We aren’t Racist! – UKIP »« Appropriation of Nerd Culture By The Wimminz

Like a Hugo Baws – Vox Day 2

I wrote about my take on the Hugo Awards and the fact Vox Day was nominated. It’s simple, if he is nominated and in the interest of free speech, I can write an article  pointing out he is a racist, sexist, homophobe and all round terrible human being and that we should not vote for him or encourage such behaviour among a community which lacks for diversity and where minorities often find themselves being judged for “realness”.

But people took umbrage to that. And sent me this.

I really get tired of stupid liberals thinking they can impose their social justice beliefs on people like this.  In British Columbia, Canada, there’s a private Christian college called Trinity Western that is having it’s accreditation for it’s law school withheld because the accreditation agencies are unhappy with the fact that it forbids homosexuality on campus. Okay, I agree, that’s stupid, I think anyone who is anti-gay is a moron, but what they allow and do not allow on campus has nothing whatsoever to do with their ability to run a law school.

Because heaven forbid we push for progressive values such as equality of men, women and sexuality.

Similarly, there’s been a furor over theHugo Awards, a science-fiction literary award, because one of the people who has made it to the finals, Vox Day, is also an outspoken racist, sexist and rape apologist, at least according to the liberals who think that this alone should stop him from winning.

Fuck you idiot liberals.

What message do we send to People of Colour, Women and the GLBT if we are willing to award a person who happily stomps all over them?

What message are they going to see? Why must we grow a thicker skin to deal with Vox Day? Why don’t you grow a darker one?

Why do we need to deal with arseholes that you do not.

Okay, I’ll address the second one first, just to be contrary.  The Hugo Awards exist to reward authors for their outstanding science fiction books.  It has nothing whatsoever to do with the personal politics of the individual authors.  It’s a book award.  Liberals want to be able to punish people they don’t agree with for things that are completely and totally unassociated with their ability to write.  These people are incapable of separating their absurd social justice wishful thinking from their ability to read and enjoy a work of fiction.

Because fiction does not exist bereft of real life and real life beliefs hurt us. So you may consider us crass and ignoble to consider the politics of those who hurt us and maybe we are.

But we live in a crass and ignoble world which judges us for the colour of our skin. Filled with people like Vox Day who we have to adjust with day in and day out. Many of us think that we should not accept these people. That in order to be taken seriously we must stop nodding along and hiding away from the dialogue of racism but opposing it openly. It is only through that will we find equality. It is only by opposing people like Vox Day will we actually be heard and actually be treated well… like people.

That’s what it boils down to. Vox Day rankles that he is being forced to treat us as human beings and we rankle at the fact that we need to tell that idiot that we are human beings. Not some sort of literate banana. Asking us to appreciate Vox Day’s fiction knowing he is a tosser of epic proportions is like trying to enjoy a chocolate ice cream knowing that the man who made it has typhoid and is known to not wash his hands.

The fact is, if you can’t vote based on what’s between the covers of the book and nothing else, you have no place voting at all.  Hell, I think Orson Scott Card is an asshole, I detest his personal views but I wouldn’t go trying to ruin his chances of winning a literary award because I think he’s a dick.  I’ve read Ender’s Game, it was a pretty good book, I ignored the movie because I didn’t want to put money in his pocket, but you didn’t see me giving it a bad review, did you?  I couldn’t, I didn’t see it and I never will.  I’m not a dick.  Lots of liberals are.

We struggle to get awards, we struggle to get taken seriously and you want us to judge things by the covers when we are judged by everything else?

The simplest example is Kal Pen. When he went by Kalpen he didn’t get many call backs. He changed his name on the CV to Kal Pen. The same CV got into places it didn’t. We are judged by our names, our skin, how we behave. Whether we are too “Insert Culture Here” or “Too White”. Our works are rarely judged by such simple things.

Orson Scott Card’s Ender’s Game was good. But Orson Scott Card was not sprouting this (to my knowledge) homophobia at the time. My knowledge of it only really began quite recently. But you know what?

When Orson Scott goes off against GLBT he helps keep the GLBT in the closet. Irrespective of the quality of the books.

The first is pretty much the same.  The only criteria for getting accredited ought to be whether or not the school meets the requirements for accreditation.  If they are producing people who can pass the Bar exam, or whatever they have in Canada, then they ought to be accredited, no matter what other social or political beliefs the school happens to have.  I don’t care if they’re racist, I don’t care if they’re sexist, I don’t care if they’re anti-gay or anything else.  So long as they meet the same requirements as any other school that has gotten accreditation, they ought to get it as well.  Sure, if you want to fight the school on it’s policies, go ahead, but do it reputably and through proper channels, using accepted and legal methods for doing so.  Liberals don’t do that, the second they get any power, they want to use that power to push their social agenda.

Because if we didn’t do that, people of colour and women would never have gotten to be lawyers, doctors, engineers and every other damn job that was dominated by White Guys.

And people always demand we take proper legal channels and be polite. Which is bullshit.

Here is the thing. How do you think we won our freedoms? How do you think we got equality? Gandhi broke the Apartheid for Indians in India and South Africa by making life unfeasible without his mass disobedience. We won our freedoms through disruption of the legal status quo.

Not by asking. But by giving people no other options.

Do you think we followed rules? Do you think we asked politely?

No. We took it. By being awkward fucking bastards. We took it by meeting your truncheons with our skulls till you knew that you were no longer the “good guys”. We took it by standing up to men with guns. We did it by making salt and making life so difficult that it was impossible to do anything else but treat us as humans.

We earned equality. And we will keep fighting until we are treated as equals.

Dinosaurs such as Vox Day deserve extinction.

We’ve seen this a lot over the years.  Take the case of Justin Vacula, who has been on the podcast and is a very nice guy.  The second he pissed off the Atheism+ assholes, they went after him whole hog, forcing him to step down from a directorship with the secular organization, Secular Coalition for America.  Why?  Because they didn’t like what he said about feminism.  Sorry, what does feminism have to do with being an atheist again?  Yeah, these are the wrong people to ask but it’s a valid question and they don’t have a valid answer.

But I can speak about Pat Condell. See I don’t know who Vacula is.

Nor do I care. I am sure someone will come to tell me about how he is awesome and I am sure he is but frankly I don’t know who he is and don’t see what his issue is or why it is germaine to the discussion of how Vox  Day is a baddie and why he is a baddie and why it sucks that he is nominated for a prestigious award.

Pat however is a pretty famous atheist and well known supporter of UKIP. And in the past few years has supported the EDL as a “non racist organisation” which happens to punch people who look Muslim and make things safe by fighting on the street. In addition he has actually used the “Thieving Gypsies” argument because nothing says classic racism like fears over gypsies. He’s repeatedly pushed Islamophobic statements before. And no there is criticism of Islam and then there is just idiocy.

He was fearmongering over 8000 Syrian refugees given Asylum in Sweden. When he reported it? The number was 2 Million.

I am repeatedly told to judge him by his atheism.

Pat Condell got a signal boost from Richard Dawkins. He has fans. 200,000 of them. I don’t exactly know how many regular readers I have. Maybe around 1,500 to 2,000 and my readers were thanks to a gamble FTB took on a little known (I used to get a thousand views a week and consider that a great day!) blogger.

What am I supposed to think? That Dawkins is willing to push the racist who thinks the thugs who attack Asians under the guise of Islamophobia are supporters of democracy and fairness and good? Most charitably I can say that Dawkins boosted Condell without realising that Condell is a racist clothed in the language of concern.

Okay Vacula may have some harmful ideas, but you know what? Some of us see the schism and go “look I may not agree with A+ but I can see they have a point”. If Vacula is really that anti-feminist then clearly he isn’t going to be promoting a fair and nuanced look of atheism outside the white guy norm.

Judging from the behaviour mentioned? He has harassed others, opposed attempts to get more secular women out and about and opposed things like harassment rules which are part and parcel of many Geek/Nerd Cons and Tech Cons but not ones with regards to Atheism. Because Atheists are incapable of doing bad things? He has tried to minimise the role of harassment. Bear in mind this comes a few days after someone who after reading my solidarity post with Melody Hensley, decided to trigger my PTSD with videos of balloons being popped. Because that was his take home message. I am weak against Balloons.

Even back when Bill Donohue and his moron Catholic League tried to get PZ Myers fired for desecrating their silly crackers, I stood up and defended Myers’ right to do it and the absurdity of their actions because, regardless of their feelings about the desecration, what he did on his blog has nothing whatsoever with his ability to perform his job as associate professor.  Yet Myers is the king of these kinds of social justice attacks, it’s something he and his ilk have advocated time and time again.  I guess there’s no such thing as practicing what you preach among the liberals.

Except Catholics aren’t a minority group in the USA and Bill Donahue represents a very vocal and powerful Catholic Conservative movement while women aren’t a minority group but are one in Atheism.

And seriously? A Harassment Policy is a Great Idea! Let us make it easier to deal with issues of this sort rather than work them on the fly. That may have been great for smaller cons but the rules make life easier.

It’s no wonder why I hate these people, they absolutely deserve it and they earn it over and over again.  I wouldn’t say if they had legitimate beefs, they just practice liberal revenge tactics, if you do something they don’t like, they’ll go to any length to get back at you, even if their revenge has nothing whatsoever to do with the actual “wrongs” that they think you’re guilty of.  So long as they get their retribution and harm the individual they think was socially unjust, they’re fine with it.  It’s all about being vindictive.  It’s the liberal way.

If a soldier walked on the street and said “my PTSD is triggered by fireworks” and your response to that was to throw them at his feet…. That would make you a dick.

What are you if you support the man who does that? The ends justify the means do they? Lucky for balloon sender up there, I have had enough contact with my trigger to be able to control it. Also? Internet in India Sucks. Also? Balloons are louder in real life.

9/10 for effort, -100 for thinking things through.

But it’s the thought that counts. And the thought from your side was “I don’t believe you were sent this”. If I had doxxed the idiot who sent this you would be cajoling him and cuddling him about how cruel I was to out his dickery to the world.

But yet it is me who wishes retribution. So forgive me if I don’t quite see your point. Your side has behaved deplorably, particularly the anti-feminist side of the anti-FTB brigade.

You want to see us judge Vox Day for his content? Okay. Stephanie Zvan’s done that. Now can I get back to telling people how much of a cock lord he is or must I apply to you for my Person of Colour is Angry form?

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Follow Avicenna on Facebook  or Twitter. Avicenna is currently delivering babies and dealing with sick women  (Obs/Gynae) in rural India. If you wish to support him? Don’t use an ad blocker or donate down the right. If you wish to instead give money to a charity? Then Avicenna is also fundraising for ASTI.

Comments

  1. dogfightwithdogma says

    I read this post at Bitchspot. I frequently go to this blog and post rebuttals to the truly idiotic stuff that is posted there. The person who runs this blog is an atheist and a conservative. His posts about religion are typically okay, though he does go overboard with language and characterizations that border on hatred. You can imagine the bullshit he says as a result of his conservatism. I will be posting a reply on his blog to this recent post within the next 24 hours.

  2. Al Dente says

    Take the case of Justin Vacula, who has been on the podcast and is a very nice guy. The second he pissed off the Atheism+ assholes, they went after him whole hog, forcing him to step down from a directorship with the secular organization, Secular Coalition for America.

    Vacula is an MRA rape apologist. SCA was basically told by a large number of people “either Vacula goes or we stop supporting you.” SCA decided they didn’t want to protect a misogynist and so Vacula went.

  3. says

    It’s a book award.

    Which is, ummmmmmm… Why a group of people took advantage of a voting/membership mechanism to get a book on the ballot that’s not good enough to get there on its own merits? Because if it was being treated as a book award, this discussion would not be happening at all.

  4. says

    Sorry, what does feminism have to do with being an atheist again?

    Humans judge eachother by the company they keep. That’s why racism is relevant to owning a basketball team, just in case that was your next profound question.

  5. francesc says

    “[...] but what they allow and do not allow on campus has nothing whatsoever to do with their ability to run a law school”
    Establishing anticonstitutional norms on your campus has nothing to do with running a law school, as being an illiterate has nothing to do with teaching literature, I guess

  6. smrnda says

    The idea that the works of fiction by an author have nothing to do with their beliefs strikes me as rather absurd. It’s possible for them to be more or less important; some authors’ books are nothing but ranting screeds connected by poorly executed characters and plots, though that is an extreme, but anyone who actually studies literature knows that an author’s beliefs are at least worth considering.

  7. says

    There’s a way to do things and there’s a way not to do things and the examples I gave are clearly the way NOT to do things. I’m all for fighting against sexism and racism and all of that, but do it appropriately, don’t attack something that has nothing to do with sexism and racism and take your loony liberal revenge because something that individual said somewhere else offended your precious little sensibilities. If you want to go after Vox Day, more power to you. I have no love for his views and if you want to avoid his books because of it, that’s entirely fine. Vote with your own personal wallet. However, when you go after something having nothing to do with their views, you step over the line. It’s like demanding Tom Cruise not get an Oscar because he’s a Scientologist. The awards are given for his acting in a specific role in a specific movie. If you cannot separate his role in a move from his social, religious or political positions outside of the movie, you’ve got problems.

    ’nuff said.

  8. karmacat says

    There are a lot of good writers out there who deserve a Hugo award. Why should we reward one who is so virulently bigoted? In fact, someone like that is just going to make that industry look bad if they get an award. It is not about revenge. It is about wanting the world to be better and marginalizing the extreme bigots

  9. says

    The fact is, if you can’t vote based on what’s between the covers of the book and nothing else, you have no place voting at all.

    I don’t care if they’re racist, I don’t care if they’re sexist, I don’t care if they’re anti-gay or anything else. So long as they meet the same requirements as any other school that has gotten accreditation, they ought to get it as well.

    Well, I do care. Because equal rights are important.

    Similar to what I commented on the previous post, I wonder how many times people who say stuff like this have been told to support an organization or person who hated them. Because to some of us, it happens all the time, and I (for one) am tired of it. And I wonder why they don’t spend time criticizing the people being racist, sexist, anti-LGBT, etc. They always seem to say something along the lines of “of course I disagree with the discriminatory thing Person X said” … and then go on and on about how it’s the people criticizing discrimination are “idiot liberals”. And then they demand that we can only use a very specific strategy to protest against discrimination (not doing anything like not voting for someone for an award or withholding accreditation for a school); basically, if the person actually faces consequences for their discrimination, then we’re accused of discriminating against the person who discriminated in the first place.

    @smrnda (#8):

    The idea that the works of fiction by an author have nothing to do with their beliefs strikes me as rather absurd. It’s possible for them to be more or less important; some authors’ books are nothing but ranting screeds connected by poorly executed characters and plots, though that is an extreme, but anyone who actually studies literature knows that an author’s beliefs are at least worth considering.

    Yes, this. I tend to take a “canon only” approach in certain situations, but in other situations I consider the views of the author. I think depends on what type of analysis you’re doing. (Granted this is my layperson view; I don’t study literature in an academic setting.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>