum’.

But they were shocked when an organiser told white people and men ‘not to come’ as it was only open to BME [black and minority ethnic] women.

Bahar Mustafa, Welfare and Diversity Officer, at Goldsmiths University in London sparked anger when she banned men and white people from a ‘diversity’ meeting. Students have reacted with anger after men and white people were banned from a ‘diversity’ meeting at Goldsmiths University in London.

In the same way that feminist “EQUALITY” doesn’t actually mean equal treatment for everyone, the SJW “DIVERSITY” doesn’t actually mean that the advocate seeks diverse perspectives or participation.

What EQUALITY really means is female supremacy. What DIVERSITY really means is non-white, non-Christian, non-male supremacy.

It is very important to never take words at face value when they are coming out of the mouth of an SJW. Always take the time to determine what they actually mean. Why? Because SJWs always lie.

When I said “always, I meant “always”.

In re SJWs. This chubbo just can’t stop digging deeper:

Alexandra Erin ‏@alexandraerin
Anyone else notice that the thing the Sad Puppies take exception with David Gerrold for saying is “nobody wants to hang out with assholes”?

Alexandra Erin ‏@alexandraerin
They read into that the threat of a blacklist, which is a stretch, but it’s more than that.

Alexandra Erin ‏@alexandraerin
As much as the SPs/RPs keep singing the refrain of “WE DON’T CARE”, it hurts them that people don’t have to like them.

Alexandra Erin ‏@alexandraerin
It hurts them that people don’t have to like the books they write, or the books they like.

Alexandra Erin ‏@alexandraerin
It hurts them so much that they have to invent an entire alternate reality where no one REALLY dislikes them except a small clique.

Alexandra Erin ‏@alexandraerin
“The problem isn’t that I’m an asshole no one wants to associate with outside my own small clique!” they say. “People are just scared.”

Alexandra Erin ‏@alexandraerin
“I’m actually super popular and everyone loves me. They’re just too afraid to say so.”

Alexandra Erin ‏@alexandraerin
No one as immune to the “feelbads” as the puppies claim to be could be threatened by the statement “no one wants to hang out with assholes.”

Alexandra Erin ‏@alexandraerin
You know what it means when they clamor for David Gerrold to be sanctioned for stating the simple truth that people don’t like assholes?

Alexandra Erin ‏@alexandraerin
It means they’re asking for censorship. Of course, they’ve been demanding censorship all along. They just dress it up as different things.

Alexandra Erin ‏@alexandraerin
The only difference between “I don’t think stories I don’t like should be praised or nominated” and what the puppies are doing is HONESTY.

Alexandra Erin ‏@alexandraerin
It’s the same dodge GG uses with its shielding battlecry of “ETHICS!”

Alexandra Erin ‏@alexandraerin
Saying, “I don’t think people should be allowed to praise this story/game” = obvious game over. So they say “Anyone doing so must be LYING.”

Alexandra Erin ‏@alexandraerin
And then, oh, then… then they’re not arguing for censorship, but arguing against deception! Who could oppose that?

Alexandra Erin ‏@alexandraerin
David Gerrold said, very simply and very clearly, that people don’t like to hang out with assholes. Is that not manifestly true?

Alexandra Erin ‏@alexandraerin
Not one Sad Puppy will address this because it doesn’t fit their narrative. Facts? Who needs them! They FEEL attacked by it. That’s enough.

Alexandra Erin @alexandraerin
Heck, Gerrold even explicitly said he’s not talking about a blacklist. But liar-in-chief Vox Day said Gerrold “literally” called for one.

 Vox Day ‏@voxday
.@alexandraerin Exactly when and where did I say “Gerrold ‘literally’ called for” a blacklist? What is the exact quote you are quoting?

In the meantime, while he/she/it is busy searching for that nonexistent lie, let’s not forget the following statement by Mr. Gerrold. Presumably he is only telling Brad this in order to ensure no one has to hang out with bodily orifices.

“I will make sure you NEVER win a Hugo!” – David Gerrold to Brad Torgersen on Facebook.

The “no blacklist” argument is about as convincing as David Gerrold coming out on stage at WorldCon in a leopard print g-string, dancing to Erasure under a disco ball with a dog leash around his neck held by a bald man wearing nothing but a mustache and leather chaps, then holding up his hands and insisting, “no homo”.

Let’s face it, if the Nielsen Haydens were caught red-handed making a list of writers who would never be permitted to publish at Tor.com, the SJWs would claim it wasn’t a blacklist so long as the names were written in blue ink.

SJWs always lie

Case in point: Mary Robinette Kowal:

Mary Robinette Kowal says:   
April 13, 2015 at 6:25 pm   

Speaking as someone who has been the repeated target of Vox Day, this strategy does not work. Until April 11, 2015, I have NEVER mentioned him on my blog. EVER. I have him blocked on all social media.

“He doesn’t attack anyone that hasn’t opened the ball up.”
HA! His first mention of me is mid-2013.

He has threatened to post where I live. And yes, he could, because he has the SFWA directory.

This idea that you can ignore him and he’ll go away is demonstrably not how it works.

What a poisonously stupid little bitch. Keep in mind this is Johnny Con’s former VP in SFWA. She is a shameless liar. I absolutely did NOT threaten to post where she lived. She publicly called me out on TWITTER about my claim that accused child molester Ed Kramer was a member of SFWA and was listed as such in the SFWA directory on June 23, 2014. The problem, of course, was that in order to provide evidence of my 100-percent correct claim by posting the relevant page from the 2010 SFWA directory, I would have to expose the names and addresses of everyone on that page, including the lying bitch herself. As it happens, Kowal, Mary Robinette (A) is directly above Kramer, Edward E. (A) on page 26 of the SFWA Directory.

This is the “proof” she cites that I “threatened to post” where she lived. Notice that they started claiming that Kramer was not a member after scrubbing his name from the online membership directory that morning. What a pity that I’d already grabbed a screenshot, knowing how these liars always lie.

Now, note that the convicted child molester Ed Kramer is not a current Active member of SFWA because he has not paid his dues… from prison. He is still eligible and can restore his Active status in the organization any time he simply pays his dues. He was absolutely a member of SFWA in 2010, as the SFWA directory showed, and he was STILL listed as a member of SFWA in their online directory as of June 24, 2014, although SFWA removed the listing only hours after I posted the screencap on my blog.

Note that SFWA member Ed Kramer “was arrested on August 25, 2000 following an anonymous tip, and
charged with molesting three teenage boys. The ensuing investigation
revealed that Kramer had previously been accused of molestation in 1997
before the alleged victim recanted. Kramer’s first attempt to serve his pre-trial detention in house arrest
lasted only a week due to a reported visit by a teenage boy. After
Kramer suffered a spinal injury in jail, Judge Debra Turner allowed him
to go back to house arrest in January 2001.This lasted until 2008.”

In any event, Mary Robinette Kowal is not only a liar, but a shameless deceiver as well. Not only did she lie about me threatening to post her address, but she lied about me not leaving her alone AFTER SHE CALLED ME OUT ON TWITTER. Sure, it’s true that she hadn’t mentioned me on her blog… because she was attacking me on Twitter.

The lesson, as always, is that SJWs always lie.

I don’t lie on the Internet, Mary. I told you it will never end. And it hasn’t, has it?

When rabbits rabbit

I’m not sure which is more amusing, this guy’s complete failure to even begin to grasp what neo-fascism is, the fact that the SJWs are pretending to take his ranting babble seriously, his claim that “If You Gave a Dinosaur a Cookie, My Love” is better than anything on the 2015 shortlist, or the severeness of the butthurt radiating from his crimson posterior:

Fuck you, Theodore Beale.

Fuck you for trying to break a thing I loved. Fuck you for doing it to serve your stupid, lame fascist ideology. More to the point, fuck you for your stupid, lame fascist ideology. Your beliefs are horrible. You’re horrible. You’re a nasty, cruel little bully, and I do not like you.

Fuck you for making me feel that way. Fuck you for the way you’ve brought this thing that I love, this celebration of great science fiction, to a point where it is full of the sort of mean and hateful desires that seem to animate you. Fuck you for dragging us all down to your sorry level. Fuck you for being so odious that we have to go there.

And fuck you for making me want you to hate me. Fuck you for all of your beliefs that amount to nothing short of hatred for the things I love. For the people I love. For the art and beautiful things that are why I get out of bed in the morning. Fuck you for living your life for the sole purpose of destroying things that I love, and for making me wish that I could destroy something of yours in retaliation. Fuck you for making me write this, in the sincere and passionate hope that it will make you feel even a moment’s unpleasantness.

And fuck you for the very real possibility that a work nominated purely because you used your noxious little voice to rally your loathsome, asshole supporters to support it might win a Hugo Award. Fuck you because it’s actually possible that you will break the Hugos successfully and demonstrate that you’re oh so much stronger than a bunch of fans who were previously just happily attending a convention and voting for stuff they loved in awards. In short, fuck you.

Other than that, how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln? I am afraid that the only thing this extended rabbiting managed to elicit from me was a wry smile. As for my “loathsome asshole supporters”, every article like this creates more of them because the true face of the SJW cannot be forgotten once it is revealed. And the lesson, as always, is this: SJWs always lie.

I particularly enjoyed the punchline: “I will not attempt to construct some absolute explanation of Theodore
Beale’s beliefs. Instead, I will construct a caricature of them.”

You don’t say….

Mailvox: the racism lens

It’s always fascinating how some people have an amazing ability to detect racism no matter how clearly the absence of racism by literally every definition is explained to them. From a discussion on Eric Flint’s blog:

I may as well go all-in here: In comments above Vox Day has repeatedly been called a “racist,” perhaps dozens of times. Have any of you ASKED him what his position is on racial differences? Have any of you READ what he has to say about racial differences? No? Then those of you who call him “racist” are simply a mob. In an attempt to educate, here is what Mr. Day wrote recently in a comment on Brad Torgersen’s blog; it was in response to the following statement by someone else (not Brad): “Vox Day believes that white people and Asians (and clearly Hispanics, since Beale is one, at least in part) are superior to black people, and he believes this inferiority of blacks is innate, genetic.”

Here is what Mr. Day wrote in response:

“Correction: I don’t have any reason to believe any one human population sub-group is intrinsically superior to any other population sub-group. That being said, both science and logic quite clearly indicate that no two population sub-groups are identical, and therefore every population sub-group is either superior or inferior to another sub-group on the basis of any chosen metric.
“It makes no more difference that you like or dislike this fact than if you disapprove of the speed of light or the rate of Earth gravity.
“I assert that an unborn female black child with a missing chromosome and an inclination to homosexuality is equal in human value and human dignity and unalienable, God-given rights to a straight white male in the prime of his life and a +4 SD IQ. How many of my dishonest critics will do the same?
“That doesn’t mean that I think it is wise to ask that particular child, when she is grown, to design the next plane on which I intend to fly. Or even to work in the air traffic control tower.
“I deal in reality as determined by history, science, and logic. And I care no more about what an equalitarian fantasist thinks about me or anything else than I do about the mentally deranged babbling in the psych ward. The world is as it is, not as we might wish it to be. If you can’t understand that, then I am among the least of your problems.”

So query: Do the above statements validate the multiple assertions above that Mr. Day is a “racist”? (Disclaimer: I’ve never met the man, nor talked to him; I have exchanged perhaps a couple of emails when I challenged a statement he made. But I do despise mindless online mobs screaming “racist!”)
Reply

    Gav says:
    April 21, 2015 at 10:39 AM

    A moment’s thought shows that his premise is completely ridiculous. Choose people A, B, C such that A & C are from one group and B from another, but A is taller than B is taller than C. So now I’ve got a metric (height) where group 1 is both superior and inferior to group 2 on the height metric. (For a real-life example, choose Robert Wadlow and his father for A & C, and Michael Jordan for B).

    You have to be not only racist but also stupid to believe that “every population sub-group is either superior or inferior to another sub-group on the basis of any chosen metric.”
 
        Mike says:
        April 21, 2015 at 12:21 PM

        This is a result of false equivocation between individuals and categories. Yes, the mean of the heights of all adult men if taller than the mean of the heights of all adult women, but that doesn’t mean all men are taller than all women.

        It ends up being a big problem in the scientific study of people. Some people have political/personal reasons to try to see one group as better than another, while other people have similar reasons to try to see no groups as being any different from each other. Both camps accuse the other side of being unscientific and ignoring the data.

        Really there is no conflict between the idea that one group may, on average, have a measurable difference than another group, and also the idea that the variance of individuals withing the groups may be much larger than the difference between the groups. But due to confirmation bias, people tend to ignore whatever part of that equation it is convenient for them to ignore.
        Reply
            Eric Flint says:
            April 21, 2015 at 12:33 PM

            The problem goes deeper than that, because there’s an intrinsic bias in the categories someone chooses in the first place. For instance, if you choose to compare “the race of whites” to “the race of blacks” you are assuming not only that such races exist but that they are the proper basis for comparison. But why should that be true? Due to the way the human race evolved, there is more genetic variation among Africans than there is between any given group of Africans and any non-African segment of humanity. The reason people think all Africans belong to the same “race” is because they share certain literally superficial features: skin color, hair and some facial features. But why should those criteria be used as the basis to define a “race” in the first place? Why not, for instance, choose the average distribution of blood types? In which case you wind up with a “racial map” of humanity that is completely different from a “racial map” drawn according to skin color, hair and facial features.

            My point is that there is an inherent bias in the way the question is posed in the first place, which makes any answer to the question automatically questionable. What defines a “racist” in the first place, intellectually speaking, is the firm conviction that “races” as defined sociologically have an actual biological reality which is more basic than any other possible differentiation. For which there is not a shred of actual evidence. It is a faith-based conviction. That’s a polite say of saying it’s just bigotry.
            Reply
                Mike says:
                April 21, 2015 at 1:59 PM

                Yes, I agree. There very definitely are biological races, if you define that as subsets of the overall human gene pool where certain collections of genes are much more prevalent than they are in the general population. But there is so much nonsense and xenophobia and misunderstanding involved that it’s a real nightmare to try to approach these questions without stepping on any land mines.

                I recommend a really interesting book called “The Sports Gene” that gives some great examples of how this can be done properly (IMO), and also some examples of where it has been done very much improperly.
                Reply
                    335522 says:
                    April 21, 2015 at 2:13 PM

                    With all due respect to all of you, I believe you’re missing the point. Please read the third paragraph by Vox Day that begins “I assert that an unborn female black child….” And then answer the question that I posed at the end, please (it being notable that not one of the responses addresses it).

The following quote from that exchange is an astonishing assertion that clearly demonstrates both the intellectual inferiority as well as the logical incapacity of the SJWs:

“You have to be not only racist but also stupid to believe that “every population sub-group is either superior or inferior to another sub-group on the basis of any chosen metric.”

Quite to the contrary, you have to be utterly stupid and wholly irrational to deny that assertion, or else possess hitherto-unknown evidence demonstrating that every human population sub-group is absolutely and entirely equal across the board. Every single group has an average, a mean, and a median, regardless of the metric chosen. None of those three statistics are likely to be precisely equal to the average, the mean, and the media of any other group.

At no point have I EVER claimed, suggested, implied, hinted, or intimated that EVERY SINGLE MEMBER of one human population group is superior to EVERY SINGLE MEMBER of another one. And anyone who claims that I ever have is either lying or simply too dim to bother even attempting to talk down to.

The idea that “races” don’t exist is simply antiscientific dogma. They might as well deny that “species” and “groups” exist while they’re at it.

Critique by identity

I find it amusing how invariably McCarthyite the SJWs playing critic reveal themselves to be:

Over and over again, we see the mechanism by which power re-asserts itself when challenged. With a gymnastic leap, those on the defensive become the underdogs, cruelly repressed by the BBC, feminists, people from Islington, some nebulous “elite” or the suggestion that sometimes a female character in a videogame might wear a decently supportive bra.

The debate demands onlookers accept one of two contradictory premises, so there is little room for nuance and the argument never runs out of fuel. Is Farage a truth-teller or a race-baiter? Was Thornberry a metropolitan snob, or was the England flag itself a type of dogwhistle? Are the Hugo awards in thrall to a politically correct cabal, or simply making an effort to remedy an ingrained injustice? Whether it’s videogames, science fiction or Westminster politics, the underlying struggle for victim status is the same. And once you notice, it’s downright eerie to hear the same arguments – about “out-of-touch elites” who don’t connect with the tastes of “real people” – coming from the leader of Ukip and a guy who wrote a book called Summa Elvetica: A Casuistry of the Elvish Controversy.

There is no single answer and, at least in the case of the Hugo awards, it is not in the extremists’ interests to find one. Vox Day has built a small internet army on his manufactured grievance, and he won’t let it go lightly. If SFF fans vote to give “no award” in the categories where Rabid Puppies candidates dominate, he has threatened to ensure that the awards are never given again. It is a supremely self-interested move. Politicising the Hugos to such a degree certainly doesn’t help the nominees themselves, because authors on his slate risk being informally blacklisted by the rest of the community. Who wants to read a fantasy story endorsed by a bigot?

This is mildly amusing, considering how it is usually asserted that I am stupid. Now I am suddenly an overly erudite elitist? Okay, actually, that’s considerably closer to the truth, but then, as an avowed anti-equalitarian, I don’t pretend to be anything but an elitist.

The important difference: unlike most elitists, I have no desire to dictate or control the behavior of the non-elite. I simply refuse to let either the elite or the non-elite claim the right to dictate or control my behavior or my beliefs.

The last question is the most interesting. We might, of course, turn it around, as it rather usefully clarifies what James May keeps pointing out to everyone. Who wants to read a fantasy story endorsed by a Communist? Who wants to read a story endorsed by a feminist? Who wants to read a fantasy story endorsed by a Negro? Who wants to read a fantasy story endorsed by a woman?

Once the idea of judging a work on its own merits, rather than on the basis of who creates or endorses it, is rejected, then there is no reason to not judge works on the very racist, sexist, and ideological grounds that the SJWs claim to bitterly oppose. They are openly demolishing the very foundations upon which their incoherent ideology rests.

The Hugo situation doesn’t “prove progressives right”. Quite to the contrary, it has clearly shown their ideology to be not only hopelessly hypocritical, but intrinsically self-contradictory too. And if the article didn’t prove it, the comments certainly do.

“They stand for intolerance, prejudice, fear & loathing and must be rejected with scorn, derision and at times, force. Their opinion and views are not equal nor are they valid so therefore they do not deserve to be given any air time or publicity.”

Very well. We can certainly treat them likewise.