Dispatches from the abyss by Uli Hesse

The Winter Soldier is introduced as this ghost, as this iconic dreaded assassin, and when you see him fully for the first time in the kitchen it’s terrifying. He does seem like an equal villain to Pierce … and then it’s all. fucking. subverted. and made horrific. that childlike docility in his face in the midst of all that violence, accepting that bit in his mouth, that backhand, it’s all haunting.

 you realize just what this is. making people into living weapons at the cost of their humanity isn’t badass or cool or legendary. it’s a sacrifice. it’s a corruption. it’s a greek fucking tragedy. [x]

(Source: fyeahwintersoldier)

also

shwetanarayan:

feuervogel:

shwetanarayan:

feuervogel:

shwetanarayan:

"give it a fair shake because it’s crap anyway" is a morally cowardly position IMO.

Would it matter if he wrote an amazing story?

We’re talking about someone who strongly though implicitly called for the lynching of N.K.Jemisin here (note, there are screencaps of some of it at the link and also tithenai quotes the bit that is a specific violence-dogwhistle, proceed with caution).  So… if you’re able to judge this person’s story ‘on its merits’, what does it say about your opinion of marginalized folks’ safety in this community?

Is this about me? Am I not ~marginalized enough~? (I’m not queer enough, because I’m married to a man; I’m not disabled enough because my migraines don’t affect me every day.)

errr no? I would have responded to you if it was.

This is about the people who are making posts to that end. There are multiple people, which is why I didn’t point to one in particular.

I saw it shortly after responding to your earlier post saying that I’m curious how terrible That Story is (I hear it’s awful), so I thought perhaps it was related.

I mean, I only belong to one group he has actively expressed eliminationist rhetoric about (though I suspect he wouldn’t have anything good to say about people with disabilities, either, and I’m positive he doesn’t like atheists), so I have some privilege there, and I can say “well, I’ll read until I’m bored or disgusted, unless it’s hilarrible, in which case I’ll keep reading for great lolz.” (Also, I read really fast, so it wouldn’t take more than an hour. Novelettes top out at 15k words, right?)

I don’t require, or even suggest, that anyone else do the same. Unless they really want to.

I can take the hit for people who can’t or don’t want to. 

Argh, was it the same time? I’m sorry, I missed that reply of yours at the time, or I’d have made my post clearer. My understanding is that you were saying a different thing from what I’m talking about here - that you personally choose to read and see how bad it is.  Not that we shouldn’t be bringing up the context of “potentially violent white supremacist” because lol the story is bad anyway.

My problem is with the people who say we “should” all be “giving him a fair shake” in order to play the game right, and with how all of them (afaik) have said something on the order of “and anyway the story is bad so what’s the harm” as part of their reasoning.

And the harm is in placing fairness to known abusers over the safety of their targets.

I see! Yes, all is clear. (This is why I hate tumblr as a discussion platform.)

And, indeed, I am saying that I choose to read it to see how bad it is, no one else has to do the same, and if “he’s a potentially violent white supremacist” is why you’re not reading it, that’s a perfectly valid reason!

I would definitely not say that we shouldn’t bring up his disgusting eliminationist rhetoric because the story is bad anyway. That’s a bizarre argument for anyone to make, and I can’t follow the logic behind it. The story is bad AND he’s a bigot! Embrace the power of “and.”

also

shiralipkin:

feuervogel:

shwetanarayan:

"give it a fair shake because it’s crap anyway" is a morally cowardly position IMO.

Would it matter if he wrote an amazing story?

We’re talking about someone who strongly though implicitly called for the lynching of N.K.Jemisin here (note, there are screencaps of some of it at the link and also tithenai quotes the bit that is a specific violence-dogwhistle, proceed with caution).  So… if you’re able to judge this person’s story ‘on its merits’, what does it say about your opinion of marginalized folks’ safety in this community?

Is this about me? Am I not ~marginalized enough~? (I’m not queer enough, because I’m married to a man; I’m not disabled enough because my migraines don’t affect me every day.)

I of course can’t speak for Shweta, but I reblogged it because I read it as being about Scalzi and other privileged people who keep insisting that we judge the work of people who dehumanize us “on its merits”. (That list includes my recent ex Michael; very glad I’m out of that relationship, yuck.)

*nods* I saw your reblog shortly after I posted another thing, so I wondered if it was related.

This particular nomination is also a problem because it’s on the list because of a concerted effort to piss off people like me, and if he wins, he’ll crow about it, and if he loses, he’ll say “I didn’t want it anyway” OR “look at the liberal sparklepony conspiracy keeping me down!” So I want (FOR ME PERSONALLY) to be able to say, “No, the story was a steaming turd and it has nothing (or very little) to do with the fact that you’re an asshole.”

I don’t require that other people do the same. Read, don’t read, based on whatever criteria you think are the most important.

also

shwetanarayan:

feuervogel:

shwetanarayan:

"give it a fair shake because it’s crap anyway" is a morally cowardly position IMO.

Would it matter if he wrote an amazing story?

We’re talking about someone who strongly though implicitly called for the lynching of N.K.Jemisin here (note, there are screencaps of some of it at the link and also tithenai quotes the bit that is a specific violence-dogwhistle, proceed with caution).  So… if you’re able to judge this person’s story ‘on its merits’, what does it say about your opinion of marginalized folks’ safety in this community?

Is this about me? Am I not ~marginalized enough~? (I’m not queer enough, because I’m married to a man; I’m not disabled enough because my migraines don’t affect me every day.)

errr no? I would have responded to you if it was.

This is about the people who are making posts to that end. There are multiple people, which is why I didn’t point to one in particular.

I saw it shortly after responding to your earlier post saying that I’m curious how terrible That Story is (I hear it’s awful), so I thought perhaps it was related.

I mean, I only belong to one group he has actively expressed eliminationist rhetoric about (though I suspect he wouldn’t have anything good to say about people with disabilities, either, and I’m positive he doesn’t like atheists), so I have some privilege there, and I can say “well, I’ll read until I’m bored or disgusted, unless it’s hilarrible, in which case I’ll keep reading for great lolz.” (Also, I read really fast, so it wouldn’t take more than an hour. Novelettes top out at 15k words, right?)

I don’t require, or even suggest, that anyone else do the same. Unless they really want to.

I can take the hit for people who can’t or don’t want to. 

also

shwetanarayan:

"give it a fair shake because it’s crap anyway" is a morally cowardly position IMO.

Would it matter if he wrote an amazing story?

We’re talking about someone who strongly though implicitly called for the lynching of N.K.Jemisin here (note, there are screencaps of some of it at the link and also tithenai quotes the bit that is a specific violence-dogwhistle, proceed with caution).  So… if you’re able to judge this person’s story ‘on its merits’, what does it say about your opinion of marginalized folks’ safety in this community?

Is this about me? Am I not ~marginalized enough~? (I’m not queer enough, because I’m married to a man; I’m not disabled enough because my migraines don’t affect me every day.)

Yet more on the Hugos and the problem of divorcing an author from their work

shwetanarayan:

feuervogel:

shwetanarayan:

This is the only thing I think I’ll post about the Hugo mess and allyfail of certain high-profile cis white dudes. Nobody I follow on tumblr is going to be surprised that uberprivileged so-called liberals are calling for a “balanced and objective and fair” approach, from marginalized people, towards loathsome bigots who deny our humanity. Must be a day ending in Y.

I cannot deal w likely harassment from posting much about this, so. This is a good roundup of what I’ve seen so far, anyway, and for the rest I’ll only be posting on lj with comments closed, if at all.

If some people want to give the homophobic etc dipshit a fair shake, that’s their call. If other people don’t, that’s also their call. From what I’ve heard, his story isn’t very good, so it’s not missing out on much if you don’t read it. I might; I don’t know yet. I’m curious about how bad his writing is, honestly. (For the record, I’m bisexual.)

I don’t think saying “I’m going to give the work a fair shake and not judge it based on Other Things” is terribad: that’s people’s own decision to make. Saying “and you should, too,” isn’t cool, though.

I have Larry Correia blocked on facebook and twitter, and I find him a completely insufferable asshole, so, aside from his nominated work being book 3 in a series, I have no desire to read it.

I’ve never been impressed with anything I’ve read by Brad Torgersen, even leaving his politics aside, so I suspect I won’t be impressed by whatever of his made it onto the ballot this time. (“Ray of Light” was a very uninspired Golden Age nostalgia yawnfest.)

I have mixed feelings about choosing to give vocal bigots a fair shake & this is pretty much me thinking them out and waffling.

On the one hand yes that’s a personal choice, and since I’m pissed off about one bout of “You must do X or you’re not playing the game right!” it would be hypocritical of me to do that the other way. Right?

but on the other, it’s a personal choice that most multiply-marginalized people cannot make on account of being the bigots’ targets. So, even being able to say/consider “judging the work on its merits” requires a lack of social vulnerability on some axes. And when one does make that choice, it’s not value-neutral to the people who are currently being stomped on.  As Rose says

In these statements there is often an embedded tone argument, an entreaty to Diversity Age fans to play nice with people who explicitly or implicitly dehumanize and more yet, threaten violence against them. Such conciliatory language from power brokers suggests story lines for the whole community to align with – storylines whose buzzwords are “reason,” “respectability,” and “merit.”

And then there’s the whole thing about “merit” not being a neutral thing in and of itself. Is it even possible for work by an abuser to have merit, unless one can distance oneself from the abuse?

Yes, it’s very complicated, and I personally believe that readers can decide what they’re going to read based on whatever criteria they want, whether it’s “That Asshole wants to eliminate me and my friends, so I won’t read his work” or anything else.

Do more privileged groups have easier choices than less privileged? Well, yes. That’s kind of how it works, innit?

(From what I hear, That Asshole’s work gives “The Eye of Argon” a run for its money in the horrible writing factor, which piques my curiosity.)

I generally think most things should be judged on their merits, but also that other factors can/should be taken into consideration. Good book written by terrible person, bad book written by good person, terrible book by terrible person.

A word about bronies.

saintcheshire:

So I just got back last night from a brony convention in San Francisco. I was working a booth for a vendor friend, and let me tell you what happened:

We met a little girl who was there with her family. She got a button drawn at our booth, told us all about her favorite ponies, and was overall just too damn cute. She had an MLP lanyard filled with pins she’d gotten in the vendor’s room, and gave me a Fluttershy pin because she liked my cosplay. She ended up just hanging out with us for a while and bein’ super cute. We call her Babby because she’s 11 and precious.

The next day, she runs up to the booth, terrified, and asks if she can please hide under our table for a few minutes. Turns out a dude had been following her around the con all day, and tried to get her to come up to his hotel room. Alone. She tells us she thought he was okay at first because he was wearing an MLP shirt, but she didn’t want to go anywhere with him, and he made her uneasy. At one point, after she’d refused, he grabbed her arm in the elevators and tried to get her to follow him. She ran, and now she wants somewhere to hide.

We tell her of course, hurry her behind our booth and fucking station ourselves around her because she’s eleven years old and all of us are prepared to physically attack the human trashheap who tries to fuck with her. We’re all dressed up in wings and ears and we’re 100000% prepared to rip them off and launch across that table to defend this kid. Eventually this very large dude strolls by, very obviously looking around, and she quietly points him out to us. At this point I’m ready to set him on fire, but when I ask if she needs me to go report him, she shakes her head. She doesn’t want to get in trouble, or make anyone mad.

We see him a few more times over the course of the day, because he keeps meandering over to our booth and just casually looking around. Eventually he actually stops to take a flier from our table and asks us a question, and we coldly send him on his way. We start sending a coworker with Babby whenever her parents aren’t around and she wants to go check out artist’s alley or the vendor’s hall. Because otherwise she’s not safe. She can’t run around and freely enjoy a convention about a show aimed at her, because instead of being surrounded by peers she’s somehow surrounded by men who pose a threat to her.

My point here: this is why I fucking hate “bronies.” Because grown-ass men are flooding into a space carved out for children—often little girls—and are making it unsafe for them.

I met a lot of non-awful people there, of course. I met a lot of parents and older siblings. A lot of adorable little boys who were happy to empathize with female characters, and a lot of little kids who wanted a picture with cosplays of their favorite pony. I met a lot of people who were cool and nice and just liked cartoons. I met a male Pinkie Pie cosplayer with a Fluttershy lady-friend who juggled and spun plates and was happy to entertain kids, and were generally just really cool people.

But I also met a lot of skeevy dudebros. A lot of guys in fedoras loudly discussing sexual shit in a room with children. Guys who drew/sold/displayed really fucking inappropriate “fanart,” including gross bodypillows that had no purpose in a little kids’ toy convention. I met a guy who gushed with absolute glee about the pleasure he derives from “corrupting innocence.” I met a lot of people who wanted to take something sweet and nice for children and make it about THEM. A lot of guys who wanted to make it about their dicks. People who made it UNSAFE for the intended audience to even be in attendance.

So yeah. If you call yourself a brony, I’m prolly not gonna trust you. Because I’ve seen y’all in action, and I am not impressed. Frankly I’m infuriated. This is like a bunch of gross neckbeards swarming Disneyland and shoving kids out of the way so they can grope Cinderella, and finding nothing wrong with it because they think they’re entitled to it.

My Little Pony is a really cute show with a lot of nice messages for kids, and gross brony shitweasels are trying to fucking take it from them by force. And I will fight them.

(Source: princess-nietzsche)