Link Soup

[kyburg]

Have you seen these? Tell me and I'll shut up.

Wiscon has said 'nope, not this year you don't', and withdrawn their invitation to be Guest of Honor.

About the only thing I've said about Pookie Moon's post was that it was new asphalt and striping on the road to hell - all good intentions, really AWFUL way to go about it. I could go into detail, but others have to better effect - really.

Truly? Taking it up at Wiscon? Not the right place, approach or even WHAT about it. What, are you guys going to sit around the table insisting the victims justify their experience as victims again? Thanks, Wiscon. Maybe next year for Pookie. Maybe. But this year?

When you sound more like Angela Merkel than is comfortable, perhaps something else needs to be discussed, more often and in different venue.

I don't know what you go to a convention for, but this wouldn't be it for me. Just saying.

Jeez, like this IS something you could take up and put down at leisure anyway. WHAT.

Also, looking at the comments on the Wiscon post, the 'what are you TALKING about' is strong with this bunch. Which dovetails nicely into this one - A newspaper in Maine has shut down its reader comments while it reconsiders its policies. The Portland Press-Herald did so, the publisher writes, to "protect the public, our readers, and the subjects of our stories" from "hurtful and vulgar" comments.

Coming on the heels of 'Spirit Day' - intended to be an opportunity to awaken public opinion to the concept of bullying - this is pertinent. Really, in the current CW, you get what you deserve if you read the comments. Which is the urge to spork your eyes out and desire very directed air strikes towards very specific targets. Repeatedly.

I really have to say I like this policy. You want to comment on a story, write a letter to the editor - and you always, always, ALWAYS have that right. Nobody's taking that away from you, bub.

But doing the virtual version of spraying your name and profanities on a public place really can come to an end anytime, says I. The ability to comment so has been a privilege, not a right and if it been used like a gas station bathroom, time for it to go.

Quit rewarding derp and maybe the derp will end. One can only hope.

Comments

[caitlin.livejournal.com]

This whole dustup over Elizabeth Moon's comments reminds me of why my last ATTENDED convention was 2007.

I had misgivings about going to WisCon prior to the whole mess... I'm not going now, and I might never go.

All of the accusations of fascism and then the "liberal fascist" label applied... it's really stupid.

Someone in their comments pointed out that THE REASON that they initially invited Ms. Moon to the con STILL EXIST - ie: she is a well-known sci-fi writer. Her work has not changed.

This may cost me more friends, but, quite frankly, if this is the way fandom is behaving, I want no part of it.

[kuangning]

When she was invited, she was simply a well-known sci-fi writer. Now she is a well-known sci-fi writer who has expressed bigotry, deleted comments calling her on her bigotry, and refused to engage further while still leaving the bigotry public. Wiscon isn't just a sci-fi convention, it's a sci-fi convention with a focus on social justice. Honoring an unrepentant bigot at a sci-fi convention which wants to focus on social justice is highly problematic.

[caitlin.livejournal.com]

Fine, but the name-calling has extended far beyond just WisCon. I've seen people pretty much say that if someone who was a friend went to WisCon and she was still GoH, they would no longer be friends. I do not find THAT acceptable.

And, really, why not keep her as a GoH but call her on the carpet for what she's said?

If she makes herself unpopular, then so be it.

I've heard of people not being asked to *return* to a convention after their behaviour there was inappropriate (DW novel writer Dave Stone, for example... he went on a drunken rant - he got the alcohol at the hotel bar - at a *DRY* ConSuite about not being given alcohol in the ConSuite. I was in charge of said ConSuite at the time... and did not take kindly to the rant, but that was AT the con.)

In the end, it IS WisCon ConCom's decision, and it is up to them, but my unease re: conventions as a whole still remains.

[kuangning]

Keeping her as GoH but calling her on the carpet for what she said is problematic for a number of reasons.

First, it would blindside Muslim attendees who didn't know about the controversy until they got there, and then would have to deal with the fact that their con, which they expected to be a relatively safe space -- because that's the way WisCon bills itself -- chose to keep honoring a bigot.

Second, nothing in Moon's demeanor or behaviour in the weeks between that post and now gives any indication she's willing to be talked out of her bigotry. Quite the opposite, in fact. You'd be trying to teach the proverbial goat to sing.

Third, people attending WisCon shouldn't be asked to sacrifice their time, money, and expected con experience so they can become Elizabeth Moon's learning experience. There's quite enough of that asked of PoC in general and Muslims in particular every single day; WisCon is a place you can go and reasonably expect you won't be trotted out like a zoo exhibit to prove that Your Group Can Be Nice People Too, So ___ Shouldn't Be Bigoted, or find that somebody has decided for you that you're going to be happy to spend your time Educating Someone.

Finally, she hasn't been asked to not go. She's free to attend, and behave in whatever way she feels appropriate, and only if she crosses the line as an attendee will she be asked to not attend again. All they've done is let her know they won't be honoring her in light of her own actions.

As for your other concern -- I can't speak to other people's boundaries for friendship. If someone decides they can't trust someone who would attend to honor Moon under the circumstances, that's their call. Everyone's got their own limits, and the right to enforce them. I wouldn't have made that particular stand, but that's me, and not them. If nothing else, Nisi Shawl's presence would have made me give my friends the benefit of the doubt. She's maybe enough sugar to make up for the bitter pill that Moon would have been. (But hey, now there's no bitter pill at all, so yay for easier decisions.)

[caitlin.livejournal.com]

WisCon is a place you can go and reasonably expect you won't be trotted out like a zoo exhibit to prove that Your Group Can Be Nice People Too, So ___ Shouldn't Be Bigoted, or find that somebody has decided for you that you're going to be happy to spend your time Educating Someone.

Have you read the comments, though? If that is what people think about my birthplace, and the people there, AND they go to WisCon? That is NOT safe space.

"my group"...? Asian-American, female, survivor of a lot.

[kuangning]

Where is your birthplace? Because the only birthplaces I'm seeing maligned on those comments are Muslim nations -- which are evidently still hotbeds of evil teeming with would-be murderers -- and Madison, WI, which is now evidently a liberal fascist outpost for one con's decision to not honor someone who was openly bigoted. The latter, by the way, would be the assertion of people who agree with you that Wiscon should have kept Moon no matter what she said. ;)

[caitlin.livejournal.com]

Madison, WI.

[kshandra]

And, really, why not keep her as a GoH but call her on the carpet for what she's said?

There was one person in the midst of all of this who offered a suggestion: Leave her on the docket for the convention, but only as a Guest. NOT a Guest of Honor. Because the GoH title (as I've always understood it, in my 25+ years in fandom) implies honoring the person, as well as their work, and very little of her behavior in this situation has struck me as being honorable.

[caitlin.livejournal.com]

That was one thought I had too...

[jimkeller.livejournal.com]

Reading between the lines of Moon's very brief post on the subject, I get the impression that she was not interested in attending in a demoted capacity.

[kynn.livejournal.com]

The point of a guest of honor at a convention that focuses on social justice is not to invite people there so you can deprogram and call out your guest of honor.

[caitlin.livejournal.com]

And last I checked, judging an entire city by the actions of people running a convention was not right either.

Sorry. I'm still mad over the people on the comment board bashing my birthplace because of the actions of the people running WisCon.

[kynn.livejournal.com]

Most of them are probably trolls from Instapundit or Vox Day or other shitty libertarian blogs who wouldn't even go to WisCon on a bet.

[caitlin.livejournal.com]

And what's your opinion?

[kynn.livejournal.com]

My opinion is pretty much exactly the same as kuangning's, and I am glad that you personally have no desire to go to WisCon, as that's probably for the best.

[lesliepear.livejournal.com]

Here is the post that started things for those who are curious:


http://e-moon60.livejournal.com/335480.html

[nagasvoice.livejournal.com]

Thank you, I recall reading that post at the time and being very puzzled. A good deal of what she said about the common good was great stuff, and it's a shame things didn't stop there.
But then it shot off into how the minority group should anticipate what the majority is likely to do or want. How would they know?! I'm pretty privileged myself, and there's no way *I* can ever predict the weirdness when I read horrible comments on the Sacramento Bee articles, which are indeed very spork-worthy. Kyburg's right, I have to learn not to scroll down and read the comments. Letters to the editor, back in my paper days, were equally horrible, that's their readership. Gaaaa! That's not even talking things like watching Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh. Many times, it's horrible enough on Larry King, which they put on in the pharmacy I have to use. Gaaaah!

[luscious-purple.livejournal.com]

Yeah, but in print publications there was at least some minimal amount of screening of letters/comments. I have been on "the other side" as an editor, and I always refused to print unsigned or "name withheld" letters to the editor, or even letters signed with something like "Concerned [Name of Town] Citizens." If John Doe and friends wanted to print a "concerned citizens" letter, at least one of their legal names had to be on it.

I really wish the Washington Post would moderate its online comments better. They get a lot of hateful crap that would never get onto the NY Times website.

[nagasvoice.livejournal.com]

What people are willing to put their names to gets pretty hateful too. Just posted a link to Hilary Clinton's vid for "It Gets Better." She talks about foreign service officers who can now be openly gay in the State Department. You get the clear impression that politically astute persons feel the hatred and bigotry is not even personal, and it's gone far enough, put a stop to it now.
Which would be nice, if I thought the haters took itin the same way.

[jimkeller.livejournal.com]

I've often thought that we could eliminate 95% of the abuse on comment forums by simply requiring every poster to use a real name and have the comment tied to a verified e-mail address that can be accessed by law enforcement if necessary.

Such a policy would have prevented me from engaging in a few conversations while I was working in public engagement (and therefore was not at liberty to publicly post personal opinions lest they be conflated with the opinions of my employer), but cases like mine are exceptionally rare, and I think people would actually think twice about what they post if it's tagged with "real name" of "real location" instead of "MrSpookie284."

[nagasvoice.livejournal.com]

In the case of the newspapers, they do require logging in and using a verifiable email address, and if they need to Yahoo and AOL and Google etc can all back trace to servers.
You also don't want haters going after real emails and back tracing on locations to harass people who don't agree with them, they get really ugly calling each other names on most of the newspapers I've read.