1 Comment

Hugos 2015 – The Hurricane of Hypocrisy

This post is going to be long, but I had to do it, because I had a sign from above you see. I had been thinking of joining the tornado of blog posts on this topic, but what clinched it was that I bought a kinder egg for my daughter and when I opened it for her it had this in it.

Untitled

Seriously. I am not making this up.

Unless you have been living under a rock with all things relating to writing and science fiction in particular, that is the Hugo awards, you will by now know about the main cause of puppy related sadness. If you do not, here is the best link of the whole summary of it written by the creator of the sad puppies campaign himself in his reply to George RR Martin, the creator of a Song of Ice and Fire (better known as a Game of Thrones from the TV series) who wrote a series of thinly veiled disingenuous posts (here is a big one) about the whole Sad Puppies campaign.

Wait, did I just call the creator of a Game of Thrones a liar? Yes. Yes I most certainly did. And that is doing him a favour, because the alternative is that he is so completely incompetent at reading and comprehension that he would have had to obviously have suddenly developed an advanced case of Alzheimer’s and/or it would mean all of his books have been clearly ghostwritten by someone other than him.

“Whoa there cowboy,” you might say, “them’s pretty strong fighting words. You got anything to back that up?”

Oh yes. Oh yes I most certainly do.

GRRM states that:

“there’s a racial component in some comments (not from the Puppy leaders, but from their followers), wherein we are told that “straight white men” are the victims here”

FIRSTLY, since when is any of the organisers of  SP/RP responsible for the behaviour of someone claiming to be a “follower”?

Because if that is the case George, I have a bone to pick with you for being a “speaker for” what you call “your side”, which includes convicted child molesters. Are you responsible for those acts of child molestation perpetrated by the below individuals?

Marion Zimmer Bradley, the noted child molester. That’s a blog post by her own daughter and confirmed by court documents. Just in case you though I was making it up, because you know, apparently I am a racist, sexist, blah, blah (we’ll get to that too George) so I wouldn’t want you to take my word for it.

Or a NAMBLA supporter, like Samuel R. Delany. That link is to a long exchange between Sam and a fan. Someone who admitted before asking the questions that they would continue to support him regardless of his position. Now, I don’t know about you, but someone who agrees to support someone even if they are guilty of child abuse, in my opinion, deserves a fate similar to the child molester’s. But if you don’t want to read too much about a supporter of NAMBLA and his dangerous mental illness, I leave you with these two quotes from Sam, and the understanding that NAMBLA wants to decriminalise sex between adults and children.

“Many, many childrenand I was one of themare desperate to establish some sort of sexual relation with an older and even adult figure. Today, all such relationships are so completely demonized as to destroy souls and psyches on both sides of the purely arbitrary 18-year-old divide.”
“I had my first sexual experience with an adult when I was six, with a local Harlem building superintendent. And nothing hurtful happened at all. It would have been cruel and unusual punishment to incarcerate him for it.”
So Sammy there would like to make it a crime to charge an adult man who engages in a sexual act with a six year old boy. Because, according to Sam, that 6 year old boy “wants it”. Just like he did at that age.
If you don’t call that view a dangerous mental illness I don’t know what is.

Or a pederast, like Edward Kramer. Yup that link is from the website of the most hated man in SF. And we will get to that too, the creator of the more “radical” Rabid Puppies platform. Let’s ignore that for a minute (don’t worry I am coming back to it) and first let’s focus on the FACTS George, which you say you are so concerned with. Can you find anything in that post by Vox that is not factual? That is untrue? No? Good we are all clear then, the Science Fiction Writers of America harbours and covers up for child molesters.

SO back to the original question George. With your skill as a writer you try to put on the shoulders of the SP/RP creators, the responsibility for the comments or beliefs of their alleged followers, and by implication if not direct statement, make the SP/RP organisers out to be ok with racism and by direct statement make out their supporters to be so too (without specifying WHICH supporters of course, so presumably including me too).

But if the SP/RP organisers are to be responsible for the comments or actions of some wild-assed racist, that may or may not belong to their campaigns, then, by the same logic you are personally responsible for the child molestation acts of your fellow SFWA members. All good with you? Because even if that were the rules we agree to play by, I’ll take a racist over a pederast any day of the week thanks.

And if instead to try to tar what is possibly a few racists which may or may NOT actually belong to SP/RP campaign with essentially BEING the whole campaign is a dishonest technique used by disingenuous old men, SJWankers and other peddler of lies, then let’s agree to not do that anymore, right?

Also because in the second place, you have (unlike me here) provided zero links, zero proof, that such creatures even exist. Especially since…err… yeah let’s look at the LEADER of Sad Puppies 3 in all of his glorious racism, shall we?

THE RACIST BRAD TORGERSEN

(as branded for racism by the supposedly objective media and SJWankers who inhabit much of the SFWA membership, as shown here, here, here and see here, if you need a few more co-ordinated mainstream media examples)

Yes, look at the picture of his wife of 21 years and his child. Obviously Brad is a deeply undercover racist.

That’s the level we vast right-wing conspiracists go to. Except I am not a right winger (see below), but hey, details eh George? Who needs factual details when you have SJWankery as “YOUR SIDE”?

Yes, in all caps. Because as this commenter (Krul) on Vox Day’s blog said, concerning you:

Well well well.

Mr “Above-it-all”.

Mr “Let’s-not-take-sides-here”.

Went from this:

I suspect I may get those sorts of emails from both sides of the Puppygate wars. I have my own views on all of this, and they don’t line up precisely what what either camp is saying.

So be it. My views are my views. I do not speak for any clique or slate or movement. GRRM

To this:

The people on MY SIDE, the trufans and SMOFs and good guys… GRRM

In a little over one day. “MY SIDE”! In ALL CAPS, no less.

Forgive me for preening, but I totally called it:

Somehow I expect this to be one of those “I don’t agree with either side, but one side is clearly right and good and the other side is clearly wrong and bad” situations.

Or let’s look at that other notorious racist, Tom Kratman, also on the Hugo nominations now, and with his military background an obviously noted racist. He gave me permission to use his pictures below.

kratport

Look at those blue eyes. Clearly he must be racist. That’s about all the evidence you’ll get though. Because the image below is that of his wife of a few decades.

Yoli3

Clearly Tom is also an insidious racist. And please note that I kid you not when he has been accused (as has Brad) of being a racist anyway, even after their personal relationships and marriages were made public. These are men deeply devoted to racism you see. So devoted to it they marry non-white women and breed with them. Repeatedly breed with them. Yes. Yes. It’s a very complex racist conspiracy, you couldn’t possibly understand it.

As for myself, the longest relationship I had, which lasted 13 years, was with an Indian woman, shown here, and little browner in shade than Tom’s wife.

Untitled

And that’s an Indian with a dot, not a feather, and yes, she would laugh at that sentence. Which I would speak if she were here while shaking my head like a good Hindu. “Accent an all yeh?”

Because she has a sense of humour, as do most sane non-SJW people. But in the intervening years, after that relationship ended, and because my morals are not of the rigidly Christian persuasion that supposedly all RP/SP supporters are, I have had relationships with pretty much every race of female human under the sun.

Depending on your somewhat arbitrary racial defining lines, I may still have to score with an Eskimo and an Australian Aborigine, neither of which option seems ideal to me anyway, but far be it from me to say never. Experience has taught me life is stranger than we can know. Anyway, barring Eskimos and Australian Aborigines, I think I got all the other races covered. Including the other Indians, you know, feather, not dot. And yes, those ladies would laugh their ass off too at that characterisation. So no, I do not take kindly to the slander I am accused of simply for having been a RP supporter.

But in any case, the objection of the SP/RP side of things has nothing to do with race, religion, or sex, of that I am sure. Supposedly it has to do with only one thing:

QUALITY.

This, as it happens is a valid point, but in my opinion not the real reason why SP/RP has been so successful. (I’ll get to it). Science fiction has always been my favourite genre, and in my opinion has at least in a sense always been social commentary insofar as it was literature. The whole point of Science fiction, or speculative fiction as it was originally called, was the wonder of the “what if?”

The claim the SP/RP have, is that the cliques, cabals and little SJWankery in general that associated with this “prestigious” award, the Hugo, became so overwhelmingly oppressive that the whole field of SF has suffered for it. And if you are anyone who has been reading SF since you were 6 or 7 years old, (so now nearly 4 decades) will know, that is measurably true.

I could not care less what your sexual orientation is. Or your race, or your politics.

But don’t try to force me to think the way you do. Because in that case you will have to actually kill me. You will NEVER succeed to force your “approved-thought pattern” on me, and you will actually have to murder me, because I will NEVER surrender to that totalitarian political correctness that is cultural marxism.

Nor will I fall for your slander, your whisper campaigns of “racism” or “sexism” or “homophobia” or whatever other lie you trade in.

If you want to write about the plight of homosexual, black-skinned were-seals and the suffrage of multi-vaginad aliens from the planet “gender is a social construct”, go ahead and knock yourself out. But:

1. DO NOT expect me to read, agree or like it. I might or I might not, but if your “story” is mostly about some SJWankery, I am likely to skip it. Which is a concept so simple anyone should get it, but much, much, much more importantly,

2. DO NOT try to tell me how if I don’t like it I am a racist, homophobic misogynist. And how I am thinking wrong. You don’t know shit about me. And unlike you, I have my own ideas about a great many things. But more importantly, if you attack, insult and lie about me, expect consequences. Like with any declaration of war, whether honestly issued or dishonestly done by ambush, there will be a retaliation from my side.

I will think however the fuck I please, thank you very much. And I extend the same courtesy to you, so the minute you try to force your mental midgetry on me, well… we’re going to have a problem.

When you insist on forcing your abhorrent world views of Cultural Marxism on me, which run counter to reality, honesty and justice, and try to force me to agree to read, like or “enjoy” things which are false, abhorrent or unjust, or that perhaps, simply do not suit my personal tastes, then be prepared for war. There is only one simple rule in life as far as I am concerned:

Your liberties end where they begin to impact mine.

And I will defend that line with everything up to nuclear options. Get it in your soft SJWanker head: You will have to KILL me. You will NEVER change my mind. There is only one person who can change my mind. Me. And I don’t like you. Deal with it.

Now a couple of points to clarify things:

1. I do not care one atom worth of a shit about the Hugos. I used to a little bit when I was a kid because they would almost guarantee a book that won one would be pretty good. But we have the internet and Amazon ratings now, thanks, and while not perfect they sure go a much longer way to giving me an idea of what I might enjoy reading than a Hugo nomination or award has in at least 20 years.

2. I write SF myself, and I write the kind of SF I’d like to read. I write it because I enjoy to do so, and luckily for me, I do not have to rely on my writing alone for my income, so I don’t really care too much if people enjoy my stories or not. I hope they do and the regular mail I get assures me at least some people do really like what I write, but never in a million years would I join the SFWA, who, as far as I am concerned, harbours and celebrates pedophiles, nor would I ever even accept a Hugo. Yes, I am on record. Even if it was given to me 10 years in a row, fuck that. I don’t want one, I don’t care for one. Why? Because to my mind it is a popularity contest based on bullshit. Based on having to kiss the right ass and hang around with the right people and say the right things, and life is too short. Larry Correia and Brad Torgersten may have been naive enough to believe in the purity of the Hugos, but I never have. Even as a kid I knew it was a closed circle. It just happened that at least that closed circle tried to produce interesting and entertaining and scientifically accurate stories. Sometimes even all three things in the one story. But I don’t care for those type of clubs. I say what I want, spend time with who I want and do what I want. And people like me don’t mix well with politically correct groupthink. You are entitled to not like it. You can even hate me for it (because you are a jealous, snivelling, ball-less turd of a soul, is my guess, but hey, whatever, I don’t actually care if you DO hate me, just be sure to do it quietly in your own sick little head, lest you get me to pay attention to you and your vicious bullshit, which would then not fare well for you.)

3. ALL of my politics and ALL of my concepts of law are best summarised here. I have to date not yet come across a better description of how I have always lived my life, and when I came across it many years ago, I was glad someone had figured this out in words long before I could even verbalise it all so clearly. So if you’re in any doubt as to my persuasion of politics, there ya go. That’s as close as you’re going to get to an open window into my mind. In case you are too lazy or dumb to get it, the primary motivator in my life is Justice. Not much of anything else, and that Justice stems from concepts that are beyond the material. And it will always be thus with people of my kind. We may make errors, gross ones even, from time to time, but as a general rule, we value fairness, honesty and ethics.

Personally I value ethics and have little time for morals (as I have written before) but as I get older I may begin to see a certain usefulness in some basic moralities, but only insofar as they truly stem from ethics rather than some false priesthood of “good think” and “party-accepted-propaganda”.

4. I have no use whatever for the labels right-wing and left-wing. I don’t care for either side. Again, read Natural Law (or the Science of Justice) by Lysander Spooner if you are in doubt as to what my politics are, if we can even call them that.

5. The SJWankery has reached epic proportion of interference, social engineering and thought-police oppression in every sphere of life, and I am sick of it. That is the reason I joined RP and that is the reason why I will vote in a way that is going to try and do the most damage to the SJWankers as possible. The reason is simple:

  • Either admit the Hugos are a little circle jerk trophy passed around by a group of SJWankers, or,
  • We will do our damnedest to wrestle it away from you. Once that is done, the SP and other normal people would simply be happy to let everyone vote on the merits of the books, but I am not their kind. I am the kind that really cares about the stupidity, damage and pain the SJWankery causes on humanity, so if it were up to me, I would try and see to it that after we gain control, the Hugos only vote for the most obnoxious, Calvinistic, Racist, Mysogynists. Not because I agree with them. Not because I like reading such drivel, no. But because I want you to experience a little of your own medicine. See how YOU like being in a mental gulag for a while. Sad and even Rabid Puppies may be gentle souls deep down. I am not. I am no Christian, but if I do subscribe to some principles of God being love (which I do) there is a simple corollary that follows from that – If God is Love, Justice MUST necessarily and logically exist. And for whatever reason, my soul has been cast such that that part of reality is the one I resonate with the most. And At the outer edges, where I was cast, Justice is stark. It has to be. It cannot be any other way out there at the edges.

6. For the record, I don’t think there is any very relevant cross-pollination between GamerGate and Sad/Rabid Puppies, but for clarity:

  • GamerGate started because Zoe Quinn was sucking men’s dicks to get favourable reviews in gamer journals all the while crying about the “misogyny” and “bad think” in modern computer games. And doing so in a way that demonstrably actually hurt the chances of other women being involved in game designing. THAT is an unalterable fact. THAT is the origin of GamerGate. And I don’t care if every newspaper from here to Beijing says otherwise. I saw it happen from the very beginning and no amount of spin changes one atom of the truth. Reality is not determined by the number of uninformed cretins that believe a thing, or the number of informed and willing liars who lie about it. Reality is what it is regardless of if only one man sees it as it is or a million do it.
  • What pissed people like me off is NOT that Zoe Quinn was whoring her orifices for favourable reviews in game journals. Read up on my politics (again!). If Zoe wants to let men cum in her mouth for writing a few paragraphs about how great her game Depression Quest is, who cares? Certainly not I. A man might pay a bribe. Whatever. It’s the hypocrisy. The utter hypocrisy of being a whore and then trying to shame honest gamers into believing you’re all oppressed by men. And in fact sabotaging a GENUINE effort to get women to participate in game creation, and how? By again offering sexual favours for slandering the organisers of something that was actually designed to encourage women into gaming. Why would she do that? Well, competition don’t you know. And the whole time doing it while claiming she is oppressed because she is a woman. Bitch, please. It’s not whores we object to. It’s you. You and your pernicious and shameless hypocrisy.

7. As a matter of record, I worked for about four years as an armed bodyguard on and off and in that time met some interesting people and worked for some world-known individuals. I also, as it happened, met and spoke to a number of professional prostitutes. I never used their services, though they were offered quite regularly, and in some cases for free too, because frankly I never understood the allure. What is the point of having simulated intimacy? I mean, I understand why the prostitute does it, but what would I get out of it? Nevertheless I did have some interesting conversations with them and on balance I would say that I tended to respect the whores more than the people paying me to work for them. Which usually were the same people paying them by the way, which is how the whores and I got to meet really. Besides, I didn’t see what they did as very different from what I did. They are, after all, the two oldest professions in the world. Women sell their bodies for pleasure, men sell their bodies to fight. We’re both mercenaries of a sort, just using what bodies we have in the best way we can. I mention this merely to highlight that, again, my objection of Zoe is not because she behaved like a whore, but because her behaviour is shameful and disgusting due to its level of hypocrisy and dishonesty, and it is so also to most whores I ever actually met.

SECONDLY – The slanderous charges

I believe I have already dealt with the charge of racism sufficiently for anyone sane to be forced to admit that if I am a racist, or if Tom Kratman is, or if Brad Torgersen is, then so is every living creature on Earth. So, be advised that any accusation of racism on your part towards me and people like me will be met with fire. The only racists here are people like you. People like Tom, Brad and I do not care about the colour of skins. We care about the honesty or lack thereof of men and women.

But the SJWankers do not call people like me or Tom or Brad racist because we ARE racists. No. They do so because they try to force shameful silence from everyone. It’s like the old trick of asking someone, “Are you still beating your wife?” at a party. The person is now tainted with the label of wife-bater, regardless.

It is the false accusation of rape of that lying cow at UVA.

It is the intrinsic dishonesty used as a weapon.

Men and women of any moral or ethical character are so far removed from this type of behaviour that they naturally can’t comprehend of someone making such horrid and obvious lies up. A charge of racism or sexism…blah, blah, blah, is serious and surely no one would throw it around for mere political, ideological and social advantage over an innocent….surely not….

Oh yes they would.

That is why they are SJWankers. That is what SJWankery is about. Others have written about Cultural Marxism and its origins and the mental illness of the nihilists that generally compose this group of lying swine offal that is SJWankers, so I will not waster further electrons on it here, I will instead answer the charges of homophobia and misogyny.

With respect to homophobia, let’s be clear, I fear no man. Regardless of what he prefers to do with his genitals. But even if we take the term “homophobe” to mean someone who disapproves, is disgusted by, judges (silently or openly) or may discriminate against a person of homosexual persuasion, then let’s address that.

One of my closest friends when I trained in Karate was a lady who unfortunately died in a car crash a number of years ago. When I wrote my first book she quietly and unbeknownst to me for over a year or so bought several copies and spread the word about it to all her friends. I cared deeply for her and I believe the feeling was mutual. It was always respectful and when I found out she had been singing my praises in my writing I was touched and grateful. It is not unfair to say I loved that woman. I considered her a good friend and someone honourable, just, and completely lacking hypocrisy. She also happened to be lesbian. And not one of those “sometimes-on, sometimes-off”, “experimenting-in-my-youth” type of lesbians either. She only was attracted to women, she was just wired that way. And I could not give a damn about it one way or the other.

On the other hand, she, and her surviving wife, who was in the car crash with her, and whom I got to know only after my friend died, would be the first to admit that their sexual orientation and behaviour was, by definition, deviant. And again, I don’t care one way or another. What you like to do sexually in the privacy of your own life, is really none of my business. I don’t care if you like girls, boys, orgies or whatever. Just don’t try to tell me I have to accept your behaviour as normal. Not anymore than I ask you to accept mine as normal. We all have our kinks, and some may be sexual and others relating to whether you use colours in your spreadsheets or not. You may be more or less OCD than me. You may be more or less kinky in bed than me, and who cares? Not I. But let’s make an easy to understand analogy here.

Let’s say your kink is to shove a bucketful of golf-balls up your ass every Saturday night and then spend Sunday extracting them again. Do I care? Look at the care in my eye. See it? No? Good. Glad we cleared that up.

Does that give you the right to go to the local driving range on Friday night, however, and scream at golfers that they are using their buckets of golf-balls wrong? And that they should be forced to watch, nay, even help, at shoving your bucket’s worth of golf-balls up your ass? No. No it most certainly does not.

Does it give you the right to promote golf-ball’s “real” purpose as tools of anal bliss? No. Not really. Do I care if you try to tell me all about your fetish this one time because you mistakenly think maybe, just maybe, if you ask me nicely, I’ll punt a few golf-balls up your ass for you? Not particularly, you’ll get a weird look from me, and a polite request to never mention your proclivities to me again, because they are weird and deviant and they may nauseate me.

Do you have a right to be offended if I say that thinking about you and your golf-balls nauseates me? No. Not at all. If in common conversation I made a comment about something sexual that you found disturbing and you said so, I would never bring it up again. And if I found that to be an intolerable strain on my mind, (which I can’t imagine that it would be) I would simply note that we probably are best not hanging out together anymore. Simple enough.

It’s the simple golden rule you see, you do NOT get to push your views onto anyone else who doesn’t want them pushed onto him or her. Does that make me a “homophobe”? Let’s define what that means first.

Would I unfairly discriminate against you because you’re a homosexual? No. I don’t believe I would. Hell, if I owned a sports shop I’d happily sell you a bucket of golf balls every week if that is what you wanted. I’d even consider you a VIP customer. Just don’t ask me to play golf with you “your way”. Or ever in fact. I dislike the idea of golf altogether. Regardless of what you do with the balls or what holes you put them in, be they in the ground or your rear end.

What about Misogyny Then?

Again, to say I hate women is patiently idiotic. I actually have more female friends and ex-girlfriends that care about me than I do male friends. Nor would any of these women say I am a misogynist. Oh of course, some slanderous, jealous, or evil bitch might try to say I am a hater of women, but there is no evidence at all of that. There have been a few women, so upset, so offended by one of the following things, that they have accused me of being a woman hater, but they have the same validity as the accusations of racism levelled at me by the SJWankers. Let’s see what really got to them:

  • The woman I am with is clearly and objectively more attractive than they are and getting a lot of attention from other men too and, the bitch, doesn’t actually treat me with the acidic contempt radical feminists try to infect other women with. In fact, the lady in question may be quite feminine, loving, caring and kindly disposed towards me. She might cuddle up to me or serve me food and drink at a social gathering, not because she is a chained slave in submission (we save that for the bedroom – see, I told you we all have our kinks) but because GASP, HORROR, SHOCK, she WANTS to. She actually gets pleasure from behaving that way and making me feel appreciated and cared for. And the acidic bitch who hasn’t had a decent fuck in –ever– can no longer think straight. The green-eyed devil of envy has her now. So…MMMIIIIISSOOOOGGGGEEENNNYYY-Y-Y-Y
  • I find that particular woman unattractive, unintelligent, unpleasant and even if the woman in question throws herself at me and I happen to be single at the time, I reject her. Politely at first, then more forcefully when they insist and finally in no uncertain terms when they STILL persist. And some women persist right there in front of your wife or girlfriend too, which as well as unwelcome is rude. (I am reminded of Bill Burr — I posted a video of him a while back, he’s hilarious). But…but… well…I can’t reject HER right? I couldn’t possibly find her uninformed, ignorant, nagging, overweight, unwashed ass unattractive! Oh noes… I must be a  MMMIISSOOOGGGGEEENNNYST!
  • In general terms, the woman ready to scream Misogeny!! With the same level of factual basis as the SJWanker who shouts RACISSSSSSSTT!! is ultimately a profoundly sexually dissatisfied woman. Regardless of sexual orientation by the way. In simple words, they tend to be either lesbians unhappy with the dearth of pretty girls who feel the same towards them, and in some protozoan attempt to eliminate the male competition think that by screaming the magic word they will suddenly be adored by the sexy, feminine woman currently hanging off MY arm instead of theirs, OR they tend to be women who have not been sexually satisfied either in a long time, or in some cases, ever. In severe cases, this renders these people actually insane. Andrea Dworkin and other radical feminists being the poster child for mental illness due to lack of normal sexual interaction. Lastly, a portion of women that have in fact been seriously traumatised by actual brutality, rape, actual sexual slavery and so on, can and do fear men to such an extent that they hate them and see hatred in return even where there isn’t any. All three types need psychological counselling, but this last type is the one I feel truly for.

And again, for the record, due to my scandalously libertine past, I have had occasion to meet and be with a varied palette of women. This includes rape survivors, and one of these a lady that actually survived a brutal gang rape and a final stabbing meant to kill her. She was left for dead and survived. She also was one of the most unselfish and caring women I knew. Although we did not have a great deal of time together, in that brief time I taught her how to begin to have orgasms. Something she had been unable to do, and for which she expressed great gratitude towards me. It made me feel something like ashamed of men in general to be thanked for what I felt was merely the minimum level of intimacy I, as a man, but really as one soul to another, owed her for being intimate with me. I feel a lot of compassion for women that have bene hurt by men through no fault of their own, be it physically or emotionally, and when I met such women I tried to be as kind and helpful as I could. This, by the way, is the reason why I have more female friends than male. Regardless of whether I was ever intimate with them or not, sane, normal women can sense my intent. Some may be attracted by me and others not, but the friendship that results because of it remains, regardless of the sexual element. I could not have such relationships if I did not care about women.

But lastly, and this really trumps it all, I have a daughter. A daughter which I truly hope I will be able to gently influence until she becomes Princess of the Milky Way, as befits the daughter of a Martian Warlord in Exile. So, to your charges of misogeny, homophobia and racism I say, shove them up your ass. And would you like a bucket of golf-balls with that?

THIRDLY – Vox Day, Destruction, Nihilism, Justice and how I will vote and why.

The Rabid Puppy slate was presented by Vox Day, who, as this interview clearly shows, knows that he is (and probably really is) the most hated man in Science Fiction.

Vox is a strange animal to most, but not to me. When I first came across his blog the first knee-jerk reaction/impression I had was that he may well be a dumb racist redneck religious zealot American.

But a few things didn’t quite gel with that simplistic explanation. And because I am a curious creature and unafraid of my fragile sensibilities becoming all offended-like, I continued reading his blog for a while. His posts were usually engaging anyway, and certainly designed to be rather inflammatory, it was clear he had a skill for increasing interest at least, even if that interest might have been outrage.

But as I said, I was curious. I wanted to find out just what KIND of dumb-ass racist religious zealot American he was you see. So I read his blog and then read some of his commenters’ comments and a few things began to become clear.

The first one was that the people commenting on his blog were for the most part fiercly individualistic. He has regular commenters that are funny, sarcastic in a sometimes quite deeply redneck way that I find funny, and other times erudite beyond my knowledge and at other times so pious and humble that I feel shame at my rough savage nature when I read what some of these gentle and brave men are doing to help their fellow humans in need.

But regardless, they generally tend to think for themselves. He also has the most diverse commentators on any blog I have come across. There is, to be fair, at least one (in my opinion) actual white supremacist (hello Thordaddy) who comments there, and who is so nauseatingly and boringly predictable that his white-supremacist babble is not even entertaining in a kind of “wow…lookit that…a real-live nazi..let me take aim and fire” kinda way. He’s more of a…”really? that is the boogyman of white supremacist racism? Wow. Do we just run it over with a car or…nah, it’s not even worth it.” The guy had his posting privileges reduced because he was BORING. Not because he was racist. But boring. Stupid. Unable to make a cogent argument of any kind. I find that funnier and far more effective than a simple ban because “Racissss!!”

There is also at least one regular poster who is a flaming homosexual (Hi BigGaySteve) who discusses his homosexuality in the context of the discussions and is an accepted member (in any loose sense than anyone on Vox’s site is a member of anything) of what has come to be known as The Dread Ilk. The regular commenters on Vox’ blog. And keep in mind that while many commenters on the blog are clearly Christian, they are not without humour. Recently a confirmed Atheist made a comment that if he had to choose between the world of the SJWankers and the world of the Dread Ilk he would still choose the Dread Ilk even knowing full well he “would be burned at the stake for heresy”.

To which, was replied, good naturally but in all seriousness too, that he would in fact not be burned at the stake at all, because that is not what actual Chrsitians are about, and instead he would be left to believe as he wished as long as he would not try and impose his atheism on those who believed different from him.

Another commenter there is a convinced Muslim (Hi Tommy). There are more than a few women. There are women of colour. There are people of mixed race ancestry and of pure European stock. There is, in short, every kind of person. There are regular mini-flame wars between different sects of Christians and Vox has put a ban on using the term JOOOOOOSSS when blaming the Jews for whatever conspiracy some guy or other wants to attribute to the Jewish people. Which happens with about the same regularity as someone blaming the dread ilk for racism, or sexism, or homophobia. Vox has been repeatedly on the record as NOT being an anti-semite, and I believe him. Some of the most despised groups on Vox’s blog are what have come to be named “Churchians”. That is, nominal “christians” that in fact do not in any way act in ways compatible with actual Christian theology in a true spirit. Which of course varies from Dread Ilk to Dread Ilk. But all comments are allowed as long as you back up your statements or retract them when wrong. You will not get banned or kicked off for your opinion as long as you argue honestly.

I truly do NOT know of a single so called “open-minded” blog by any liberal, SJWanker, socialist leaning, supposedly egalitarian blogger anywhere else that allows this level of actual diversity and freedom. The only people who get banned are the real trolls and those unwilling to argue with dialectic honesty, and who insists on pushing only demonstrable falsehoods in perpetuity. And even then it takes a while and ample opportunity and facts to correct the genuinely mistaken is usually given and presented by the Dread Ilk and Vox himself too.

What Vox does is write what he wants to write in the WAY he wants to write it. And he is intelligent enough to know the WAY he writes things will get a rise out of most people. If that is where they stop looking and they go no deeper, then good riddance, he has eliminated people who are unwilling or unable to think past first impressions, and this is a good tactic, which I recognised because I use it myself. Nothing gets rid of the ignorant and incapable as quickly as dismissing those fooled by superficial impressions and those who are not able to read the details of what is actually being said instead of HOW it’s being said.

My belief is that Vox knowingly phrases certain things in if not the MOST offensive/shocking way possible, at least in a way that certainly gets a reaction out of most people at first glance.

There are multiple reasons for doing this that I can immediately see, and a few besides, but at a minimum:

  • He can have a higher degree of somewhat reliable index of loyalty from his fan base once they stick around long enough to understand at least some of his perspectives
  • He does not waste time with those too simple-minded, incurious or uncaring to see past the facade of shocking social commentary
  • It’s a fast way to sort for emotional and mental stability. Regardless of whether a man agrees or disagrees with you vehemently, one that can stand his ground on his own merits instead of resort to shouting “I am OFFFFEEENDED!!” is a worthy adversary at the very least, and a potential friend at best.

I have corresponded with Vox a few times and while I cannot say with absolute certainty what his innermost views are on race, sexual equality and other topics, I certainly have built up my opinion of what these may be. First of all, I don’t think Vox is racist in the way most people mean the term. I think Vox believes in genetic differences between races and that these are a scientific fact.

There is in fact good evidence for this and as a point of fact it is not really arguable. There are measurable physiological differences between the average negroid and the average caucasian, or between either of those and the average oriental (far east as opposed to near-asia), or between any of them and the average Red Indian (I refuse to call then Native Americans, for the simple reason that the only four actual Red Indians I met in person all told me the term Native American was more offensive for them, as I personally felt too. If some race of aliens called Elves came to Earth and conquered us and then called Earth Elf-land, I would far prefer to be referred to as a dago than a Native Elfland Inhabitant.)

What Vox advocates, and in his own words he does this because he would prefer to avoid what he perceives to be the inevitable bloodshed that will follow if it is not done, is that different ethnicities, people and races, essentially stick to their own for the avoidance of bloodshed due to cultural misalignments. In essence a kind of voluntary apartheid. Once you get your head past the SHOCK HORROR of the suggestion and you analyse it dispassionately on its own merits, you can see his point really.

The fact that I doubt that it is possible in the first place, as well as the fact that my view of humanity as a whole and in the future probably differs from his, is sort of beside the point. In a sense his view is one that can be explored much like one explores a story of science fiction. What if all the Chinese moved to the Moon. What would that work like? That sort of thing.

Personally I think that a voluntary apartheid of the mind is desirable, but that one of the physical is probably impossible without a lot more bloodshed than simply allowing the messy intermingling of cultures and races to continue, with only a few notable exceptions, which I will get to some other time, since this over 10,000 words already.

The charges of racism against Vox come from his unapologetic way of presenting his case, which I am not unconvinced he doesn’t do as actually a smart way of getting more publicity on the one hand, and the satisfaction of not having to kow-tow to any kind of political correctness on the other. And a third and I think important point for him, which is that acting this way he actually helps some people actually THINK. And think for themselves, which actually is what the ORIGINAL point of good SF was. In a way, with his strategy Vox is forcing people who get past the initial shock to use their own brain and analysis instead of repeat the thoughts and analysis that were spoon-fed to them over the last 30 years or so.

But I would not call Vox a racist in any important sense. I would say he is an elitist and one that would like things to be a lot more orderly than they are, there is a certain snobbery to that way of seeing things and being, but that kind of arrogance has never bothered me.

Let’s put it this way, I am pretty sure that if I were ever to receive an invite to visit Vox at his home and I came along with a girlfriend that happened to be brown instead of white, it’s not like he would mistreat her or me in any way, nor make her or I feel in any way uncomfortable because of her race or skin tone. I genuinely think he would not do that because of how he is, and not because I think he is also smart enough to understand that if he did, well, there would be a bit of an issue to resolve that really sort of necessarily must involve pistol or rapiers and an early and final morning start for one of us (which way of resolving things he would fully understand and agree with I am sure, and which brings me to his “misogyny” which I feel would need a separate post to address).

My own preference for an intellectual apartheid could be seen as being far more cruel than his own ideas (and please understand I do not presume to know exactly what his ideas are, I merely opine on their potential nature). My view would be to treat everybody equally. And by the same very high standards of justice. And trust me, that would be brutal.

Think about it. Either we really are all the same, or we are not. And if we are not, then, if certain groups of people are either culturally or genetically predisposed to certain traits more than others, then how fair is it to treat them all the same? If women ARE say less rational or men ARE more prone to act differently because of their hormones (testosterone). Or if there really IS a difference in IQ that is related to genetics. or a physical aptitude for certain movements or sports that is in fact biased towards a specific sub-set of humanity. What if all of the above? Is it really fair to then treat everyone the same? And if not how do you go about it?

The current “answer” which creates a shitty mess for everyone, is to have the lowest possible common denominator be the standard applied to everyone.

And personally, I think that is a shitty way of doing things, because MY minimal standard for a lot of things is near the top of the average human’s ability to behave or perform in certain ways, and I refer here only to raw ethics. Jail sentences on my planet would not be walks in the park, but they would rehabilitate. No staying locked in a cell for 23 hours a day on MY planet. You either work you ass off to make amends for your sins or you don’t eat. You either learn a skill and master it or you don’t eat. You either learn something about art and become able to create something beautiful or you don’t eat. And for certain crimes, there would only be a shallow hole in the ground. That shallow hole in the ground would also apply to judges, prosecutors and others of the legal system who condemned innocent people to death, which I think would lessen its use considerably.

But many social activities accepted by most people would not be tolerated at all on my planet. Or at least, would not be so fun to indulge in. I can smell your cigarette? Well that gives me the right to slash at your face with a small horse whip. Twice. Per cigarette.

You are free to smoke though. As I am to try to aim for the eyes.

Maximum freedom and maximum responsibility for your actions.

You risk killing me with passive smoke as well as inconvenience me with your filthy habit? Fine I can try to similarly give you a cutting switch of the whip which has a tiny potential of killing you due to infection. And smears your clothes with your own blood.

So you see? Vox is not so bad. I am pretty sure there would be no horse-whips for smoking on his planet.

But there are no easy answers here. I don’t know what the ideal solution for human harmony is. And neither does Vox. Nor am I prescribing any solutions, despite my views on smokers above, you need to know I have actually given effective hypnosis to over three dozen people, each of which has stopped smoking after a single session. And I didn’t even use a horse-whip see? They did it all voluntarily and even paid me for my work. So while I may describe my smokers-get-what-they-deserve utopia, it doesn’t actually mean I secretly wish to bodily harm every smoker I see. It would be nice to have it happen sometimes, just as a teaching aid in reminding the stupid selfish bastard that his disgusting habit is affecting ME. So would he rather please shoot up with crack, which I don’t have to smell. But in reality I suffer in silence under the yoke of this primitive and unintelligent planet of semi-apes. Clearly I was dropped off here at birth by my real parents, in order to save me from a plot against my rightful claim to the Galactic Empire.

Besides, I enjoy the company of people from all walks of life and I also detest the attitudes of people from all walks of life too. And understanding what are these “differences that make the difference”, is key to getting along.

My main gripe with most humans hinges on their levels of consciousness, justice and ethics. I care little or nothing for morals and little or nothing for your politics, your religion, your sex (except I am attracted to one sexually and not at all to the other) or much of anything else. In a way I am an elitist of the worst sort. My main criteria for judging others is:

  • Are you efficient enough to keep up your side of the work?
  • Are you smart enough to keep up your side of the conversation?
  • Are you flexible, fluid and funny enough to be interesting, entertaining and fun enough?
  • Are you kind enough?
  • Are you honest enough?
  • Are you loyal enough?
  • Are you innocent enough?

If you have at least ONE of those attributes, I will at the very least respect you. I will be able to live in some proximity to you at least some of the time. And if you have two or more of those attributes I dare say we could be friends. Even very good friends.

Vox has the efficiency and the brain to definitely keep up his side of work you might do with him or  conversation you might have with him. I also think he is almost certainly honest enough. Any mistakes he would make in regard to honesty would, I believe, be genuine mistakes and readily admitted if recognised as such. I would need to spend some time face to face to be sure on this point, but I’d bet money on it.

He has about the same level of innocence as I do, which is to say probably something in the deep realm of the negative, and his kindness is not readily apparent to almost anyone, but, even if he might never admit it, it exists. I know because I have witnessed it in a number of small but telling ways. Cruelty Artistry notwithstanding.

And I would say that while he may be very rigid in certain things, he has shown a level of flexibility uncommon to most men in others. But as a believer in fundamental truths, some rigidity must necessarily exist. And this is often misjudged by others (who do not believe or see or know any fundamental truths) to be far in excess of what it actually is. I know because my own fundamental truths are really quite few, and yet, it seems others are intimidated even by his scant handful of deep principles as if I were some fanatical zealot of the one true faith of some deranged religion.

As for his loyalty, I think it may again be similar to mine, but it is hard to read at a removed distance. That is a thing best measured in the fear and alarm of war, as Dire Straits puts it.

I would guess that to get Vox to definitely be on your side is not something he would do in a hurry, but if he does decide to think of you as one of his friends, he’s probably the kind who doesn’t just help you move, but helps you move bodies.

That’s something like 5 out of 7 and maybe more, and that’s good enough for me to consider him a friend, even if one I have not met in person or spent much time with even via computers. I know him through his work, his blog and a few exchanges we have had via email and on his blog.

Keep in mind I also consider friends people who may only have one of those attributes and whose other attributes may be severely lacking. The most personally disturbing to me was a man whose only attributes was a certain level of kindness and loyalty.

He was possibly the truest form of pathological liar I ever came across and I genuinely think he would have lied about his own name if asked, in fact I am sure he did, as he went by the nickname John-John. But he was kind and loyal. It was the oddest combination I ever found and it surprised me to discover that I did, despite his obvious flaw in honesty, come to think of him as a friend. And he did show up in the important ways at a couple of times that were let’s say… uncomfortable… for me.

I also at least can have a professionally successful relationship with someone who is efficient enough, though I can’t work co-operatively with them if they don’t have at least a certain level of ethics or honesty, but even if aligned against them, even if utterly evil, I can at least respect efficiency. The SJWankers however have none of these attributes.

  • Firstly they are unrepentant and perpetual liars. They lie regularly and constantly and viciously.
  • They only fake kindness and are in fact, in my opinion, the most extreme narcissists of the human population. Totally self-centred egoists that use a veneer of political correctness and supposedly palatable platitudes to hide their true monstrosity.
  • They pretend to be flexible and accepting of everyone and everything but in reality are authoritarian despots hell-bent on dominating all thought. Your thoughts must conform with theirs. They are flexible and accepting only of those who agree with them on every minutia of policy, ideology and “good-think” propaganda and will literally kill you if they cannot get you to conform.
  •  They have the loyalty of maggots
  • They are singularly inefficient because their groupthink Stalinist pre-approval system requires them to first send signals throughout the herd to ensure everyone is in lock-step thought agreement so they do everything by committee and social acceptance normative meetings of meeting for …oh fucking shoot me, or better yet, shoot them!
  • They certainly THINK they are the smartest person in the room, and their ability to self-deceive on scales that make astronomical units look like the provincial concerns of fruit-flies, they are immune to facts, reality or anything short of a brick smacking them in the face to announce that this in front of them is an actual wall, not just a “bigoted idea of the patriarchy” or whatever buzz-mangling of the language they are using this week to try and pervert others into accepting their delusional non-view of actual reality.
  • In some way, I suppose they may, in a few rare cases be considered innocent. Perhaps brainwashed from a young age, and thus not really responsible for their actions, but these would fall under the criminal by way of insanity types really, and while we may pity them, the only way to save them is with icy-cold buckets of reality thrown soundly into their face, to wake them from the hallucinations that pervade their broken minds.

The only truly innocent are small children and animals, and strangely enough, they both seem to like me.

John C. Wright, who has now six nominations in the wake of the SP/RP Puppies Hugos and with whom I have also corresponded, in his excellent Transhuman and Subhuman describes 5 types of men, and it is a sobering read. I think mostly I would fall in the Noble Savage category, and yet his argument for the Hopeful Man category is hard to refute as being a superior way.

The main difference between Vox and I is, I think, his deep conviction of Christianity. I do not know his story of how he came to it. I know he didn’t just stumble on it. I think something happened and what that was I do not know, but it would be interesting to hear about it.

My own view on that topic is much more recent and as such perhaps not as developed. Yet, as I mentioned in my previous post, what I call the Christian Mythos actually has, for now, the seemingly most complete explanation of reality. To write that last sentence still seems strange to me, because for most of my life I thought of Christianity as absurd. But if a man is not able to change his mind when faced with incontrovertible new evidence, then he is, to my mind, unfit of being called an honest man.

An honest man, even if unable to accept the truth, would at least admit that much, that while all evidence points to his being wrong, and he can see it and understand it, his own prejudices and twisted nature does not allow him to change direction. And this at least would be an honest, if rigid man. But I pride myself on being flexible in approach if remaining constant in aim.

And once you accept or realise there is a loving God, a number of important points flow from that. A man who sticks to what he perceives to be the closest thing to the truth of those points as best he can, is an honest man. He may, of course be utterly wrong. He may be too stupid to draw the right conclusions. He may be ill-guided by others into false conclusions, but he is, to the best of his ability, trying to be an honest man. And that man, even if he were my enemy, I have to respect. Even if only so as to understand how to defeat him.

I do not know the deep parts of Vox’s mind, and I don’t need to in order to recognise enough in the man to know one thing: He hates injustice with a passion similar to my own. I think we are quite different in many things, including how we react to injustice and how we fight it.

Long ago, I read a book called Messages from Michael, which describes souls as being of seven types. To date, I have found nothing to falsify that book and much to agree with it. The point is if that book’s premises are accepted, the reason I recognise Vox is because his soul and mine are of the same type. We are a warrior class. We may make terrible errors. We may be cruel or pitiless at times. We may be harsh or inflexible. We may be rigid or sneakier than a greased snake with poisonous fangs bared to bite. And if souls evolve, as I believe they do (I tend to believe in reincarnation as well as Christianity in broad strokes) then in the first levels of their development, warrior souls can be the worst perpetrators of violence on this planet. But matured, they become the defenders of Justice most high. Even at the cost of their own salvation if need be.

That is how I see Vox and how I relate to him. To visit his blog a couple of times and call him a bigoted-zealot-racist is easy. But it’s not in any way accurate.

I read his blog for a couple of months before I realised what he really was. And keep in mind, that if Vox IS a vicious racist, he’s definitely a weird one. He has Mexican and Red Indian blood in him. Enough Red Indian in him to qualify as a member of his tribe.

In the most original sense of the word when used for dogs, he’s a bastard breed. He’d hardly be welcomed at KKK meetings I think. Maybe he’d be alright to be tea-boy to the grand-dragon, but I think Vox has a little bit of an ego that might get in the way of that, so you know…either he’d have to start his own brand of “I’m not really white myself, but ignore that and please be racist white supremacists on my behalf” which is I admit creative, but…not likely to succeed, or pass on the Stormfront membership card application.

On the Vote

And so finally, I come to the vote for the Hugo Awards. Some have accused SP/RP of being destructive and ruinous to the Hugos.

Yes.

That’s right. And that’s fine with me. Perfectly fine.

You see, you had two options. Either admit your Hugo is a circle-jerk of mutually fake-admiring SJWankery, in which case, we will happily let you wallow in your shrinking mental gulag of political correctness, or, make it as fair and just an award as possible, based on quality of the work, the writing and the power to entertain and empower those who read it with a sense of justice, honour, kindness, loyalty, love and all that improves mankind. We know it would never be perfect. We know there would be bloc voting from this or that side, but if we mostly try to ensure honesty and truth reign in the voting, and we would do that first and foremost by being ACTUALLY diverse. In allowing EVERYONE their opinions, not just the SJWanker approved type of opinions, then the Hugos could become something worthwhile. Maybe.

Personally though, I would bet not.

I would very much like Brad to be right. I would very much like the Hugos to be a true prestigious award for excellence. But it hasn’t been that for a very long time, if it ever really was. And in any case, an honest man does not need a beacon of popularity to discover for himself what he likes or not. And he certainly does not need someone to TELL him what he MUST accept as GOOD and PROPER for him to THINK and READ and ENJOY. But…

I know humans. And they are fallen and corrupt creatures. And I expect every snivelling toad of an SJWanker will vote to No Award anything that is from the SP/RP list.

Guess what suckers. We can do that too. And I will.

I will No Award everything that is not from the SP/RP award. I apologise to those authors that are not SP/RP nominees in advance. I do not know you. I do not know your works. I have not read them. I will not read them most probably, because I doubt I will get to any of them since I will prioritise the RP/SP works, but I am No Awarding you anyway.

It has nothing to do with your skill or work or quality of it.

I am not a nice soft forgiving man.

I believe that crimes should be punished. And the crime of the SJWankers has been of slandering, lying and blaming. So I will do my level best to torch them out of their own homes. If that means the Hugo burns to the ground, so be it. But mark this well:

The SJWankers will NOT win.

Those who think like me do not care for the Hugo. We do not care about your whisper campaign. We do not care about your SJWankery and lies. We do not care if every single newspapers and radio programme and television host in the world lies right alongside you.

We care about the truth and Justice. You lied. You behaved dishonestly and unjustly. And now there will be a cleansing fire. And it will continue until every last one of you is rendered impotent. And when in time, you return and sneak back in like the rats you are, eventually another tribe of my kind will come along and individually and in groups they will come to this same conclusion:

There is to be no mercy for your kind until you are extinct or you genuinely repent.

We don’t care your skin colour. We don’t care your religion. We don’t care your sex. We don’t care who you like to fuck or be fucked by. We don’t care about any of those things.

We care about freedom. THAT is the real vote I am casting. I do care about quality, but not above freedom. I care about freedom first and quality a close second. And I care about justice. Enough that I will even act wrongly, knowing full well it is wrong, and keep doing it, until you submit to justice and ethics and honesty. After which, I will voluntarily submit to my just punishment. Because I can do this all day at zero cost to me. We didn’t start this. But there can be no peace between honest people and dishonest ones. And we are no longer leaving the field in order to avoid trouble.

It may take a thousand or ten thousand years, but my kind is not taking a single step back. You will either learn to become honest and just, or you will be burned out of every rabbit hole you run into hiding in. Those are now your choices. And your mere paying lip service to honesty will not fool anyone.

Yup. I am not even a Christian, but this is a crusade. A real one. And like the very first historical crusade, it is spontaneous, and honest in its intent. We are fighting for truth, justice and beauty. And you, ethical degenerates have nothing but the whispering and screaming lies of your Liege and Prince of this realm.

I speak only for me, but I know there are thousands and millions like me. And each one of us, on his or her own power, will take to the field, and come straight at you. You will fall back right under the rock you crawled out of and then we will overturn it and let the sunlight burn you out from under it too.

Welcome to sunlight and charging wolves rabbits.

Whatever SP/RP 3 does, Hungry Wolves are coming next.

And we aren’t sad or puppies at all.

One Response to “Hugos 2015 – The Hurricane of Hypocrisy”

  1. thordaddy says:

    Lol… Didn’t realize this was the Giuseppe…

    [Rest of comment removed]

    Note from GF: Yup. And I am not as tolerant as Vox is of people with *stupid monomaniac* tattooed on their forehead. So your bullshit will be spammed here. Permanently.

Leave a Reply

All content of this web-site is copyrighted by G. Filotto 2009 to present day.
Website Design by Kaizenet London