Home

Details

And I'd like you to join me.

I plan to make up some shirts with this:

width=

And with statements like "SHITLORD" and "Cisgender heteronormative male oppressor."

Over those, we'll wear beach babe tropical shirts.

I recommend a beard, and an (unlit) cigar.

I expect to be attacked by femorrhoids.  We shall laugh at their hatred and ignore their whines. If attacked physically, we shall have them arrested for battery. Remind them that cosplay is not consent, and no matter how we're dressed, we're not asking for it.

My room will be a safe haven for the privileged, and you must prove privilege to enter.  We will drink Scotch and discuss how a belief in privilege equates to a belief in white/male/cishet genetic superiority.

I expect the lamentations to be epic.

Details

Dear femorrhoid cunts:

The women on Dr Matt Taylor's shirt can dress as they wish. You have no right to dictate their clothing choices.

Dr Matt Taylor can dress as he wishes.  Just because you don't like the shirt doesn't mean he's "asking for it."

Likewise, cosplay is not consent.

Attacking him is slut shaming, and also attacks the artisanal abilities of the female friend who made the shirt for him.

If you think I'm mansplaining to you, you're wrong.  I'm smartsplaining.  Also, if you thought that, you're a sexist cunt as well as a retarded one.  My sex is not relevant to the validity of my statement.

Instead of being bossy cunts and attacking your intellectual betters out of jealousy, why don't you go learn something useful, like how to make a sandwich?

Can't figure out why this is entitled "Equality"?  Because a retarded dick male would get the exact same treatment. So suck it, bitches.

Everyone else, donate here: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/matt-taylor-rosetta-project-scientist

Details

Oscar-winning scientist Al Gore now wants "A national food policy."  He refers to this "brilliant article" (Actually, it's an op-ed):

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-a-national-food-policy-could-save-millions-of-american-lives/2014/11/07/89c55e16-637f-11e4-836c-83bc4f26eb67_story.html?hpid=z2

First of all, nothing in a newspaper is ever "brilliant." They're aimed at someone with a 4th grade education.

Here are the pallid suggestions:

~~~

All Americans have access to healthful food;

~~~

Well, gee, who doesn't want that?  But you know, I've been helping a couple of recently homeless friends, and the food banks give away food.  Now, a lot of it is starch, because we produce so much of it. But, it's food. Almost no other nation on the planet can do that. This is the typical statist bullshit of creating a panic over something that doesn't exist, making it mandatory, making you pay for it, then providing less than you had before, but at least it's "Fair."

~~~

● Farm policies are designed to support our public health and environmental objectives;

~~~

Translation:  "Let a bureaucrat decide what you can eat." Because that's worked so well with health care, education and drilling for oil.  Oh, and the US Postal Service.

~~~

● Our food supply is free of toxic bacteria, chemicals and drugs;

~~~

It pretty much is.  And if it's not, you can sue or file criminal charges. Why, I remember just last week that 47,000 school children got gastroenteritis from bad school food and sued…oh, wait, no, they all ate perfectly safe stuff (other than being loaded with government mandated starch).

This is probably more anti-GMOtardery.  Fun fact: Without GMO food, we can't feed 7 billion people.  I propose everyone opposed to GMO stop eating.  That will eliminate GMO, and provide enough food for everyone else, mostly poor people in Africa and Asia.  Unless, of course, the anti-GMO crowd are mostly privileged "liberal" racists who hate brown people. Which they are.

~~~

● Production and marketing of our food are done transparently;

~~~
Because the government excels at transparency.  Seriously, did these idiots actually say that?  Why don't they ask for rainbow-colored unicorn jizz while they're at it?

~~~

● The food industry pays a fair wage to those it employs;

~~~

Ah, the "living wage" that destroyed Detroit.  "Liberals" will never learn, because they are not capable of learning.  What we really need is a national policy to declare "liberalism" (as opposed to actual Liberalism) a psychiatric disorder and put them in facilities where they can mumble to the walls and other inmates and not hurt anyone who matters.

~~~

● Food marketing sets children up for healthful lives by instilling in them a habit of eating real food;

~~~

Ah, "Real food." Which the USDA, which is run by...let me check my notes…ah, here:  The US Government.  It endorses eating gobs of starch that cause metabolic disorders, including obesity and diabetes. I even saw one recent report from this "US Government" that diabetics should get 70% of their calories from starch.  The article concurs with this problem, but suggests MOAR GOVERNMENT will make it better.

Hint for the scientifically illiterate:  Starch metabolizes as sugar. That's what it is.

What some of these tofu-munching pussies are hoping for is a law against meat, to stop those ebil, gun-toting, god-worshipping teahadis and make them comply.

Except California famously outlawed Caesar Salad a few years back, leading to literal bootlegging of salad.  Once you put a bureautard in charge, it's hard to get anything rational to happen.

~~~

● Animals are treated with compassion and attention to their well-being;

~~~
Most farmers do this, because maltreated animals don't taste good.  What this will turn into is more "animals are people too!" bullshit from the bunnyfuckers, and retards who try to feed their carnivorous pets weeds.

~~~

● The food systemΓÇÖs carbon footprint is reduced, and the amount of carbon sequestered on farmland is increased;

~~~

Wait, didn't you say you wanted the food to be cheap and plentiful?  So: We will regulate the food and the farmers, require them to spend more money on wages, demand they comply with "Carbon sequestration," and it will magically be cheaper, just like health care.

Actually, though, this is potentially achievableΓÇöwe just reduce the carbon footprint of everyone in favor of this to zero, process them through a logchipper, then through a lime pit. We'll sequester their carbon and they won't produce any more. And, we won't have to listen to them. Win-win-win.

~~~

● The food system is sufficiently resilient to withstand the effects of climate change.

~~~

According to my research, the food system has withstood climate change for a half billion years. What we need to be concerned about is if it can withstand Al Gore, his private jets, his mansions all over the coasts (wait, isn't he afraid of sea level rise? Why would he have mansions on the coasts?) and his considerable bulk that is probably fed by cheeseburgers, not salad.  The carbon footprint of his houses exceeds my entire block.  The calorie footprint of his girth exceeds the local football team, and his bullshit quotient exceeds that of every cow in Kansas.

Even on an ephemeral basis, first we have to actually conclude what specific effects of climate change we are concerned about.  If we lose a week of frost-free days in Canada, their wheat crop fails.  If we lose rainfall, much of the corn belt suffers.  If we lose a couple of degrees in another Little Ice Age or Younger Dryas, there goes the citrus crop.  Then there's hurricanes, El Niño, etc.  "Make it more resilient" sounds cute, but doesn't actually say much.  And of course, doing so will cost money, which will magically make food more affordable.

We have a system in the US that feeds not only us, but most of the world, and so well we actually pay farmers not to grow food.  But what this proposes is to raise the prices, reduce the output, and somehow, magically, cheaper!  And as for all those poor people in Asia and Africa, who cares?  Because at heart, "liberals" are racist, narcissistic, greedy fucks who only care about themselves.

And Al Gore is their spokesJabba.

So, we have an op-ed that's shallow, panders to the wrong market, does so poorly, and is endorsed by a fat albatross.  Ultimately, though, the proposal comes down to, "Government stupidity got us into this mess. We need more government stupidity to get us out."

Or, you could stop "helping" and figure that since people have been eating food for 3 million years, they'll figure it out.

Coming next: A national policy on masturbation and heavy breathing.

Details

http://laurajmixon.com/2014/11/a-report-on-damage-done-by-one-individual-under-several-names/

So, I'm reading this about someone being an utter shitbag of a troll. 

I'm glad they're being outed, and I'm glad people are responding.

I know how attention like that can be painful, or at least aggravating.

I wonder how many of these people realize how common this type of behavior is.

In fact, just recently, I've been called:

a "child abusing fucktard" because I taught my kids to shoot, even though I'm a qualified instructor with decades of military experience.

"Ultraconservative," by someone who's certainly never read a word I've put in print, who then publicly demanded a publisher stop carrying my books based on that.

During the Iraq War, while deployed, and while endorsing some of our strategy, the "support the troops" meme suddenly turned to "Well, fuck you, you Koch-whore.  I hope you get your balls blown off."  The pun is at least amusing, but really, what they meant was they supported the troops who agreed with their political position. They wished me a violent death.

I get actual death threats every month or so. They're usually not credible.

I finally had to block fantasy author Tad Williams from my Facebook wall after two years of driveby comments where he'd call everyone racists and accuse others and myself of privilege because he thinks I'm as straight white male as he is, with no evidence to support his belief.  It even came down to, "I'm not even sure what this post was about, but you're all a bunch of racists" (paraphrased).  I try not to block people, but if they add literally nothing to the discussion, and merely troll, I do.

Racist, racist, racist, white middle class fuck, white male (and my opinion is invalid based on my gender and apparent race).  I get this all the time.

So I'm glad to see this is an issue that these people want to address.

Oh, wait:

~~~

As a lesbian Thai woman, she identifies as a member of a highly marginalized community, and there has been quite a bit of excitement in progressive circles around her rise in popularity as a short story writer. She has been publishing SFF since 2012 and is a John W. Campbell nominee for 2014.

~~~

There's excitement about her being a writer. But there's MORE excitement about her race and orientation.

Perhaps someday "liberals" will judge a writer on the content of the work, not on the color of their skin.

~~~

  • She and her supporters argue that she punches up, but the truth is that she punches in all directions. The bulk of her targetsΓÇödespite her progressively-slanted rhetoricΓÇöhave been┬áwomen, people of color, and other marginalized or vulnerable people.

~~~

So, "punching up." That's "liberal" code for "attacks white males."  Well, that's okay.  It's only when she attacks certain minorities or "marginalized or vulnerable people" that it's a problem.

So, either they're claiming that my alleged "privilege" (Assuming I'm as SWM as they think I am based on my appearance) makes me immune or less vulnerable to such attacks.  In other words, they believe in white supremacy. (Or any other writer who's allegedly white, whether they are or not.)

Or, they're perfectly okay with attacks on certain demographic groups. That makes them bigots.

~~~

  • She has single-handedly┬ádestroyed several online SFF, fanfic, and videogaming communities┬áwith her negative, hostile comments and attacks.

~~~

width= 

Again, this happens all the time to conservatives and libertarians.

Most of these people supported the vitriolic attack on Uncle Timmy (Tim Bolgeo), based on something he copied and pasted, to the point where the ignorati wondered "what a racist blog has to do with SF," when he publishes neither a blog nor a racist one. He got uninvited from a convention.

Then the privileged white male who started that twitstorm publicly and repeatedly called me a "racist piece of shit" at a convention (which did step in and stop him).

Remember mega-nerd Jonathan Ross got uninvited from LonCon because someone was sure he would definitely make personal comments about her, with no evidence that he'd ever done so or intended to.

~~~

  • ΓÇ£If I see *** being beaten in the street IΓÇÖll stop to cheer on the attackers and pour some gasoline on himΓÇ¥ ΓÇô ΓÇ£*** is an ignorant, appropriative bag of feces.ΓÇ¥
  • ΓÇ£Spread the word that *** is a raging racist fuck. Let him be hurt, let him bleed, pound him into the fucking ground. No mercy.ΓÇ¥
  • ΓÇ£Stupid fuckΓÇ¥ ΓÇô ΓÇ£homophobeΓÇ¥ ΓÇô ΓÇ£without any talent whatsoeverΓÇ¥. To a reader defending her: ΓÇ£Your liking for this pile of verbal diarrhea proves what morons fantasy fans are.ΓÇ¥
  • ΓÇ£rape apologist!ΓÇ¥┬á ΓÇô ΓÇ£her hands should be cut off so she can never write another Asian character.ΓÇ¥
  • ΓÇ£ah, if only I could actually do it in person. with scalpels, not words.ΓÇ¥

Stupid fuckΓÇ¥ ΓÇ£homophobeΓÇ¥ ΓÇ£without any talent whatsoeverΓÇ¥. ΓÇ¥MAYDAY, MAYDAY. BIOCHEMICAL WEAPON TO CINDY PONΓÇÖS COORDINATES AND MAKE THAT DOUBLE TIMEΓÇ¥ To reader defending her: insults along the lines of ΓÇ£Your liking for this pile of verbal diarrhea proves what morons fantasy fans are.ΓÇ¥

~~~

"Biochemical weapon"—does that sound like a real threat?  That sounds herpaderp.  But if you think it might be legit, call the FBI. They do investigate threats of terrorism.

And a reader has the right to publicly say your book is "complete racist shit."  It's an opinion. It needs no proof.  It needs no license.  You cannot stop it and have no recourse. Again, downvote it and move on.

So, now that she, from her alleged (since we don't actually know her race, gender or status) position of more victimhood, is attacking people of less victimhood (which actually IS "punching up"), now it's a problem.

Pardon me for having little sympathy for the culture as a whole. They endorsed this, and still do.  But they can't handle it when they get it.

I guess the lesson here is that publishers, hosters, bloggers and authors shouldn't be apologizing to anonymous internet cowards over allegations of anything.  Block them, move on, and ignore them. Giving them bandwidth only encourages them.

And hopefully, the "liberal" SF community will learn from this and try to be less racist and judgmental.

Had they started fighting this when she was "only" "punching up" white males of privilege, they might have contained the matter.  Now it's turned into a virus.

"Then they came for me…"

~~~

ADDENDUM:

In response to a comment of support:

Honestly, I realize most of them are only internet brave, and I'm pretty sure face to face I can take most of them.

Now, I know female authors who've gotten legitimate threats and had to get bodyguards.

Privilege does exist. But that doesn't make it okay to exploit it, or bandy it about as an epithet.

  1. THIS Is What A Slippery Slope Looks Like
  2. Europe Again, November

Guns

Shirts

  • You are here:  
  • Home