Friday, April 10, 2015

A Reply to Larry Correia - a backlash against what? #SadPuppies #HugoAwards

As I was reading Larry's response to George R. R. Martins post I jotted down some impressions.

Reactions as I read this:

Whinny Ass Titty Baby. Although that is doing what he is doing, making an insulting remark to start out.

He thinks he has a sense of humor but doesn't. Like that loud immature jerk in college or high school or your early jobs that laughs at his own insulting made up abbreviations for people.

Casually slams and smears other people, probably because he feels it was done to him.

Hung out drinking with bitter older conservatives at his first World Con and became convinced the awards were all a conspiracy by some liberal connected elitists.

Over estimates the numbers of his crowd and the widespread knowledge of their in-jargon. Half the people do not and did not know what SJW (Social Justice Warriors) was and why you would even think or use that term. And, of course,it is another insulting generalization.

Wow, he invokes Heinlein, controversial even when alive and getting awards, but forgets it is the Sad Puppies he started that crowded his biography off the ballot after they forgot about it.

Won't give up on insulting Social Justice Warrior term because he has used it so much and he feels it justifies all of his actions despite it's rarity of use and it's insulting nature.

Wow, just wow: " When you have professional culture warriors like Brianna Wu and Arthur Chu, who make their livings off of generating political controversy, saying that Brad Torgersen’s two decades of interracial marriage is just a shield to hide his true secret racism, then yes, there is a serious tone problem."

There are some really, really touchy people on both sides of this political/religious/cultural divide and casual conversations/comments/posts/tweets can set them off. Conversations got heated because this really seemed that segments of fandom were finally getting awarded and recognized for their contributions when what seems to many like a backlash from conservatives developed because they were feeling excluded. Comments about racism were tossed about too casually, then loud heated objections to comments about racism were tossed about. A picture was posted that showed the interracial family of someone accused of possibly being racist. And then the question was asked is that being used as a shield?

Stop it, both sides, just stop it and grow up.

Mistakes were made. On both sides.

He seems calmer at the end and is backing up accusations with facts about people looking at past nominations. The problem is that the main comparison is between a new writer versus an established professional and between books with very different appeals - Monster Hunters is or was a niche market that doesn't attract much attention from big prestigious reviewers no matter how much some fans like it or how popular it was. That is like complaining why wasn't the first Fast and Furious movie nominated for an Oscar.

So are the Puppies slates a reaction to conservatives not being nominated for awards, or a reaction to after many years a mass of liberals and feminists winning a bunch of awards and a formerly privileged class feeling excluded? Although the Puppy ringleaders are new entrants into the field they represent the conservative old timers who often dominated the Hugos in years past.

You've got me on that, at least he makes his points in his post.

Still he avoids the turd in the punch bowl, Vox Day, who I feel bought a publisher and may have bought many nominating memberships to stick it to SFWA and the most prestigious award in fandom. His adapting and expanding the Sad Puppy slate is why many good nominations were excluded this year.

See my previous post for my too hasty response to Brad Torgersen.

No comments: